Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind a HANDBOOK for TRAIL PLANNERS

Planning Trails with

A HANDBOOKWildlife FOR in TRAIL Mind PLANNERS

TRAILS AND WILDLIFE TASK FORCE • COLORADO STATE PARKS • HELLMUND ASSOCIATES Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind A HANDBOOK FOR TRAIL PLANNERS

Governor Roy Romer Colorado Department of Natural Resources: Wade Buchanan, Executive Director Colorado State Parks: Laurie Mathews, Director Colorado State Trails Program: Stuart Macdonald, State Trails Coordinator

TRAILS AND WILDLIFE TASK FORCE • COLORADO STATE PARKS• HELLMUND ASSOCIATES

September 1998 CREDITS

TRAILS AND WILDLIFE TASK FORCE Please send comments to Stuart Macdonald, Colorado Lise Aangeenbrug (Great Outdoors Colorado), Ron State Parks—Trails Program, 1313 Sherman St., Rm. 618, Benson (Douglas County Parks), Bob Finch (Castlewood Denver,Colorado 80203; fax: (303) 866-3206; e-mail: Canyon State Park), Colleen Gadd (Colorado Wildlife [email protected]. Federation), Glenn Graham (State Trails Committee), Bob Hernbrode (Colorado Div. of Wildlife), Scott Hobson (Summit County Open Space), Susan Johnson (El Paso County Parks), Suzanne Jones (The Wilderness Society), Connie Knapp (USDAForest Service), Richard Larson (Colorado Div. of Wildlife), Bill Manning (Trails 2000), Jim McBrayer (Bureau of Land Management), Roz McClellan (Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project), Chris Pague (The Nature Conservancy), FOR COPIES OF THIS HANDBOOK Mark Pearson (Sierra Club), Gary Skiba (The Wildlife To obtain a single copy of this handbook, send a large, Society), Steve Smith (Office of U. S. Rep. Skaggs), David stamped (6 first-class stamps), self-addressed envelope (min- Stark (USDA Forest Service), Mike Strugar (Colorado State imum 9"x12") to the address above or download the hand- Trails Committee), Suzanne Webel (Boulder Area Trails book from our website: Coalition), Dave Weber (Colorado Div. of Wildlife), Ruth http://www.dnr.state.co.us/parks/ Wright (Great Outdoors Colorado Board), and Ed Zink (The For multiple copies, please contact the Trails Program at Outdoorsman) the address above.

COLORADO STATE PARKS © 1998 ColoradoState Parks Stuart Macdonald (Project Manager), Tom Easley, Jack Copies or excerpts of this handbook may be made and Placchi, Deb Duke, Katie Knoll, and Tanya Ellsworth distributed freely for non-commercial uses provided the title

HELLMUND ASSOCIATES and credits pages are included. Please give credit to Paul Cawood Hellmund (Principal Author/Publication Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind, Trails and Wildlife Task Designer), 2840 S. Kearney St., Denver, CO 80222; Force, Colorado State Parks, and Hellmund Associates, 303-759-3735; [email protected] 1998. Illustrations are by Robin Farrington and are copyright GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO 1998 by Colorado State Parks, and may not be reproduced Special thanks to the staff and members of the Great separately from this handbook without prior written Outdoors Colorado Board for encouraging the Trails and permission. Wildlife Project and for providing important funding.

We thank Joyce Berry, Nicole Haynes, and Jay Jensen of Colorado State University’s Environmental and Natural Resources Policy Institute for help in facilitating meetings and coordinating the project. Thanks to those who contributed to or reviewed drafts, including Chris Childs (Golden Gate State Park), Dr. Richard Knight (Colorado State Univ.), Gary Lacy (Boulder Public Works), Dean Pearson (MDGAssociates), Doreen Schmidt (USDA Forest Service, Granby, Colorado), John T.Stanley (The Habitat Restoration Group, Felton, California), and Melanie Woolever (USDA Forest Service, Denver). Printed on recycled paper.

ii Welcome

Dear Trail Planner: How can trails best be planned and managed to Dynamic format that needs your contributions recognize the needs and sensitivities of wildlife and the In many ways this handbook can never be finished, but environment? What impacts do trail development and use we can continue to learn and use the growing body of have on wildlife? What can we do to minimize these knowledge to improve our planning efforts. It is an impacts? evolving document about a subject that is just beginning to These are some of the important questions that be studied and understood. We plan to update this hand- prompted Colorado State Parks—in cooperation with Great book regularly and ask you to send information and Outdoors Colorado—to convene a state-wide Trails and suggestions through either the comment form in the back or Wildlife Task Force. by visiting our website: The Task Force was comprised of key stakeholders and www.dnr.state.co.us/parks/ experts on habitat and recreation issues. With the increasing use of trails, a growing statewide The Colorado State Trails Program population, and Coloradans’ tremendous love of both trails Since it was established in 1971, the State Trails and wildlife, this seemed to be an ideal time to develop a Program has been active in encouraging trail development handbook on wildlife issues for trail planners. around the state. Recreational trails are a priority of Colorado State Parks, and provide for a significant part of Task Force Objectives the outdoor activities available in Colorado. Over a period of nine months, the Task Force and support staff have worked to identify critical issues and sources of information about trails and wildlife, to Stuart Macdonald document case studies, and to present the information in a Colorado State Trails practical format. Coordinator

iii Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

2. WILDLIFE AND TRAILS PRIMER ...... 5 The Big Picture ...... 6 A. Trails and their zones of influence ...... 6 B. Avoiding large natural areas ...... 8 C. Tools for a broader view ...... 10

Natural Features ...... 16 D. Habitat quality varies ...... 12 E. The importance of streamside areas ...... 14 F. Species and places of special interest ...... 16

Human-Wildlife Interactions ...... 18 G. A site’s existing impacts ...... 18 H. How wildlife respond to trails ...... 20 I. What happens to plants near trails ...... 22

Management Decisions ...... 23 J. Managing trails with wildlife in mind ...... 23 K. Making informed decisions ...... 25 L. Land ownership ...... 26

3. WILDLIFE AND TRAILS CHECKLIST ...... 27 A. Getting the whole picture ...... 29 B. Considering alternative alignments ...... 31 C. Building and managing the trail ...... 32

4. CASE STUDIES ...... 33 Sand Creek Regional Trail ...... 33 Chatfield Basin Conservation Network ...... 34 Antelope Island State Park ...... 35 Chatfield State Park ...... 36 Crown Hill Park ...... 36 Peron’s Peak ...... 36 Bay Trail Project ...... 37 Appalachian Trail ...... 38 Humboldt &Huron Peaks ...... 38 Snowmass’s Tom Blake Trail ...... 39 St. Vrain Greenway ...... 39 Wheat Ridge Greenbelt ...... 40

5. SOURCES OF INFORMATION ...... 41

6. GLOSSARY ...... 45

INDEX ...... 49

COMMENT FORM ...... 51

iv 1. Introduction

ew things are loved more by • educate people about wildlife ing. Other times they may be more Coloradans than trails and the issues and appropriate behavior in the substantial and long-lasting. Foutdoors. With participation in outdoors; and outdoor recreation at unprecedented • build broad constituencies for Trails can be effective wildlife man- levels, access to nature is clearly an wildlife conservation by putting peo- agement tools integral part of living in our state. Too ple in contact with nature. Let’s take a typical situation. Land much outdoor recreation, however, managers intentionally choose not to can sometimes put at risk the very Trails affect wildlife in a range of build a trail to a particularly sensitive natural resources upon which it is ways area, perhaps a heron rookery. People based. Typically, the impacts to wildlife hear of the rookery and make their This handbook will help trail plan- from trails aren’t as great as those own paths to it. Many of the visitors ners and builders balance the benefits from intensive development. More are careful in how and when they of creating trails and being stewards and more, however, we realize that— approach the herons. of nature, especially wildlife. no matter how carefully we tread and Before long, however, many paths Trails make many positive contri- no matter how much we desire to braid through the trees and planners butions to conserving nature. They “leave nothing but footprints and take are pressured into doing something. can help: nothing but pictures”— building trails They decide to harden one of the • restore degraded stream corri- can effect wildlife. By entering an trails and build an observation deck at dors and other habitats in the process area, we may change the ecology of a an appropriate distance from the of trail building; system that is complex and frequently herons. Finally, with great effort— • guide recreationists away from hard to understand. over many years—most of the social sensitive wildlife habitat and into Sometimes the effects of building trails are revegetated. more adaptable settings; and using a trail are minor and fleet-

1 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

Rules of thumb in the face of Handbook purpose and organization approach that best fits their circum- scientific uncertainty This handbook, which was devel- stances. In situations such as the heron oped as part of Colorado State Parks’ This handbook should not be rookery, scientists say the specific Trails and Wildlife Project, is divided thought of as a cookbook, with a one- effects of trails on wildlife are usually into six main parts: size-fits-all approach. Every trail proj- uncertain. These complex interactions Chapter 1: Introduction. ect is different and the important eco- are just beginning to be understood Chapter 2: Wildlife and Trails logical issues will vary widely with and few unequivocal ecological prin- Primergives an overview of impor- the kinds of trails, wildlife, and habi- ciples for trail planners are known. tant wildlife and other environmental tat. Because of this uncertainty, this issues and suggests a range of handbook offers rules of thumb approaches to planning trails with The Primer introduces topics rather than iron-clad principles. These wildlife in mind. If you have general questions rules of thumb are helpful suggestions Chapter 3: Wildlife and Trail about the interactions of wildlife and based on practical experience, extrap- Planning Checklistis a sequence of trails, the primer—which is organized olations from the sometimes sketchy wildlife-related questions and possible around broad wildlife topics—is a scientific literature, and just plain steps to consider in planning a trail. good place to start. In addition to key common sense. They are experienced Chapter 4: Case Studiespresents concepts and rules of thumb, refer- guesses that may prove useful even specific trail projects and the wildlife- ences are presented for each topic. though they may not be “right” in related lessons learned in the process every situation. Each could appropri- of planning each trail. The Checklist suggests steps ately be prefaced with phrases such Chapter 5: Sources of The checklist focuses specifically as, “when possible” or “in general.” Informationidentifies a wide range on wildlife issues of trail planning Perhaps the greatest contribution of information sources, including and is designed to mirror comprehen- of these rules of thumb is that they websites, data bases, publications, and sive planning processes. This should raise issues that trail planners might people. make it easier to integrate the infor- not otherwise anticipate. Also, if most Chapter 6: Glossarydefines mation into the ways trails are already relevant rules of thumb cannot be wildlife terms likely to be encoun- being planned. met, it may indicate a trail should not tered in further reading. If you are beginning to plan a trail be built in that location. and want to find appropriate ways of Even if scientists were certain of How to use this handbook including wildlife issues, the checklist the specific impacts of trails—some- There are many ways to use this may be a practical aid. It raises thing that should become better handbook. Readers who are new to important questions through each step known over the coming years—that wildlife issues may choose to read the of the planning process. knowledge still has to be balanced handbook from cover to cover. Others with the benefits of trails. Scientific may want to turn first to the wildlife Overall Handbook goals facts alone don’t dictate what should planning checklist (or its summary on This brief document functions best be done with a specific trail. It is the the next page) to find issues for which at raising issues, presenting back- larger framework of laws and commu- they would like more background. ground, offering suggestions, and pro- nity desires that determine what Others may wish to look up a specific viding references to other, more in- should—or must—be valued and pro- topic or source of assistance. depth, sources of information. The tected. The handbook’s two major sec- authors hope that the handbook also tions—the primer and the checklist— will encourage more discussion and are offered as distinct ways of access- study of wildlife and trails issues. ing the same issues and information. Readers are free to choose the

2 1. INTRODUCTION

Overview of the Wildlife and Trails Planning Checklist (See Chapter 3 for details.) Step A. Getting the Whole Picture 1.Include wildlife in the trail vision Look at the broader landscape of the area where you are considering a trail. What opportunities or constraints are there for trails and wildlife in the broader landscape? What plans are there for other trails or wildlife across the landscape? Do you foresee any cumulative trail impacts by adding a new trail? Ask the help of a biologist and other professionals, as needed. What kinds of goals and activities do you foresee for the trail? What are your wildlife goals for the trail project? 2.Organize & communicate Share your ideas and findings with other community members, including trails and wildlife enthusiasts and property owners and managers. Find ways, such as community meetings, field trips, or a web site to discuss ideas and issues related to the possible trail. What opportunities are there for both recreation and wildlife protection in the corridor? Do the ideas seem to complement or conflict? Research and inventory 3. Find information about local wildlife habitats. Conduct an inventory of the area’s sensitive plants, animals, and critical habitat. Note any special opportunities for wildlife education. To the degree possible, understand the existing impacts to wildlife in the area. Step B. Considering Alternatives

1.Prepare and evaluate alternative concept plans Looking across the broader landscape, identify and evaluate several distinct alternative alignments for a trail. (Where an existing trail is to be upgraded, alternatives might include different management strategies.) Use this handbook’s rules of thumb and other information to guide the design, to help maximize the opportunities, and to minimize the constraints for wildlife. Get professional trail planning help, as needed. Are there opportunities to use the trail as a catalyst to restore degraded habitats and preserve pristine areas? Review the alternatives with the community and appropriate land managers and select a preferred plan to refine. 2.Design the trail Develop designs, budgets, time tables, and management strategies for the preferred plan. Review and refine the plan with the help of a wildlife biologist. Step C. Building &Managing 1.Part 1: Acquire and construct the trail If land is to be acquired for the trail, look for additional areas that can be set aside at the same time for wildlife conservation. Implement the plan, being careful to impact wildlife as little as possible during construction. 2.Part 2: Manage and monitor the trail Have a clear plan to manage the trail corridor and activities within it. Monitor the effects of the trail on plants and wildlife and adjust management plans as appropriate. Look for ways to involve the public and to provide educational opportunities.

3 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

The Colorado State Parks Trails • A trail is more than a thin line alignments that will have less impact Program will be updating this hand- traversing the landscape. To respect on their surroundings. book periodically and invites your wildlife, a trail must be planned in • Understanding both the existing comments and suggestions. (Colorado conjunction with its zone of influence. and potential impacts of a trail to State Parks—Trails Program, 1313 • In building a trail, we may wildlife can help set more realistic Sherman Street, Room 618, Denver, choose to impact wildlife and habi- goals for a trail project. CO 80203 or e-mail: tats, but we should do so with an • Native biological diversity is [email protected]) understanding of the implications. much more than a count of the species Additional current information • In many cases, scientific knowl- found in an area. Instead, it is a about wildlife issues in trails planning edge alone can’t determine whether broader concept that includes all may be found in the Trails section of wildlife impacts are great enough to facets of our natural living heritage. the Colorado State Parks website: preclude a trail. The decision also • The best strategy in planning http://www.dnr.state.co.us/parks/ should be based on community val- trails is always to avoid impacts to ues, including the benefits the trail wildlife. The next best is to minimize Some overall observations will offer the public. the impacts. The last resort is to miti- In creating this handbook, we • Wildlife don’t necessarily see the gate for impacts. found a number of overarching landscape the way we do. What may • Plan and manage a trail in ways themes: appear to a person to be a minor that help make users more predictable • When planned with wildlife in change may be perceived quite differ- to wildlife so they can acclimate to mind, trails can be effective manage- ently by wildlife. people. ment tools that help reduce the • If we learn to see the landscape impacts of people on wildlife. more as wildlife do, we can find trail

COLORADO’S WILDLIFE ARE VARIED AND INTERESTING

When planning trails with wildlife in mind, it may be Grassland to Glacier: The Natural History of Colorado. helpful to think of specific wildlife species as part of your Johnson Publishing Co., Boulder, Colorado. trail users group, along with recreationists. There are sev- Kruger, Frances Alley; John Fielder; Carron A. Meaney, Denver eral good introductions to our state’s wildlife, including: Museum 1995. Explore Colorado: From Plains to Peaks. Armstrong, David Michael; James P. Fitzgerald, Carron A. Westcliffe Publishers, Englewood, Colorado. Meaney 1994. Mammals of Colorado.University Press of Rennicke, Jeff 1996. Colorado Wildlife. Falcon Press, Helena, Colorado, Boulder, Colorado. Montana. Benedict, Audrey DeLella 1991. Sierra Club Naturalist’s Guide Whitaker, John O., Jr. 1996. National Audubon Society Field to the Southern Rockies. Sierra Club Books, San Francisco. Guide to North American Mammals. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Emerick, John C.; Cornelia Fleisher Mutel 1992. From New York, New York.

4 2. Wildlife and Trails Primer

nowing how wildlife respond individual species relate to trails, for and colleagues offer useful principles to recreationists and their example—may be available through of landscape ecology. Ktrails is a vital part of plan- the Colorado Trails and Wildlife Full citations for the most com- ning trails. This section of the hand- Bibliographic Data Base. (See mon references are given below. book gives an overview of the major Chapter 5: Sources of information.) Dramstad, W., J. Olson, and R. wildlife issues relevant to trail plan- Forman, 1996.Landscape Ecology ners and provides references for more Principles in Landscape Architecture and ARULE OF THUMB IS: in-depth study. The topics presented Land-Use Planning, Island Press, here are some of the most important 1 : a method of procedure Washington D.C. for incorporating wildlife concerns based on experience and Forman, R.1995.Land Mosaic: The into trail planning common sense. Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. 2 : a general principle Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Key Concepts and Rules of Thumb Forman R. and M. Godron, 1986. regarded as roughly correct Key concepts are presented as an Landscape Ecology.John Wiley and Sons, but not intended to be scien- introduction to each Primer topic. To New York. tifically exact. make the concepts practical, rules of Knight, R.and K. Gutzwiller, eds., thumbare also given with each topic. 1995. Wildlife and Recreationists: The rules of thumb are intended as Coexistence through Management and helpful advice for wildlife situations Research.Island Press, Washington, D.C. that are generally too complex for Noss, R.and A. Cooperrider, 1994. ironclad, universal principles. Saving Nature’s Legacy: Protecting and Restoring Biodiversity.Island Press, For more detailed discussions Practical advice is offered in each Washington, D.C. References for further readingare of these volumes. For example, in Smith, D.and P. Hellmund, 1993. given with each Primer topic. These each chapter, Knight and Gutzwiller Ecology of Greenways.University of books are general in nature, and readi- offer “management options for coex- Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minn. ly available in bookstores. More istence,” Smith and Hellmund include detailed information—on how planning guidelines, and Dramstad

5 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

ecological edges in the world as a A.4 Negative effects.Trails may A. Trails and theirresult of increasing human develop- negatively affect species that need zones of influence ment of all kinds.) conditions (such as specific vegeta- The specific edge effects of a trail tion or light) that are altered in trail and their associated widths depend on construction. Key Concepts the characteristics of the trail(how A.5 Degraded areas.Seek out wide it is and its type of users, for degraded areasthat have the potential example) and the surrounding land- to be restored when aligning a trail, scape(how sensitive local wildlife rather than creating another disturbed As with anything we build in the are). area. landscape, a trail changes its sur- Trailheadsand other trail facili- A.6 Edges.Align a trail along or roundings. Some of these changes ties, which have their own character- near an existing human-created eco- are minor and temporary—such as istics and impacts on wildlife, con- logical edge, rather than bisecting when a deer moves away from an tribute to the extent of a trail’s zone of undisturbed areas. When this is possi- approaching hiker, to return to browse influence and should not be forgotten ble, the trail will not create a totally once the hiker has gone. Other in the planning process. new ecological edge. changes have wider ramifications and A trail’s area of influence should A.7 Avoid sensitive wildlife. duration—such as when aggressive be planned and managed as an inte- Keep a trail—and its zone of influ- bird species follow trails, expanding gral part of the trail. This influence ence—away from specific areas of their habitat, displacing sensitive zone should provide recreationists known sensitive species, populations, species, and preying on songbirds and with meaningful interactions with or communities. Where appropriate, other sensitive neotropical birds. nature, without infringing on sensitive use glimpses of these areas as oppor- These changes to a trail’s sur- habitat. tunities for educating trail users. roundings may extend for hundreds or A.8 Think thin.In constructing or even thousands of feet on either side Rules of Thumb upgrading a trail, disturb as narrow an of a trail. (They are sometimes area as possible to help minimize the referred to as trail distance effects.) zone of influence. Collectively these effects define a zone of influenceassociated with a A.1 Always some impact.Any trail. This zone is also the primary trail will have at least some negative experience area for recreationists impactson wildlife. Such impacts using the trail. Without wildlife in this must be weighed with thebenefits of zone, trail users would have a less the trail. diverse experience. A.2 The broader view.In consid- There is a natural variabilityto ering wildlife, don’t focus solely on landscapes, so the width of a zone of the narrow width of the trail’s tread- influence varies along a trail’s length. way; also consider the wider area it Some of the effects characteristic may influence. of a trail’s zone of influence are what A.3 Sensitive vs. non-sensitive. Radiating out from every trail is a biologists refer to as edge effects. Trail corridors may encourage some zone of influence, the width of Edges attract more generalist species species of wildlife, such as jays, rac- which varies with local conditions at the expense of more specialist coons, and other edge-loving general- over the length of the trail. species, which have fewer options in ists, but these species are already Planning a trail with this in mind can greatly help anticipate the increasingly human-dominated land- increasing across the landscape and future interactions of the trail and scapes. (There are more and more may not need encouraging. wildlife.

6 2. WILDLIFE ANDTRAILS PRIMER

A.9 Screening.Locate trails and A.11 Predictability.The more Noss, “Wildlife Corridors” in Smith, D. supporting facilities in areas where predictable human actions are, the and P. Hellmund, 1993. Ecology of they can be screened and separated more adaptable wildlife may be to Greenways.University of Minnesota from sensitive wildlife by vegetation those actions. Press, Minneapolis, Minn., pp. 58-59. or topography. This approach is less Noss, R. and A. Cooperrider, 1994. Saving disturbing to wildlife and reduces the Nature’s Legacy: Protecting and amount of energy wildlife must use in Restoring Biodiversity. Island Press, reacting to recreationists. Washington, D.C., pp. 197-203. A.10 Rewarding trails.Provide Forman R. and M. Godron, 1986. trail experiencesthat are diverse and Further Reading Landscape Ecology.John Wiley and interesting enough that recreationists Dramstad, W., J. Olson, and R. Forman, Sons, New York, pp. 108-109. are less inclined to create their own 1996. Landscape Ecology Principles in Forman, R. 1995.Land Mosaic: The trails and thereby expand the zone of Landscape Architecture and Land-Use Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. influence. Planning, Island Press, Washington Cambridge University Press, D.C., pp. 27-29. Cambridge, pp. 81-111.

Variable Example interactions How wide an area will be influenced by a trail is determined by VEGETATION Some types of vegetation, such as dense forests, can visually screen trail users more than others. many variables in a complex interaction. Some of these variables WILDLIFE SPECIES Some species are more sensitive to human activities than and examples of their effects on others. the interactions of wildlife and recreationistsare shown above. SEASON Certain times of the year, such as breeding season, may (Adapted from Clinton Miller, City be more sensitive than others for wildlife. Also, during of Boulder Open Space, 1994) dormant periods, some plants may be less easily impacted.

TIME During resting, feeding, or other specific times of the day, wildlife may be more susceptible to disturbance.

WEATHER In cold weather, recreationists may have greater impact on wildlife because of the increased energy wildlife must expend to avoid the recreationists.

TRAIL/USER LOCATION Wildlife may respond differently if trail users are above or below them, on or off a trail.

SURROUNDING LAND USE Trail impacts may be less significant in an already disturbed area.

INTENSITY/LEVELS OF USE More intensive or higher levels of trail use may have farther-reaching impacts.

PREDICTABILITY The more predictable trail users are, the more likely their presence can be incorporated into the daily strategies of wildlife.

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY There is greater impact when recreationists bring along dogs. Also the speed of activity influences the level of disturbance

7 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

• an influx of plant and animal Protecting large, undisturbed areas B. Avoiding large species(usually generalists) that like of wildlife habitat should be a priori- natural areas or tolerate the new conditions of light, ty. Deciding whether or not to build a wind,or human presence; and trail that may contribute to fragmenta- • a decline of speciesthat cannot tion is a tradeoff that the local com- Key Concepts tolerate these conditions or are munityor land manager will have to adversely impacted by the species make. newly arriving in the trail’s zone of influence. Rules of Thumb Typically as we go about building The new species may include communities—and especially the weeds and other exotic plant species, infrastructure that supports them—we as well as predators that eat the eggs cut across and through streams and or young of indigenous wildlife. B.1 Big habitat areas. When pos- forests, windbreaks and prairies—the These new conditions and interac- sible, leave untouched large, undis- natural systems around us. This tends tions can change the trail’s zone of turbed areas of wildlife habitat. They to leave ever-smaller areas that are influence in ways that may not be are an important—and rapidly vanish- even more directly impacted or influ- obviousto the casual observer. ing—resource. Identify and seek to enced by humans. The impacts of a trail on the bio- protect all such areas when aligning a This habitat fragmentationis logical diversity of a large area that trail. considered by many biologists to be has already been heavily disturbed B.2 Edge trails.It is better to the single greatest threat to biological may not be significant. For example, route a trail around the edge of an diversity. Some species, such as lynx constructing a trail through a young, area of high quality, undisturbed habi- and wolverine, for example, may not even-aged stand of lodgepole pine tat, than through its center. survive without large, unbroken that has regrown after clearcutting B.3 Trail density.Keep the densi- blocksof habitat. may not change how wildlife use the ty of trails lower within and near pris- There is little specific knowledge area. If the stand has very low diversi- tine or other high quality areas to of how much a trail may contribute to ty of wildlife—as is often typical of reduce the contribution of trails to these factors or ultimately help this type of habitat—it is even possi- fragmentation. degrade biological diversity. The ble wildlife diversity might increase B.4 Stepping-stone patches. extent of the impacts depends on a with the creation of the trail. Avoid small patchesof high quality number of factors, including the type of habitat, thespecies present, and the characteristics of the trail, HOW TO EXTRAPOLATE PRACTICAL INFORMATION including how heavily it is used by FROM A SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL ARTICLE people. There may be no existing spe- In particular in reading an arti- As mentioned above, trails have cific studies of wildlife and the cle, consider: Are the species of zones of influence(of variable width) potential impacts of a trail for your wildlife examined in the study the associated with them. Taking this particular area, but you can still same as my project? Is the habitat added width into account, it is easier get help from scientific journal arti- type the same? Are the trail uses to understand how a region criss- cles and other sources. It may take you anticipate similar to those crossed with trails could end up with time to get used to scientific jar- studied, if any? few areas not somehow influenced by gon, but it is possible to cull practi- Through this process, you can humans. cal information from such sources start to develop new rules of thumb In a complex series of interac- with patience. to apply to your trail project. tions, fragmented habitats may see:

8 2. WILDLIFE ANDTRAILS PRIMER

habitat in routing a trail. Such patches may be important stepping stones used by wildlife to move across the landscape. B.5 Balancing needs across landscapes.It is easier to balance competing wildlife and recreation needs across a landscape or region than it is on a specific trail project within a smaller area.

Further Reading

Binford and Buchenau, “Riparian Greenways and Water Resources,” in Smith, D. and P. Hellmund, 1993. Ecology of Greenways. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minn., pp. 69-104.

Carefully consider how and where to route a trail through a streamside area. These riparian zones are rich habitat for wildlife. The illustration shows a trail alignment running primarily outside the riparian area, but moving into it at places where wildlife is less likely to be disrupted. (Left:plan view, right: sketch.)

15 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

pullenl/cais /tespec.htmlor call the The Division of Wildlife only F. Species and Service’s Colorado Field Supervisor, offers advice and does not approve or places of special 303-275-2370.) reject projects. To review the Endangered Species Some wetlandsare protected by interest Act see http://www.fws.gov/r9end federal legislation. Special (404) per- spp/esa.html#Lnk03 mitting is required before they can be If your project includes a federal disturbed. (See sidebar opposite.) Key Concepts action, permit, or funding and will Other specially designated areas impact a federally listed species, you to take note of include: must contact the USFWS for what is • proposed wilderness study areas known as a Section 7 consultation. • wilderness areas While some species (such as bald Even if your project has no associa- • inventoried roadless areas eagle and Ute ladies-tresses orchids) tion with the federal government, if • USDA Forest Service research and habitats (such as wetlands) have you believe there may be an “inciden- natural areas and areas with a pre- legal statusthat must be respected in tal takings” of a federally listed scription emphasizing wildlife, the process of trail building, others speciesyou must have a Section 9 flora, fauna, or ecological values may deserve special attention because consultation with the Fish and • BLM areas of critical environ- of the value placed on them by a Wildlife Service. mental concern local community. The State of Colorado T&E list • wild and scenic rivers Threatened and endangeredare includes species that are in danger of • Colorado State Natural Areas, legal designations applied to certain becoming extinct in Colorado, but not • significant archeological sites, and species of plants and animals per- necessarily in the country. Almost all • other officially protected areas. ceived to be in danger of potentially species on the Federal list are on the Extra care and research should be becoming extinct, either in the world, Colorado list, but the Colorado list taken when proposing a trail in any of country, or state. includes several species that are com- these areas or in areas that may be of For those working in Colorado, mon elsewhere in the country, but rare local concern. there are two lists of threatened or in this state. Plans for trail construction that endangered (T&E) species. One is Colorado law gives no protection will affect a stream must, by Colorado issued by the federal government, the to the habitat of species on the state law (Senate Bill 40), be approved by other by the Colorado Division of list, but provides for increased penal- the Colorado Division of Wildlife, if Wildlife. ties for directly killing such animals. they are being done by a state agency The federal T&E list includes The Colorado Division of Wildlife or with state funding. species that are in danger of becoming administers the law, and its person- extinct nationally. The Endangered nel—either the district wildlife man- Rules of Thumb Species Act, which provides some ager or the habitat biologist in a protection for these species, is admin- region—should be contacted with istered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife questions about state-listed species. Service. (For a copy of the complete list, visit F.1 Avoiding sensitive areas. The degree to which the law pro- the Division of Wildlife’s website: Generally avoid specific areas where tects species on the list is complicated http://www. dnr.state.co.us/wildlife/ there are known species, populations, and varies depending on the individ- T&E/list.htmlor request a free copy or communities of special interest and ual species. It is best to discuss spe- of the brochure: “Non-game Wildlife where potential impacts of a trail are cific situations with U.S. Fish and Regulations” from: Colorado Division uncertain. This is especially true of Wildlife Service (USFWS) personnel. of Wildlife, Order Fulfillment Center, breeding sites of big gameand (See website: http://www.fws.gov/ 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80216.) raptors.

16 2. WILDLIFE ANDTRAILS PRIMER

F.2 Spur trails.When it is appropriate to provide access to a more sen- WETLANDS PERMITS sitive area, use a spur (i.e., dead-end) Before you disturb a wet area to When applying for a permit you trail instead of a through trail because build a trail or a bridge, you should must show that you are in compliance spur trails tend to have lower volumes determine if you will need a wetlands with the EPA §404b(1) guidelines. of traffic. This is because, given a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of These include: choice, people tend to stay on a Engineers. 1) avoiding wetland impacts where through path rather than take a spur. The federal government defines a practicable, F.3 Expert advice.Check with the wetland as an area with saturated soil 2) minimizing potential impacts to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and in low depressions, secondary stream wetlands, and the Colorado Division of Wildlife channels, or in areas that “appear to 3) providing compensation for any about special species and places. feel wet.” In most cases, wetlands cre- remaining unavoidable impacts Check with the U.S. Army Corps of ated by people are subject to the same through activities to restore or create Engineersregarding impacts to wet- protection as naturally occurring wet- wetlands. lands. lands. Other permit application require- Wetlands regulations include fill- ments include a §401 Water Quality Further Reading ing, draining, excavating, and flood- Certification from the appropriate ing. Regional Water Quality Control Board. Section 404of the Clean Water If threatened or endangered Actestablishes a program to regulate species may be affected by the pro- In general there is considerable the discharge of dredged and fill posed activity, the Army Corps will information available for individual material into waters of the United consult with the appropriate Federal species and specially designated States, including wetlands. agency (e.g., U.S. Fish and Wildlife areas. There are two basic types of 404 Service) to obtain a biological opinion permits issued by the Army Corps, on the affects to the species. individual and general. An individual For more information see the fol- permit is usually required for potential- lowing websites: ly significant impacts. However, for http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/ most discharges that will have only http://www.epa.gov/docs/Region4Wet/ minimal adverse effects, the Army overview.html Corps often grants general permits. http://ceres.ca.gov/wetlands/ These may be issued on a nationwide, permitting/sec_404.html regional, or statewide basis for partic- Or call the U.S. Army Corps of ular categories of activities (e.g., minor Engineer. road crossings, utility line backfill and bedding) in order to expedite the permitting process.

17 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

Typically, urban landscapes are heavi- • Generally, what kind of wildlife G. A site’s existingly disturbed and restoring habitat may habitat is present? What condition impacts be the principal wildlife goal. In more is it in? pristine settings, preserving what is • Are the plants and animals typi- already there and minimizing impact cally associated with that habitat Key Concepts may be the major concerns. actually present? Is the ecosystem An important first step is deter- already impoverished to some mining where a site fits on the gradi- extent? ent of human modificationranging • What are and have been the It is very rare that an area proposed from urban (highly modified) to pris- human impacts to wildlife in the for a trail hasn’t already seen at least tine (few modifications). area? some impactfrom humans. The ques- Even portions of wildernessareas • What are the surrounding land tions then become—How disturbed is may have had some human impacts uses and condition of habitat? the site? What kinds of impacts to from activities such as mining, How close is any nearby develop- wildlife already exist there? forestry, or road building. ment? Are there already roads With this kind of ecological eval- Understanding these modifications bounding the area under consider- uation, it will be easier to set reason- can help guide trail alignments. For ation for a trail, posing obstacles able wildlife goals for a trail or to example, trails might follow ecologi- to wildlife movement? evaluate the tradeoffs between cal edgescreated by historic roads or • Overall, to what extent is the site wildlife and trails. Every trail project timber cuts. insulated from external forces? should have wildlife goals. In gauging how modified an area • What opportunities are there to The specific wildlife goals and already is, there are some practical improve habitat on the site? rules of thumb you apply will partly questions to ask: depend on how disturbeda site is.

Assessing the amount of human disturbance already along a potential trail alignment can help set more realistic wildlife goals for a trail project. Trail alignments may pass through one or more of the general levels of modification along a gradient from urban to pristine.

Urban Suburban Managed Pristine

18 2. WILDLIFE ANDTRAILS PRIMER

Rules of Thumb (where there are not many ecological Further Reading implications) and along streams and other drainages often already trans- formed for flood control. G.1 Patterns of disturbance.The G.4 Restoring habitat.Trail proj- Thorne, “Landscape Ecology,” in D. best trail alignments work with the ects can aid wildlife by being cata- Smith and P. Hellmund, 1993. Ecology existing patterns of disturbance lysts for restoring habitat, creating of Greenways.University of Minnesota already in a landscape, rather than wetlands, and planting native plant Press, Minneapolis, Minn., p. 27. imposing an entirely new set. species for food, cover, and visual Forman R. and M. Godron, 1986. G.2 Existing human disturbance. screening. Landscape Ecology.John Wiley and Before setting wildlife goalsfor a trail G.5 Seeking professional help. Sons, New York, pp. 286-310. project, consider the degree to which Without special training, it’s easy to an area has already been modifiedby overlook or oversimplify wildlife people. issues. Get professional assistance G.3 Urban limitations.In urban whenever possible. landscapesthere are often few options for routing trails other than streetside

19 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

factor in how much disturbance a trail used by hunters. Hunting, by design, H. How wildlife user causes. If trail users stay on a affects wildlife. In general, even respond to trails trail they are more likely to be per- though hunting reduces animal popu- ceived as acting in a predictable fash- lations annually, it is often of short ion and therefore as less of a threat. duration, closely controlled, and can Key Concepts Dogscan cause considerable dis- be used as a wildlife management turbance (because they may chase and tool. kill wildlife), but less so if they are on In weighing impacts to wildlife, a leashand don’t leave the trail. attention is often given to effects on The construction of a trail directly Paradoxically,bird watchingand biological diversity.Biodiversityis impactsthe habitat it displaces. other forms of nature viewing that not equivalent to species diversity. It Specifically, vegetation removed in intentionally seek out close encoun- is more than just a count of how many the process of building a trail is no ters with wildlife may have a signifi- species use an area. longer available for use by wildlife. cant impact. “Biodiversity is the variety of life Once a trail is built, its physical Factors affecting the short-term and its processes. It includes the vari- presence also can change its environs. impact of human disturbanceon ety of living organisms, the genetic The trail may have created a new wildlife include: differences among them, the commu- ecological edge, perhaps increasing • Type of species and flushing dis- nities and ecosystems in which they the light intensity and prompting a tances; occur, and the ecological and evolu- shift in the composition of wildlife • Type and intensity of human tionary processes that keep them and plant species, thus changing activity functioning, yet ever changing and biological diversity. • Time of year and time of day; and adapting” (Noss and Copperrider). Impacts of a trail will depend on • Type of wildlife activity (feeding, Although the presence of large the type of trail use(e.g., hiking, nesting, roosting, migrating). numbers of exotic species may boost snowmobiling, biking). These uses do For example, a slowly moving the count of species in an area, it not represent a continuum with hikers birdwatcher may impact the birds he would probably indicate declining at the low-impact end and motorized approaches, but only over a more biodiversitydue to loss of native recreationists at the high end; wildlife localized area than a speeding motor- species. Exotic species frequently out- impacts are more complicated than cycle that may have a briefer impact compete natives and replace them. that. on any one area, but impact a broader That is why, for example, some area. wildlife refuges allow auto tours but Wildlife characteristics, includ- Rules of Thumb not walking tours because many ing type of animal, group size, age, wildlife species are less fearful of and sex, also determine the response people in vehicles. to a disturbance. Sometimes the response of Disturbance by humans can cause H.1 Lack of wildlife knowledge. wildlife to a trail doesn’t last long,as nest abandonment, decline in parental Because there isn’t much detailed when a bird stops feeding as a hiker care, shortened feeding times, knowledge about the effects of human approaches, only to continue eating increased stress, and possibly lower disturbance on wildlife, be cautious in after the hiker has passed. With reproductive success. planning a trail, carefully weighing increasing levels of useand changes If an animal responds to a noise as the alternatives. in the type of use,there may be suffi- soon as it hears it, noisy vehicles may H.2 Make do.Use the best cient disturbance along a trail that affect it at a greater distance than wildlife information available, even if some wildlife may move away perma- humans can typically be heard. it is scarce. Get the advice of a nently. Predictabilitycan be a major Trails often pass through areas biologist.

20 2. WILDLIFE ANDTRAILS PRIMER

H.3 Considerable differences. Species Disturbance Factor Flight Distance* Not only do different species respond Mule deer Person on foot—In low disturbance area 330 m differently to trails, different popula- — In medium disturbance 250 m tions of the same species may respond — In high disturbance 200 m — recommended to avoid most flight 191 m differently, based on previous encoun- Mule deer person afoot in winter 200 m ters with people. Elk person afoot in winter 200 m H.4 Concentrated use.Generally, highway vehicles 77 m it is better to concentrate recreational Elk cross country skiers in—high use area 15 m — low use area 400 m use rather than disperse it. If social Mountain sheep person afoot in winter 50 m trails have developed in an area, it is Golden plovers people on trail 200 m probably better to consolidate them Eider ducks land-based disturbance—with a dog 103 m — without a dog 52 m into one or a few trails. American Kestrel winter disturbance of person afoot 75 m H.5 Type of trail use.Some Merlin winter disturbance of person afoot 125 m wildlife are more alarmed by hikers Prairie Falcon winter disturbance of person afoot 160 m Rough-legged hawk winter disturbance of person afoot 210 m than by people who stay in their vehi- Ferruginous Hawk winter disturbance of person afoot 140 m cles, especially if the vehicles don’t Golden Eagle winter disturbance of person afoot 300 m stop. Bald Eagle land activities near roost on shoreline 250 m Great Blue Heron land-based activities 200 m H.6 Dog controls.If dogsare to water-based activities 100 m be allowed on a trail where there are sensitive wildlife, the dogs should be *Note: Flight distance is the measurement from the source of the disturbance to the leashed or excluded seasonally to animal when the animal physically flees to a safer location, not the distance at which reduce conflicts. the animal first responds or is aware of the disturbance. H.7 Screening.The natural visual Flight Distances for a variety of wildlife. Studies have documented a range screening of a trail in a wooded area of responses by wildlife to various forms of disturbance. (This chart was frequently makes most wildlife toler- developed from a review of the published literature by Clinton Miller, City ate greater human disturbance than of Boulder Open Space, 1994). While these numbers don’t specify how far a trail needs to be from wildlife to avoid disturbance, taken together they they would in open terrain. In some illustrate a variability based on the species of wildlife and types of distur- areas, it may be possible to plant a bance. vegetative screen or build a screening fence to accomplish similar effects. sensitive seasons, consider rerouting Knight and Cole, “Factors that influence H.8 Impacts vs. benefits.Don’t the trail through another area. Wildlife Responses to Recreationists,” assume all wildlife impacts can be in Knight, R. and K. Gutzwiller, eds., resolved through management. There Further Reading 1995. Wildlife and Recreationists: may be situations where the negative Coexistence through Management and impacts of a trail to wildlife outweigh Research.Island Press, Washington, the benefits to trail users and a trail D.C., pp. 71-79. should take a different alignment. Knight and Cole, “Wildlife Responses to Noss, R. and A. Cooperrider, 1994. Saving H.9 Breeding areas.Either avoid Recreationists,” in Knight, R. and K. Nature’s Legacy: Protecting and wildlife breeding areas or close trails Gutzwiller, eds., 1995. Wildlife and Restoring Biodiversity. Island Press, through them at the times such Recreationists: Coexistence through Washington, D.C. wildlife are most sensitive to human Management and Research.Island disturbance. Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 51-69. H.10 Enforcing closures.If there won’t be sufficient resources to enforce a trail closure during wildlife-

21 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

wildlife get from native species. I.6 Weed control.To prevent I. What happens to (Typically, weeds are also less suc- weed spread, control aggressive plants near trails cessful at inhibiting soil erosion than weeds along trails, especially at trail- native plants.) heads. Recovery times from trampling I.7 Trampling.Design trails with Key Concepts vary widely with habitat type,with proper drainage and sustainable gradi- alpine ecosystems some of the slow- ents so users are less likely to trample est to recover. vegetation along alternate routes. In alpine ecosystems, herbaceous I.8 Wet areas.Route a trail The most readily observable impact meadows are most quickly modified around meadows and other wet areas of trail recreationists is to vegetation by walking, fellfields with cushion and build up a dry trail in areas where near trails. While these impacts tend forms are less affected, and turf seasonal water creates boggy soil. to be very localized, they have broad- meadows are least affected of all. I.9 Improving existing trails.To er implications because they alter Heavy tramplingwill destroy a turf minimize ground disturbance and pos- habitat conditions and, in turn, affect ecosystem in eight weeks, while a sible spread of weedy species, recon- wildlife. In most cases, however, rock-desert (fellfield) will be struct an existing trail instead of these impacts to vegetation are much destroyed in only two weeks. rerouting it. less than the trampling that results when there is no trail to channel Rules of Thumb Further Reading people. Of special concern should be impacts to plants that have been designated as threatened, endangered, I.1 Keeping users on trails.In Cole and Landres. “Indirect Effects of or sensitive. areas with sensitive vegetation, pro- Recreation on Wildlife,”in Knight, R. If recreationists don’t stay on vide a well-designed trail to encour- and K. Gutzwiller, eds., 1995. Wildlife trails, they tend to: age users to stay on the trail. Use and Recreationists: Coexistence • reduce the density of plants near a signs, educational materials, and even through Management and Research. trail by trampling and picking; barriers as appropriate. Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp. • compact soil and contribute to I.2 Native plants.In natural 183-202. erosion; areas, use native plants in revegetat- Cole, “Minimizing Conflict between • alter the composition of species ing along trails because these are the Recreation and Nature Conservation,” by damaging existing plants, cre- plants wildlife depend upon. in Smith, D. and P. Hellmund, 1993. ating bare spots that favor exotic I.3 Weed-free feed.Require use Ecology of Greenways. University of species, the seeds of which are of weed-free feed for horses and other Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minn., introduced by trail users and their pack animals so they don’t spread pp. 105-122. pack animals; and weeds along trails. • in the process, change the vertical I.4 User education.Educate trail structure and spatial pattern of users about the results of direct vegetation. impacts to vegetation and indirect The conditions along trails also impacts to wildlife. can allow weedy, exotic plantsto I.5 Toilets.Provide toilets at trail- invade natural areas. Weedsare a heads and other key locations to problem because frequently they are reduce damage to surrounding vegeta- more aggressive than native species tion. and yet don’t provide the habitat that

22 2. WILDLIFE ANDTRAILS PRIMER

Offering wildlife inter- J. Managing trails pretation and environmental education to with wildlife in trail users can play an important role in reducing impacts to mind wildlife. People more readily protect what they understand and Key Concepts appreciate. Interpretive programs, guided tours, staff interactions, signs, brochures, maps, and While the specific activities associat- videos all can be effective in communi- ed with managinga trail come after it cating appropriate vis- has been built, an understanding of itor behavior among how a trail will be managedmust be wildlife. part of planning the trail. Management is a poor substitute for a lack of planning. Trail managementis more effective when it is planned up front, rather than later as a corrective for poor trail location. Because environmental conditions change along the length of a trail, it is often useful to identify distinct zones Carefully monitorthe trail corri- seasonal wildlife closures, inventory along the trail, where management dor to detect social trails early. Then and monitor wildlife, and much more. reflects differences in wildlife habitat use brush, boulders, signs, or other Trails present good opportunities and recreation use. means to dissuade use. for the public to understand wildlife. Adaptive management—in Monitoring and other aspects of Whether conducted by volunteers or which the process of managing a trail effective trail management may seem paid staff, offering wildlifeinterpre- can be used to learn more about like luxuries, but they are actually tationand environmental education impacts to wildlife—is especially basic stewardshiprequirements. to trail users can play an important appropriate for trails given the uncer- Finding the resources to accomplish role in reducing impacts to wildlife. tainties of potential wildlife impacts. this stewardship will require the same People more readily protect what they The best laid trail plans, carefully levels of creative effort as building understand and appreciate. crafted and built with wildlife in the trail. Interpretive programs, guided mind, can be disrupted by people who Volunteerscan be tremendously tours, staff interactions, signs, choose to make trails of their own. helpful in managing trails. They can brochures, maps, and videos can all Social trailsare one of the biggest serve as trailhead hosts or trail guides be effective in communicating appro- challenges facing trails planners and who offer information about wildlife priate visitor behavioramong wildlife. managers, who may have worked and trail regulations. They can con- Sound regulationsare needed to long hours to provide trails that duct interpretative programs and help protect wildlife, but they also need to respect wildlife. Social trails degrade with trash pickup and other mainte- be enforced. vegetation and may increase soil ero- nance tasks. Volunteers can enforce sion. rules and educate trail users about

23 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

Rules of Thumb or garbage around to further support are less likely to behave in ways that generalists species. are harmful to wildlife. J.7 Multiple approaches.Use a combination of management tech- Further Reading J.1 Early managementplanning. niques to facilitate the coexistence of Plan how to manage a trail’s wildlife recreationists and wildlife. issues before its alignment is set. J.8 Volunteers.Enlist the help of J.2 Resolving conflicts.Don’t trail users in monitoring wildlife use Larson, R., “Balancing Wildlife Viewing depend on management to resolve of the trail corridor and other activi- with Wildlife Impacts: A Case Study,” wildlife conflicts that can be avoided ties. in Knight, R. and K. Gutzwiller, eds., by careful alignment in the first place. J.9 General references.To pro- 1995. Wildlife and Recreationists: J.3 Increased demands on man- tect wildlife, when describing points Coexistence through Management and agement.More careful management of sensitive, ecological interest near a Research.Island Press, Washington, of resources will be required when a trail—sites you want people to know D.C., pp. 51-69. trail passes through or near sensitive about, but not visit,—don’t indicate “Agencies and Volunteers: Conducting habitat. the direction or distance to the spot. Your Own Volunteer Projects,” J.4 Predictability.Wildlife accept J.10 User facilities.Provide facil- Volunteer for Outdoor Colorado, 1990. the more predictable disturbances of ities, such as blinds, viewing areas, To order: Volunteers for Outdoor people (and dogs) on trails more read- and boardwalks, for visitors to see Colorado, 600 South Marion Parkway, ily than off trails. wildlife with minimal disturbance. Denver, CO 80209, (303) 715-1010. J.5 Weed-free feed.Using weed- J.11 Interpretation.Interpretation “Organizing Outdoor Volunteers, Second free feed for packstock will help mini- and environmental educationare very Edition,” Appalachian Mountain Club mize weed invasions. important management tools. If peo- Books, 1992. To order: Appalachian J.6 Discouraging generalists. ple value wildlife and understand the Mountain Club Books, P.O. Box 298, Encourage visitors not to leave food implications of their own actions, they Graham, NH 03581, (800) 262-4455.

24 2. WILDLIFE ANDTRAILS PRIMER

It is easiest to reach consensus entering undisturbed areas and it K. Making among groups with differing values acknowledges our obligation to future informed decisionswhen there is a common understand- generations. ing of the issues at hand. That is one of the main purposes of this hand- Rules of Thumb Key Concepts book. More and more often today, communities are not just discussing their present needs and desires for trails K.1 Sweeping statements.In dis- Any trail will have at least some and wildlife, but also ways of leaving cussing trails and wildlife, avoid impact on wildlife. Therefore, decid- choices for future generations. The sweeping generalities about wildlife ing whether the recreational value of a concept of sustainabilityis about impacts that may not be possible to trail outweighs those impacts is a meeting the needs of the present with- substantiate or even be true in a spe- community choice, or in some cases, out compromising the ability of future cific situation. a legal question. generations to meet their own needs. K.2 Public values.Scientific To conform to legal requirements In the case of wildlife and trails, sus- study doesn’t reveal how the public it is important to check with state and tainability is about enjoying trails values wildlife. Various kinds of federal wildlife agencies. In order to today without precluding the ability wildlife may be valued quite differ- understand community values related of future generations to enjoy ently from a public and a scientific to wildlife and trails, there needs to be wildlife. perspective. a public processassociated with a A trail that is contributing to the K.3 Broader perspective. project. sustainability of an area is meeting Frequently, disagreements over trails There are many public involve- people’s fundamental desire to experi- and wildlife can be resolved by bal- ment techniquesand abundant ence nature while not compromising ancing objectives over the broader sources of information about them. the ecological integrity of the area. landscape. It may be harder to balance An important first step in understand- This implies careful planning of trails competing interests of wildlife and ing how a community values wildlife so that they do not seriously degrade trails in the same confined area. and trails is recognizing that there are biodiversity. K.4 Public process.Don’t assume probably many subgroups within a With this kind of forward-looking everyone in your community values community—many publics. These perspective, it is especially appropri- trails or wildlife in the same ways you groups may hold very different values ate to restore degraded areas for trails. do. Invite broad public participation and may need to be invited into the Improving degraded habitat (i.e., cor- on every trail project. process in different ways. recting past mistakes) is better than

25 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

The National Environmental communicate with these community L. Land ownership Policy Act (NEPA)outlines an envi- members from the beginning of the ronmental review process for review- project. Key Concepts ing projects proposed with federal lands or funds. NEPA can seem intim- Rules of Thumb idating to those first encountering it. (Contact the manager of the federal Many longer trails cross from one property early in the process for jurisdictionto another. This has ram- advice.) Because the NEPA process L.1 Existing plans.Propose trails ifications for how the trail is planned would have been followed for an on federal lands in areas identified as and specifically how wildlife issues adopted federal forest or other land suitable in existing management are considered. If a trail will cross management plan, it may be possible plans. federal lands, a more careful envi- that additional environmental review L.2 Additional requirements.Be ronmental analysis may be required. is not needed for a specific trail proj- prepared to follow a more formal Federal agencies, such as the ect. Often reconstruction or minor environmental review process if you USDAForest Serviceand the Bureau trail rerouting may be approved under are proposing a trail on federal land. of Land Managementhave their own existing NEPA documentation, with- You may want to start working with environmental review processes in out the need for additional review. the responsible agency a year in most cases. These agencies also have In general, the smaller and less advance of proposed construction. land management plans that identify intrusive the trail project on federal L.3 Practical advice.Interview a where they believe trails should and lands, the quicker the environmental person who already has been through should not go. review. The public scoping process the NEPAprocess for a trail project It is important early on in a trails (by which issues and concerns are similar to yours. (Talk with the project to contact the federal, state, identified) may be more lengthy if a Bureau of Land Management or U.S. and local agencies with jurisdiction trail is perceived as controversial. Forest Service, for example.) over lands you are considering. This For more information, see is not just because they manage the NEPAnet at: http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/ Further Reading land and have the ultimate say as to nepa/nepanet.htm what happens, but also because they As early in the trail planning most likely have important wildlife process as feasible, contact the own- informationand knowledgeable ers of private lands in the general area Shipley Environmental, Applying the experts. of your proposed trail. Out of respect NEPAProcess.Telephone: for private property, it is good to 801-298-7800.

USDAFOREST SERVICE TRAIL SYSTEM ANALYSIS Typical information needed for trail system analysis What other resource activities are likely to take place? on lands managed by the USDA Forest Service includes: 4. Within those prescriptions, what standards and 1. Is there an approved plan for the area? guidelines might affect trail system design, operation,and 2. What are the general goals of the Forest Plan as administration? they relate to the area? 3. What specific Forest Plan management objectives From: http://www.fs.fed.us/ im/directives/fsh/2309.18/ and prescriptions have been designated for the area? 2309.18_1

26 3. Wildlife and Trails Checklist

hile the Wildlife and Trails Specific questions addressed possible alignments may be along Primer (Chapter 2) is a top- How well wildlife concerns are drainages or other existing corridors Wical presentation of wildlife represented in a planning process not attractive to most kinds of devel- and trails issues, this chapter presents depends on how well the following opment. wildlife concepts in a sequence your are understood: Similarly, many trail projects in might follow in planning a trail. 1) the specific wildlife species and Colorado improve existing roads or The checklistprovides a broad populations being affected, trails, rather than create new align- framework for considering wildlife 2) their habitats, and ments. Developing wide-ranging while planning trails. It also high- 3) the proposed recreational activ- alternatives may not make sense in lights important issues to consider at ities affecting that population. such cases. specific points in the planning The steps outlined in the checklist Also, users of the checklist from process, raising questions rather than should help trail planners become states other than Colorado will need providing answers. more familiar with these issues. to find substitutes for the Colorado- The checklist’s organization is specific resources. complementary to such trail planning A generalized process processes as that developed by the Every trail project is unique and Austin Metropolitan Trails Council not all of the detailed steps and ques- with assistance from the Rivers, tions in the checklist will be relevant Trails, and Conservation Assistance to each project. Therefore it is impor- Program of the National Park Service. tant to adapt the checklist to your own (For more information, see the situation. council’s website: For example, in an urban settingit http://www.austin360.com/green may not be possible to identify a zone/amtc/build.htm) range of options for a trail. The only

27 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

Wildlife and Trails Checklist

A. Getting the B. Considering C. Building and whole picture alternative alignments managing the trail

1. 1. 1. Including wildlife Preparing and Acquiring and in the trail vision evaluating alternatives constructing the trail

2. 2. 2. Organizing & Designing Monitoring and communicating the trail managing the trail

3. Researching & inventorying

Comments welcomed It would be very helpful to have your comments and suggestions on the Wildlife and Trails Checklist. Please send them to: Stuart Macdonald, Colorado State Parks—Trails Program, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 618, Denver, CO 80203 or e-mail: [email protected].

28 3. WILDLIFE/TRAILS CHECKLIST

A. Getting the whole picture

1. 2. Including wildlife in the trail vision Organizing & communicating

o Look at the broader landscape.What opportuni- o Create a profile of the kinds of userswho are ties or constraints are there for trails and wildlife in the likely to use the trail. What are likely levels and seasons broader landscape? What plans are there for other trails or of use? Are there organizations that would be interested in wildlife across the landscape? In general, what kinds of the trail project? Would any help monitor the trail area for landscapes would the trail pass through? Would any be wildlife issues? areas that currently have no trails and little human modification? Do you foresee any cumulative trail impacts by o Identify the groups interested in wildlife in your adding a new trail? trail area. What wildlife and conservation organizations would be interested to know of your trail project? Would o Develop preliminary goalsfor the project.What any help monitor the trail area for wildlife issues? activities do you foresee for the trail? What are your wildlife goals for the project? o Share your ideas and findings with other community members, including both trails and wildlife o Develop initial trail concepts.What destinations, enthusiasts, property owners, and land managers. Who users, and activities do you foresee for the trail? are people and organizations that would feel strongly for or against the project? How can you inform and involve them? o Keep wildlife concerns within the focus of the project vision. Are there biologists or other professionals o Meet with agency planners.Are there city or available to advise you on wildlife and trails concerns? county land-use planners and federal or state resource planners who understand the broader context of the area where o Look for opportunities to coordinate your trail you are considering a trail? Is there an area-wide land-use, project with conservation and other complementary open space, or trails plan? If the trail might cross federal projects. Are there opportunities to coordinate habitat land, is there an existing management plan? Is your trail restoration, protection, or acquisitionwith the trail project? concept consistent with these plans? Where? o Start a public discussion of the trail and its implications for wildlife. What are the best ways to reach the various groups interested in your trail? Community meetings, field trips, a web site? What are the wildlife issues that must be addressed in planning the trail? Do the ideas you hear seem to complement or conflict?

29 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

A. Getting the whole picture, cont.

3. Researching and inventorying

o Determine the physical extent of the project. o Identify seasons of special concernfor the Over what area might the trail extend? What elevational important wildlife species or communities.Are there ranges? times of year, such as elk calving or eagle nesting season, that are particular sensitive to disturbance from people? Are o Conduct a preliminary biological inventory. What there alternatives for the trail away from such areas? Would are the area’s sensitive plants, animals, and wildlife habi- seasonal closures of a trail near such areas be workable? tats? Are there any special opportunities for wildlife education? How impacted already are wildlife in the area? How o Identify important plants in the area. Are there much modified is the area—is it urban, suburban, agricul- any sensitive plant species or communities in the area? Are tural, pristine? there ways to present these communities to trail users without disturbing sensitive species? o Determine the habitat/ecosystem types present in the area of the proposed trail and the potential o Evaluate the extent of existing impacts towildlife species or communities of special concern.What do the and the landscape. What are the existing impacts to Colorado Natural Diversity Information Source(available wildlife? How much have humans already modified the online Fall 1998) and other sources indicate are likely area?Is the area primarily natural, managed, cultivated, species or communities of special interest in the area? suburban, or urban? Will the trail provide access to backcountry or areas that have never had trails before? How can o Draw inferences from scientific studies done in you minimize the trail’s contribution to habitat fragmenta- similar habitats or with similar wildlife species. Does the tion? Colorado State Parks wildlife/trails bibliographic data base include any such relevant references? o Take a step back. Given what you have learned to this point, how well do you think this project will fit into o Learn from others who have completed projects its larger ecological context? with similar wildlife issues. Are there case studies in Chapter 4 of this handbook with similar wildlife issues? o Formalize the project goals.How would you Does the Trails Section of the Colorado State Parks website revise the preliminary project goals based on what has been (www.dnr.state.co.us/parks/) include trails projects through learned? What do members of the public and others think similar environments? What lessons can you draw from the of the project goals? experiences of others?

o Review data found to date and conduct a site visit with a wildlife biologist or other scientists to identify potential wildlife opportunities and constraints.Are there areas to avoid because of resource sensitivity or areas to consider because of restoration potential or lower sensitivity? Which areas would provide the most interesting route and have the least impact on wildlife? Are there special opportunities for wildlife education?

30 3. WILDLIFE/TRAILS CHECKLIST

B. Considering alternative alignments

1. 2. Preparing and evaluating alternatives Designing the trail

o Create distinctive alternative plans.With this o Refine the selected plan.Develop site designs, handbook’s rules of thumb as a guide, develop alternative budgets, and timetables. plans that maximize the opportunities and minimize the constraints for wildlife. Especially look for opportunities to o Develop management strategies.Consider how coordinate the restoration of degraded habitats. Get profes- the trail will be managed, maintained, and monitored. sional help preparing and evaluating alternatives, if possible. Where an existing trail is to be improved, alternatives o Develop an environmental education/ might include different management strategies. interpretation plan. The plan should explain how to communicate to trail users the specific wildlife issues of this o Consider alternatives for trailheads and other trail. support facilities.Sites for trailheads and parking areas are sometime overlooked in evaluating wildlife impacts of o Developa volunteerplan. Outline support tasks trails. They need careful design and review. for involving volunteers in monitoring or managing wildlife. o Evaluate the alternatives. Conduct an internal evaluation of the alternatives using the goals set earlier. o Conduct a final review of the plan and its components.Review the final plan with a wildlife biologist o Ask others to help evaluate the alternatives. and other specialists to make certain all the parts went Conduct an external evaluation of the alternatives with together in ways that support wildlife. wildlife biologists or other agency personnel, public, environmental groups, landowners, land managers, and others, as appropriate. Summarize the pros and cons of each alternative.

o Select a preferred plan.Review the comments made during the evaluation process and select one of the alternatives or create a hybrid plan incorporating the best qualities of two or more plans.

31 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

C. Building and managing the trail

1. 2. Acquiring and constructing the trail Monitoring and managing the trail

o Look for opportunities for complementary con- o Manage the trail.Implement the plan to manage servation. In acquiring the land needed for the trail, look the trail corridor and activities within it. for additional areas that can be set aside for wildlife conservation at the same time and for the partners to implement o Monitor.Using staff or volunteers, monitor the such efforts. important plants and wildlife of the alignment, looking for impacts. Adjust management plans as appropriate. o Implement the plan.Be careful to impact wildlife as little as possible during construction. o Communicate to all interested parties.Share the progress about the trail and what is being learned about co- o Communicate to all interested parties.Share the existing with wildlife. progress about the trail and what is being learned about co- existing with wildlife.

32 4. Case Studies

he following are case studies of In order to evaluate the habitats, trail projects that involved sig- Sand Creek the 12-mile corridor was divided into Tnificant wildlife issues. In addi- Regional Trail 20 smaller segments, each about a tion to a contact name for further half mile in length. Scientists estimat- information, cross-references are list- Integrated trail/wildlife planning ed habitat quality in each of these seg- ed to topics in the Primer. Sand Creek has been one of ments based on overall plant and ani- Denver’s forgotten streams. It flows mal diversity. from wide open spaces east of Denver, through Aurora, under run- Plant and animal diversity measured ways at the former Stapleton Plant diversity was formulated International Airport, through inten- based on the number of different sive industrial development in types of vegetation that were present Commerce Cityand into the South in the corridor. Also considered in the Platte River. study of diversity were vegetation With the development of type, topsoil condition, soil texture, Stapleton’s Bluff Lakeand other sites and abundance of noxious weeds. along the Creek as natural areas has Animal diversity was one of three come more attention. components used to determine wildlife habitat quality. Animal Systematic ecological study before diversity was based on the number of trail planning different species (species richness) in As part of planning a trail system each segment. along the creek, an ecological assess- Another component of the study mentwas completed to evaluate the was a rating of the corridors based on existing vegetation and wildlife habi- their ability to support a population of tat along the creek. particular species of songbirds, water

33 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

birds, deer, medium-sized mammals, tion. Evidence of human activity, toward improvement included beaver, reptiles, and amphibians. grazing activity, and number of native enhancing vegetation—restoration of Quantitative bird counts were particu- species present were all used to deter- native plant communities to provide a larly helpful in this portion of the mine a disturbance rating. larger expanse and a greater diversity study. Finally, the presence of rare of habitat types; and stream and pond animal species was taken into High quality areas avoided improvements—to provide additional account. Recommendations for trail align- open water. ments were evaluated based on this Other habitat considerations information. Areas of concern were For Information Other interesting factors used in established and avoided in trail plan- Sand Creek Greenway; Stapleton assessing wildlife habitat included the ning, and existing trails or roads were Development Corp. degree of human disturbance, abun- used as much as possible for con- 303-393-7700 dance of refuse, including piles of struction of new trails. Suggestions Also see Primer topic: G. A site’s waste soil, asphalt or concrete, and for habitat improvement were also existing impacts. abundance of transplantable vegeta- included. The most important steps

rich in indigenous species because tect major wildlife movement corri- Chatfield Basin these ecosystems are buffered and dors. The cooperation of private Conservation connected, with opportunities for hik- landowners and developers will be ing across the basin. The project needed in planning housing develop- Network vision is supported by five goals: ments and other uses in the buffer Looking at the big picture 1. Conserve and enhance areas of areas so that wildlife connections and Agroup of over 35 public and pri- significant wildlife habitat and protect important habitat areas are integrated vate organizations and agencies is a connected system in support of into the larger system. implementing an aggressive vision for wildlife movement. wildlife and trails in the Chatfield 2. Conserve and enhance areas of Trails are an integral part of the Basin, on metro Denver’s southwest- significant vegetation. conservation plan ern boundary. 3. Conserve open lands and wet- Trails planners were part of the Already the area has over three lands to protect water quality and help Chatfield Network from the beginning million visitors (in 1996), and the use reduce damage from flooding. and the proposed interconnected and popularity of its trails, open 4. Create an interconnected, non- regional system of trails is fully inte- spaces, 2,150 surface acres of water motorized trail system for the grated into the concept plan. By and 279 miles of streams will only Chatfield Basin. working together across the basin not grow with population increases. 5. Coordinate open space systems only were trail planners able to coop- Although approximately 39 per- across jurisdictions in the basin. erate across jurisdictions, but they cent of the Chatfield Basin is already were able to work directly with conserved as a state or local park or Considerable cooperation wildlife biologists to understand the some other kind of protected open This is a complex conservation wildlife sensitive areas to avoid. space, the scattered conservation effort because it involves the coopera- lands will not be enough to protect an tion of many people. Area parks and For Information interconnected open space system for open space agencies will continue to Chatfield Basin Conservation wildlife and trails. manage and, as needed, expand core Network, 303-660-7334 Their vision includes healthy pro- reserves, such as Roxborough State Also see Primer topic: C. Tools for a tected areas that are sustainable and Park. These areas alone will not pro- broader view.

34 4. CASE STUDIES

recreation is confined to park roads Tim Smith, manager of the park, Antelope Island and excluded from the trail system. says there have been few problems State Park with off-trail use since the program’s Space and time limitations placed on inception. Planning Backcountry trails in the recreation midst of sensitive wildlife In order to achieve the goal of Interpretation used to encourage Utah State Parksis in the process providing access while protecting responsible trail use of implementing a backcountry trails habitat, the park has developed a plan As a way of encouraging responsi- plan that will add 40 miles of trail to that limits recreation spatiallyand ble trail use, the park has introduced Antelope Island State Park, near Salt temporally. interpretive programs. These pro- Lake City, in the Great Salt Lake. To The main spatial limitation on grams present the rationale behind the help with the process, the agency recreation is requiring trail users to trail program and the opportunities formed a wildlife advisory committee remain on the trails. This part of the and limits it places on recreationists. of experts from academia and other plan is based on the theory that The park attempts to get the message agencies. wildlife may become accustomed to across using a variety of means such The committee was created to recreationists if their presence always as personal programs, interpretive bring a more scientific approach to occurs in the same area. signing and exhibits, publications, and park management, and to provide Temporal limitations in the park other media outreach. unbiased review of resource based include seasonal closings. For exam- programs and proposals. The wildlife ple, Antelope Island’s Frary Peak Trail impacts monitored committee was particularly interested Trail is closed for six weeks while Antelope Island has a monitoring in minimizing recreational impacts of bighorn sheep are lambing. system in place that evaluates the trails in a setting that is home to both impacts of the trail system on wildlife bighorn sheep and free-roaming Enforcement—staff and volunteer— populations. Elements the park staff bison. is vital monitor on a (somewhat) regular The following are some of the Trail restrictions are enforced by basis include: habitat use; displace- important aspects of the trail program park law enforcement staff. Rangers, ment; calving, lambing and fawning developed by the committee. who patrol the backcountry on bikes success; recruitment; causes of mor- and horses, have the authority to issue tality; overall health of herds; and Identifying critical habitat a first step citations. range conditions. Park staff conduct A major first step was identifying In an effort to help the law studies of the island’s resources and critical wildlife habitatand the kinds enforcement staff, a volunteer trail encourage outside research. of recreational activities that might patrol program also is being put into impact it. Critical habitats for place. These volunteers are present For information Antelope Island include areas where primarily on weekends and other busy Utah State Parks, Antelope Island wildlife calve, lamb or fawn, critical times to explain the program to park State Park; Tim Smith, Manager winter range and habitat of threatened patrons. They are, in effect, salesmen 801-322-4307 and endangered species. for the entire management program at Also see Primer topic: H. How To avoid wildlife conflicts in these Antelope Island. wildlife respond to trails. area during sensitive times, motorized

35 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

3. Enforcing rules and regulations. In this way the deck serves less as Chatfield State Park The first strategy—zoning—was the only possible vantage point for Visitors in a sensitive area crucial in protecting the birds. A visitors and more as a containment In creating a wildlife viewing area recreational access schedule defines strategy to protect the water birds by at Chatfield State Park, planners used timing and types of human activities concentrating the people. three main strategies to avoid exces- allowed within 150 meters of the sive disturbance of more than 90 waterbird colony. For information active great blue heron nests and 135 From March 1 through April 30 See Richard Larson, “Balancing active double-crested cormorant nests: the risk of human disturbance is high. Wildlife Viewing and Wildlife 1. Controlling both the timing and During this period the birds return to Impacts: A Case study,” in R.L. location of visitors; the colony, court, build nests, lay Knight and K.J. Gutzwiller, 2. Educating visitors about the eggs, and begin to incubate them. Wildlife and Recreationists. wildlife resources; and Therefore human access is limited to the viewing deck.

A trail through a wetlands portion of are informally involved in coyote pro- Crown Hill Park the park is closed each year while tection by making sure other visitors Strong public support for wildlife waterfowl nest. are not antagonizing the animals. management Recently there was support when a “Crown Hill is living proof that Jefferson County(Colorado) Open portion of the park was closed for two successful closures and good public Space Department’s 250-acre Crown to three months due to the presence of compliance are possible with strong Hill Park is a neighborhood park in an nesting Swainson’s hawks.Through interpretive and volunteer efforts,” urban setting. The park provides both interpretive efforts, the public was says Jeffco’s Colleen Gadd. important habitat for wildlife and made aware of the situation. recreation for a half million visitors In another situation, park-goers For information each year. were initially outraged when coyotes Jefferson County Open Space, The public has shown strong sup- arrived in the park, displacing resident Colleen Gadd, 303-271-5995 port for wildlife at Crown Hill Park, foxes. Through education this has Also see Primer topic: J. Managing even when it has meant trail closures. been turned around. Now park visitors trails with wildlife in mind.

animals feel that the area is secure. side closure and riden right up to the Peron’s Peak On April 1st, the area opens up west falcon eyries. This has the potential to The challenge of enforcing seasonal of the county road. The area east of cause falcons to abandon their nests. closures the road remains closed due to pere- Peron’s Peak is a Colorado grine falcon nesting. On July 15th the For information Division of Wildlife area purchased entire area is opened to the public. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Mike with hunter and angler dollars. The Managers have faced ongoing Zgainer, 970-247-0855 area is completely closed the day after problems enforcing the closures. Also see Primer topics: H. How hunting season ends through March Some cross-country skiers, hikers, wildlife respond to trails, J. 31 to make the area more attractive to and bikers ignore the signs and enter Managing trails with wildlife in animals and for deer fawning. The the area anyway. Some mountain bik- mind, and L. Landownership. Division of Wildlife tries to make the ers have ignored the signs at the east

36 4. CASE STUDIES

Other features of the project There was 15 years of input from Bay Trail Project include: the public and from technical experts. San Francisco Bay’s proposed 400- • Aprogram was developed to An interpretive signage program was mile trail develops creative designs remove invasive exotic plants, such as planned to educate users about sensi- for wildlife pampas grass and French broom. tive wetlands. California’s Bay Trail Project, is a • A secondary trail between wet- The wetlands were enhanced proposed 400-mile shoreline hiking land ponds and the improved main through the introduction of tidal and bicycling trail system around the trail was removed. action through excavation of chan- San Francisco Bay. Project planners • A task force developed the nels, creation of elevated islands, and are looking for effective ways to pro- shoreline master plan over a period of installation of culverts. Also, a sensi- vide access while preserving natural three years. tive sand dune area was preserved for shoreline resources. the least tern, a shorebird. To date, 170 miles of trail have See Primer topic: J. Managing trails been completed. The Bay Trail with wildlife in mind. See Primer topic: K. Making Project is now working to implement informed decisions. the more difficult trail segments, E. Palo Alto—Ravenswood Landing many of which are near wetland and In this joint effort, the San JoseRiparian Corridor Study shoreline habitat areas. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space The City of San Jose developed a As public access is proposed District(MSROD) and San Mateo riparian corridor policy to help limit along undeveloped shoreline areas, Countyrealigned a trail and built public access in potentially sensitive concerns have been raised about the observation decks to reduce growing areas. They conducted an extensive impact hikers, bicyclists, and pets conflicts between recreational use and inventory of 150 miles of creeks and may have on the adjacent wildlife. wildlife preservation. biotic resources and met with resi- The Bay Trail Project personnel are MSROD and the County worked dents, interest groups, and the build- studying the interaction of shoreline with the Audubon Societyto locate ing industry. recreationists and wildlife and looking wildlife observation decks. The decks The policies and guidelines devel- for ways to avoid harmful impacts. are raised and have railings to further oped by the city aim to protect ripari- A particularly good job of consid- deter trespassing into sensitive an corridorsfor environmental and ering wildlife is evident in several wildlife areas. Interpretive signs recreational purposes. They: projects. explain that the decks act as dead • Require a 100-foot setback from ends to protect wildlife. the riparian corridor for all active land San Rafael—Shoreline Park Trail uses; Included in the two-and-a-half See Primer topics: H. How wildlife • Seek to limit trails to one side of mile San Rafael Shoreline Master respond to trails, J. Managing the riparian corridor; plan are two parallel fences planted trails with wildlife in mind, and K. • Direct lighting away from the between with native vegetation. This Making informed decisions. corridor to reduce the impact of such wetland buffer, which is unobtrusive lighting on wildlife; and still effective in keeping dogs and San Leandro—Shoreline Marsh • Direct runoff away from the cor- other pets away from the marsh, was Improvements and Public Access ridor and into filtration areas; built by the developer of an adjacent Corridor • Locate interpretivenodes at least property. In considering a new link to the 500 feet apart. Although the trail is heavily used, Bay Trail through San Leandro, alter- monitoring has shown an increase in native trail alignments were consid- See Primer topics: C. Tools for a the number and diversity of shore- ered to protect 175 acres of prime Bay broader view and E. The importance birds. wetland and sand dune habitat. of streamside areas.

37 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

Babbs Creek Canyon Drainage Project Appalachian Trail Humboldt & In constructing a pedestrian trail Even with careful study, sensitive Huron Peaks along Babbs Creek Canyon, efforts wildlife can be overlooked were made to maintain and enhance The conflict between wildlife and Rerouting trails reduces impacts sensitive oak riparian habitat. recreation has become a prominent Use by hikers had created a seri- The trail was located at the outer issue for the well-known Appalachian ous erosionproblem on Humboldt edge of the creek buffer zone, 100 Trail. In several cases, despite every Peak’s southwest slope. A gully feet from the top of creek bank. The effort to be sensitive to wildlife, trails formed with some spots up to ten feet area is being revegetated with native have had to be relocated. wide and four feet deep. All vegeta- species, with the goal of a continuous In one case, wildlife studies were tion was trampled so there was noth- canopy of oaks along the 100-foot conducted prior to building a new ing to hold the topsoil when it rained. wide buffer. trail, and a trail route was determined. TheColorado Fourteeners Habitat sensitive street lighting But unfortunately, following construc- Initiative organized a project to fix (which focuses light on the street) is tion biologists discovered that the trail this trail in southcentral Colorado. being encouraged to reduce unnatural alignment was impacting falcon hack- They carefully imported rock from nighttime lighting. In addition, water ing sites. nearby quarries, plugging up the gul- drainages are being monitored for The hacking sites (ledges where ley with nearly 180 tons of rock. pollutants. falcon eggs were hatched) also were The group cut a new trail around attractive to hikers because of the the gulley and transplanted the vege- See Primer topics: H. How wildlife spectacular views they afforded. The tation from the newly cut trail to the respond to trails and E. The falcons were being disturbed by hik- site of the old gulley. importance of streamside areas. ers. A relocation of the trail was nec- At nearby Huron Peak, the essary to protect these breeding sites. Initiative moved an existing trail For information A second relocation of the away from endangered plant species Bay Trail Project; Janet McBride, Appalachian Trail was necessary and from soils that were inappropriate Manager; P.O. Box 2050, when the trail was discovered to be for trails. Oakland, CA 94694-2050 threatening the habitat of the Eastern The Huron Peaktrail was not well Timberback rattlesnake. Again, bio- delineated at the top, and as a result, logical studies had been done before- many social trails had been created on hand, but somehow the Timberback the climb down. Hence, trail consoli- got overlooked until after construction dation was necessary to eliminate of a mile and a half of this segment. social trails. A biologist suggested a new route, to protect both the habitat and the pub- For information lic. Colorado Fourteeners Initiative, Keith Desrosiers, 303-278-7525 x114 For information Also see Primer topic: F. Species and Appalachian Trail, Bob Proudman, places of special interest. 304-535-6331 Also see Primer topic: F. Species and places of special interest.

38 4. CASE STUDIES

Project planners made certain to wildlife.The trail may be benefiting Snowmass’s Tom leave snags(dead trees) for nesting some local wildlife by providing a Blake Trail birds along the trail tread. Slash piles path for migration during heavy snow (small huts about 4-6 ft. wide) were season. Future management of the Thinking of wildlife at every stage also created in the same area to serve trail will be by a local housing devel- Wildlife issues were taken into as shelter for small mammals. oper. consideration throughout the con- Both snags and slash pileswere struction of the Tom Blake Trail in left as a way of helping wildlife adjust For information Snowmass, Colorado. Because the to the intrusion of recreationists into Town of Snowmass (Colorado); nearby ski area had been required to their habitat. Twice a year—in the fall Dawn Keating, Biologist, complete an environmental impact and spring—the trail is closed for a 970-923-5524 study, trail planners were already month during elk and deer calving Also see Primer topics: J. Managing aware of sensitive species and habitat and migration. trails with wildlife in mind and F. in the area. To date, monitoring has not Species and places of special detected any negative impacts to interest.

had been dumped along the banks of habitat. More foraging and shelter St. Vrain Greenway the river. To prepare the area for trail were provided. Atrail project as midwife to river construction and river restoration, the Some sensitive species were restoration Longmont Parks and Recreation thought to have migrated out of the As part of the St. Vrain Greenway, Department removed this debris and area during construction, but have residents of Longmont, Colorado, are eased the gradient next to the river. returned since the project was com- reclaiming the river that flows The department also removed pleted. through their community, The noxiousweedsalong the trail corridor Greenway trail begins in Golden and re-seeded, reintroducing native For information Ponds Park and runs along Main plants. They planted trees, and added Longmont Parks and Recreation Street through heavily industrialized benches and trash cans. Department, Paula Fitzgerald, areas. The restorationwork was done to 303-651-8448 Large pieces of concrete, asphalt, create a better trail setting, but was Also see Primer topic: G. A site’s and car parts—among other things— also effective in improving wildlife existing impacts.

39 PLANNING TRAILS WITH WILDLIFE IN MIND

Wheat Ridge then limited to equestrian and pedes- from the riparian corridor as possible, trian traffic. while still staying within the designat- Greenbelt An environmental analysis was ed greenway. completed prior to construction of the The area with the “slower,”crusher Reconfiguring a riparian trail trails. An endangered orchid, ute’s fines path was designated as a conser- At one time an 8-foot asphalt ladies tresseswas found in the area. vation area, due to citizen request. trail—narrow by urban standards— Other endangered species thought to Enhancements to the habitat are wound through the Wheat Ridge be present were not found. being made through planting. (Colorado) Greenbelt. In order to Throughout construction, the reduce congestion on the trail, a sec- city’s park naturalist walked the align- For information ond paved trail was built for bicyclists ment with the contractor to point out City of Wheat Ridge, Margaret Paget, and rollerbladers and the original and have avoided such things as nest- Park Naturalist, 303-423-1122 asphalt path was replaced with crush- ing trees and fox dens. The city Also see Primer topic: E. The impor- er fines. Use of the original trail was moved the new “fast” trail as far away tance of streamside areas.

40 5. Sources of Information

University of Idaho Extension Forestry: Building forest trails Internet resources http://www.ets.uidaho.edu/extforest/august97.htm Note: It may be convenient to access this list online and take advantage of the active links already established to the sites South Carolina Trails Program: Trails management, including listed below. The list may be found at Colorado State Parks' searchable bibliographies and information on funding, con- website (www.dnr.state.co.us/parks/), where it will be kept struction, and greenways. updated. http://www.sctrails.net/trails/trails_mgmt.html

GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT TRAIL PLANNING, Purdue University Cooperative Extension Service: How to plan an CONSTRUCTION, AND MANAGEMENT interpretive trail http://persephone.agcom.purdue.edu/~agcom/Pubs/FNR/FNR- Austin (Texas) Metropolitan Trails Council, How-to guide for 124.html neighborhood trail planning and development. http://www.austin360.com/greenzone/amtc/build.htm North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service: “Recreational Forest Trails: Plan for Success,” including types of trails, Austin (Texas) Metropolitan Trails Council: Sources of books on design, layout, construction, studying the land planning, building, maintaining, and managing trails, including http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/nreos/rrea/rectrailstoc.html volunteerism. http://www.austin360.com/greenzone/amtc/resource.htm North Carolina State University: Recreational Forest Trails: “Top Ten Construction Tips” and sources of information Appalachian Trail Conference: Includes general information on http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/nreos/rrea/topten.html management plans and other stewardship activities, as well as a land trust to protect their trail corridor. University of Minnesota Trail Planning, Construction, and http://www.atconf.org/programs.html Maintenance Bibliography http://www.lib.umn.edu/for/bib/trls.html

41 5. SOURCES OF INFORMATION

FEDERAL LANDS AND AGENCIES NATURAL RESOURCE INFORMATION

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rocky Mountain Ecology: Wildlife links, ecological problems, Threatened and Endangered Species Data Set: trail links http://www.fws.gov/pullenl/cais/tespec.html http://www.afternet.com/~tnr/mountain/ Endangered Species Act: http://www.fws.gov/r9endspp/esa.html#Lnk03 clay.net® Environmental Professional's Homepage, designed specifically for environmental consultants and remediation pro- USDA Forest Service: Chapter 1.3 of Trails Management fessionals. Includes state and federal agencies and legislation. Handbook. Includes typical information needed for trail system http://www.clay.net/ analysis. http://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/fsh/2309.18/2309.18_1 Texas Agricultural Extension Service: Wildlife management information Bureau of Land Management: General statement about steward- http://leviathan.tamu.edu:70/1s/pubs/wildlife ship activities, including trails. http://www.blm.gov/budget/1998/98rec.html Olympic National Forest: Ecology of Aquatic and Riparian Ecosystems: An Examination of Forest Management USDA Forest Service: Newsletter about an Off-Highway Vehicle Alternatives (OHV) proposal for Daniel Boone National Forest http://www.olympus.net/gov/onf/ecomgt/research/riparian.htm http://www.atving.com/editor/trails/db.htm Natural Resources Research Information Pages: Outdoor National Park Service Planning Homepage Recreation Research http://www.nps.gov/planning/ http://sfbox.vt.edu:10021/Y/yfleung/recres.html

USDA Forest Service Homepage Colorado Division of Wildlife http://www.fs.fed.us/ http://www.dnr.state.co.us/wildlife/

U.S. Forest Service Wildlife page Links to state wildlife agencies http://www.fs.fed.us/outdoors/wildlife/get.htm http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/devold/twrid/html/ gov.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Homepage Colorado Mountain Club http://www.epa.gov/ http://www.cmc.org/cmc/

USDA National Resource Conservation Service Craighead Environmental Research Institute: Corridors and http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/ Reserve Design http://www.avicom.net/ceri/col/reserve.html NRCS Technical Resources, includes the National PLANTS data- base. Craighead Environmental Research Institute: Reserve Design-- http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/TechRes.html links to corridor analysis, habitat preservation, movement across landscapes American Trails articles on trails in wetlands. http://www.avicom.net/ceri/reserve/index.html http://www.outdoorlink.com/amtrails/resources/trailbuilding/ BuildTFWetlands.html Bay Trail Project: Creative designs for conservation along trails http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/baytrail/innovsol.html Council on Environmental Quality—NEPAnet, http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/ nepanet.htm International Association for Landscape Ecology, http://www.edc.uri.edu/iale/

42 5. SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Society for Conservation Biology USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service: Conservation http://conbio.rice.edu/scb/ Programs, including, incentive programs for wildlife, wetlands, soil, environmental quality. Wildlife Biology Information Page http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/NRCSProg.html http://members.aol.com/Bioweb98/thankyou.htm RESTORATION Sources specific to Colorado Colorado State Parks: Revegetation along trail corridors http://www.outdoorlink.com/amtrails/resources/trailbuilding/ Trail Projects BuildTFReveg.html Boulder County Parks and Open Space, Michael Sanders, Senior Resource Specialist/Wildlife, 303-441-3952 Army Corps of Engineers: Habitat Restoration Recommendations http://www.swt.usace.army.mil/factbook/tc_71.htm City of Boulder Open Space Department, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306 Bibliography of Literature describing riparian restoration and revegetation projects Bureau of Land Management, Jim McBrayer, Outdoor Recreation http://www.habitat-restoration.com/rrrbib.htm Planner, Little Snake Resource Center, Craig, CO, 970-826-5083 Ecological Restoration http://wfscnet.tamu.edu/courses/wfsc406/restore.htm Continental Divide Trail Alliance, 303-838-3760

Restoration and Management News Colorado Division of Wildlife http://wiscinfo.doit.wisc.edu/arboretum/rmn/homepage.html Wildlife Habitat Biologists: Western Region: Bob Clark, 970-249- 3431, Montrose; Northeast Region: Rick Moss, 970-484-2836, Ft. Collins; Southeast Region: Bruce Goforth, 719-539-3529, MISCELLANEOUS Salida Natural Diversity Information Source (online, available Fall Links to State Trail Programs 1998): http://www.dnr.state.co.us/ wildlife/ http://www.outdoorlink.com/amtrails/resources/statetrails/ Colorado List of Threatened and Endangered Species: index.html http://www.dnr.state.co.us/wildlife/ T&E/list.html Colorado State Wildlife Statute 33 North Quimper Penninsula (Washington) Wildlife Corridor: http://web.intellinetusa.com/cgi-dos/statsrcf.exe?N Project to preserve wildlife corridor of native vegetation con- necting habitat areas. Colorado Dept. of Transportation, Gay Page, Bicycle/Pedestrian http://www.olympus.net/community/saveland/corridor.htm Program Manager, 303-757-9982J51

Colorado Natural Areas Program; E-mail: FUNDING AND ASSISTANCE [email protected]; website: http://elbert.state.co.us/cnap Colorado State Trails Program http://www.dnr.state.co.us/parks Colorado Natural Heritage Program, John Armstrong, Environmental Review Coordinator, 254 General Services. Colorado Division of Wildlife—Fishing is Fun Bldg., Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, http://www.dnr.state.co.us/wildlife/ 970-491-7331

43 5. SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Colorado State Parks Trails Program, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 618, Denver, CO 80203 ; email: [email protected], General Trail References website: www.dnr.state.co.us/parks/ Also see the Wildlife Bibliographic Data Base at this website. Note: Also see the references listed in the Wildlife and Trails Primer. Colorado Weed Management Association http://linden.fortnet.org/CWMA/#index1 Ashbaugh, B. L., and R. F. Holmes. 1967. Trail Planning and Layout. National Audobon Society. New York, NY. 104p. Jefferson County Open Space Department, Randall Frank, Natural Resources Supervisor, 700 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite Fogg, G. E. 1986. A Site Design Process. National Recreation and 100, Golden, CO 80419, 303-271-5986 Park Assoc., Alexandria, VA. 185p.

Summit County Open Space and Trails Department, Scott Fogg, G. E. 1981. Park Planning Guidelines Revised. National Hobson, P.O. Box 5660, Frisco, CO 80442; 970-668-4060. Recreation and Park Assoc., Alexandria, VA. 202p.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Larsen, D. M., and W. R. Miles. Nature Trails. Agricultural Denver (Omaha District), 303-979-4120; Extension Service, University of Minnesota. Extension Bulletin Pueblo (Albuquerque District), 719-543-6915; Number 368. 15p. Grand Junction (Sacramento District), 970-243-1199. PLAE, Inc. 1993. A Design Guide for Universal Access to U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Recreation and Outdoor Recreation. Berkeley, CA. 240p. Public Service, 303-275-5045; Melanie Woolever, Wildlife Biologist, 303-275-5007 USDA Forest Service 1985. Trails Management Handbook. (FSH 2309.18) 84p.

44 6. Glossary

them functioning, yet ever chang- DETRITUS.Organic particles or other ncluded here are terms used in the ing and adapting. loose material that result directly handbook or terms likely to be BIOTIC.Life and living organisms, from disintegration of leaves, Iencountered in other sources of especially characteristics of entire stems, or other materials. wildlife information. populations or communities DISPERSAL.The managerial action of CANDIDATE SPECIES.A species distributing a given amount of ABIOTIC. Not living; often referring being considered for listing by the wilderness use over a larger area, to the non-living components of federal government as threatened such as through the construction the ecosystem such as water, or endangered. of additional trails, with the inten- rocks, and mineral soil. CANOPY.Formed by the branches tion of lessening impacts to AGE STRUCTURE (of a population). and leaves of trees in a wood or wilderness areas. The percentage of the population forest. DISTURBANCE.A discrete event, at each age level, or the number of CARRYING CAPACITY. The number either natural or human-induced, individuals of each sex at each age of recreationists that can be that causes a change in the condi- level. accommodated in a specific area tion of an ecological system. BASELINE SURVEY. The initial set of based on ecological, physical, DIVERSITY(index). A measure of the measurements in an ongoing mon- facility, and/or social factors. biological diversity within an itoring study, typically done CONNECTIVITY.The state of being environment which can be used to before the system is changed by functionally connected by move- detect stress on an environment. management ment of organisms, materials, or ECOSYSTEM.A system formed by BIODIVERSITY.The variety of life and energy. the interaction of living organ- its processes; including the variety CORRIDOR.Narrow continuous areas isms, including people, with their of living organisms, the genetic of favorable habitat that allow the environment. Spatially, ecosys- differences among them, the com- movement of animals, birds and tems are described for areas in munities and ecosystems in which plants along them. which it is meaningful to talk they occur, and the ecological and CORVIDS.Birds of the Corvidae or about these relationships. evolutionary processes that keep crow family.

45 6. GLOSSARY

ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT.The FACULTATIVE.Having the capacity to HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX(HSI). skillful, integrated use of ecologi- live under different conditions; A scale is created by rating the cal knowledge at various scales to organisms that can live in a certain habitat for each species before and produce desired resource values, way but are not obliged to and after a project on a scale from 0 product, services, and conditions may, under certain conditions, (= totally unsuitable habitat) to 1.0 in ways that also sustain the diver- adopt another mode of life. (= optimal habitat). sity and productivity of ecosys- FLAGSHIP SPECIES.Species that are HARDENING. The manual, mechani- tems. This approach blends physi- popular and charismatic and cal, or chemical compaction of the cal, biological, and cultural/ social which therefore attract popular trail tread resulting in a hard, flat needs. support for their conservation. surface that sheets water effective- EDGE.A significant change in struc- FLUSHING DISTANCE.The distance ly and resists the indentations that ture or composition caused by nat- at which wildlife flee from a dis- are created by use. ural events such as fire and wind turbance. INDICATOR.A specific measurement or human-caused events. FORAGE. All browse and herbaceous used to gauge a resource or social EDGE EFFECTS.Tendency to have plants that are available to feed condition. greater variety and density of livestock or wildlife. INDIGENOUS SPECIES.Any species organisms in the boundary zone FORBS.Seed plants with nonwoody, of flora or fauna that naturally between communities. green stems (herbaceous plants); occurs in wilderness areas that EDGE SPECIES.Species living prima- especially a plant other than a was not introduced by humans. rily or most frequently or numer- grass. INDIRECT EFFECTS.Those effects ously at junctions of communities. FOREST-INTERIOR SPECIES.Species occurring at a later time or at ENDANGERED SPECIES.Any species living primarily or most frequently some distance from the triggering listed under the Endangered in the interiors of forests. action. Species Act which is in danger of GUILD, SPECIES.Group of species LACUSTRINE.Living in or beside a or threatened with extinction having similar requirements and lake. throughout all or most of its range. foraging habits and thus similar LAND AND RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT roles in the community. MANAGEMENT PLAN(LRMP) STATEMENT (EIS). An environ- HABITAT.The natural environment of Programmatic level Forest-wide mental analysis, as required by the a plant or animal. plan (required by NFMA) setting National Environmental Policy HABITAT EVALUATION PROCESS overall management direction, Act (NEPA), for proposed federal (HEP). A process developed by standards, and guidelines for a actions that may have a significant the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Forest. effect on the quality of the human as a structured and quantitative LANDSCAPE.Heterogeneous land environment (40 CFR 1502.3). way of evaluating habitat before area composed of a cluster of EROSION.The detachment and and after a project and determin- interacting ecosystems that is movement of soil from the land by ing how much mitigation is need- repeated in similar form through- wind, water or gravity. ed to compensate for damage. out. EXOTIC SPECIES.Species that occur HABITAT FRAGMENTATION.A LEAVE NO TRACE(LNT). in a given place, area, or region as process by which habitats are Educational program designed to the result of direct or indirect, increasingly subdivided into instill behaviors in the wilderness deliberate or accidental introduc- smaller units, resulting in their that “leave no trace” of human tion of the species by humans, and increased insularity as well as an activities or occupation. for which introduction has permit- overall loss of habitat area. LIMITS OF ACCEPTABLE CHANGE ted the species to cross a natural HABITAT SECURITY.The condition of (LAC). A planning framework barrier to dispersal. being safe from disturbance. that establishes explicit measures

46 6. GLOSSARY

of the acceptable and appropriate MONITORING.The collection of the ecosystem as if it were an resource and social conditions in information to determine the indigenous species. wilderness settings as well as the effects of resource management NEOTROPICAL MIGRANT.A bird appropriate management strategies and to identify changing resource that migrates to temperate North for maintaining or achieving those conditions or needs. America from Central or South desired conditions. MULTIHABITAT SPECIES.Aspecies America and back over the course LANDSCAPE SCALE.At the broader that uses more than one type of of the year. scale of a landscape, i.e., several habitat over the course of the year NEST CAVITIES.Naturally occurring square kilometers. or its life. holes in trees, used by birds for LAYER. Horizontal stratum in a plant NATIONAL WILDERNESS nesting. community, i.e., the tree layer PRESERVATION SYSTEM NEST PARASITES. Cowbirds and comprising the canopy, the shrub (NWPS). All lands covered by the other birds that lay eggs in nests layer comprising the shrubby Wilderness Act and all subsequent of other species of bird and leave understory, the herb layer com- designations, irrespective of the their young to be raised by others. prising grass and herbaceous department or agency having NEST PREDATION.Jays and other plants, and the ground (moss) jurisdiction. birds that prey on eggs or layer comprising the ground sur- NATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC nestlings. face, lichens and mosses. RIVER SYSTEM.Rivers with out- NOXIOUS WEED.Plant that is inva- MANAGEMENT INDICATOR standing remarkable scenic, recre- sive, displacing native species. SPECIES(MIS). A wildlife species ational, geologic, fish and wildlife, OBLIGATE.Obligatory; limited to one whose population status and trend historic, cultural, or other similar mode of life or action. in a certain habitat type indicates values designated by Congress OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE (OHV). the population and trend of other under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Any motorized vehicle used for species that depend on the same Act for preservation of their free- travel in areas normally consid- habitat. flowing condition. ered inaccessible to conventional MANAGEMENT ZONES. Areas iden- NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL highway vehicles. OHVs generally tified for different management POLICY ACT (NEPA) Legislation include dirt motorcycles, dune techniques and/or uses. declaring the productive harmony buggies, jeeps, 4-wheel drive MATRIX, LANDSCAPE.The most with nature, and protection of the vehicles, snowmobiles, and ATVs. extensive and most connected environment, to be national policy. PALUSTRINE.Growing in marshes or habitat type in a landscape, which NEPA provides for analyzing the swamps. often plays the dominant role in environmental consequences of PASSERINES. Large order of birds, landscape processes. proposed management actions on which includes small and medi- METAPOPULATION.A set of partial- all National Forest System lands, um-sized perching birds and song- ly isolated populations belonging including management actions birds such as crows, tits, warblers, to the same species. The popula- taken in wilderness. thrushes, and finches tions are able to exchange individ- NATIVE SPECIES.Any species of PATCH, LANDSCAPE. A nonlinear uals and recolonize sites in which flora or fauna that naturally occurs surface area differing in appear- the species has recently become in an area and that was not intro- ance from its surroundings, typi- extinct. duced by humans. cally a small (less than 50 acres) MITIGATE.Actions to avoid, mini- NATURALIZED SPECIES.Any non- portion of the landscape; small mize, reduce, eliminate, or rectify indigenous species of flora or patches the size of an individual the adverse impact of a manage- fauna that is close genetically or tree canopy are frequently called ment practice. resembles an indigenous species gaps. and that has become established in

47 6. GLOSSARY

PREDATION.When an organism the “primitive” ROS class. shoulder. Common tread surfaces catches and kills other organisms RIPARIAN.The land and vegetation are native material, soil cement, for food. immediately adjacent to a body of asphalt, concrete, or crushed rock. PUNCHEON. A log or timber struc- water, such as a stream, lake, or UNTRAMMELED.An untrammeled ture built to cross a boggy area. river; such vegetation depends area is which human influence Usually consists of sills, stringers, upon a perpetual source of water. does not impede the free play of and a log deck. RIVERINE.Living in rivers. natural forces or interfere with RANGE.The geographic extent of SOCIAL TRAILS.Unplanned trails that natural processes in the ecosys- habitat used by a species. developed informally. tem. RAPTORS.Hawks, eagles, owls or SENSITIVE SPECIES.Those species WATERSHED. The entire area that other birds of prey. on an official state list or recog- contributes water to a drainage RECORD OF DECISION(ROD). The nized by another agency, needing system or stream. Portion of the portion of a Final Environmental special management to prevent forest in which all surface waters Impact Statement that identifies them from becoming endangered drain to a common point. the proposed action, signed by the or threatened. WETLAND.Areas that are inundated appropriate deciding officer. SINGLE-TRACK TRAIL.A trail wide by surface or ground water with a RECREATIONAL STOCK.Pack and enough only for one user to travel frequency sufficient to support a saddle stock used primarily for and requires getting off the trail to prevalence of vegetative or aquatic transporting recreationist and their allow another user to pass. life dependent upon the water for gear. Both commercial pack sta- SNAGS.Standing dead trees. growth and reproduction. tion and individual stock are SUCCESSION.The more or less pre- WILDERNESS.An area of wilderness included. Usually horses and dictable change in the composition is defined in sec. 2(c) of the mules but may also be llamas, or of communities following a natu- Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131- goats. ral or human disturbance. 1136). RECREATION OPPORTUNITY TAKE.Harass, harm, pursue, hunt, WILDLIFE SIGN.Feathers, rubs, SPECTRUM (ROS). A means of shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, scraps, beds, and other evidence of classifying and managing recre- or collect, or to attempt to engage wildlife use. ational opportunities based on in any such conduct. physical setting, social setting and TREAD.The actual surface portion of managerial setting. Wildernesses, a trail upon which users travel are normally managed entirely for excluding backslope, ditch, and

48 Index A D I acquisition 29 degraded areas 6 impacts from humans 18 agency planners 29 disturbance patterns 19 impacts on wildlife 20 alpine ecosystems 22 disturbance, human 10, 34 impacts, existing 30 Antelope Island State Park (Utah) 35 disturbance, levels of 18 impacts, negative 6 Appalachian Mountain Club 24 disturbed areas 10 incidental takings of a federally listed archeological sites 16 dogs 20, 21 species 16 Audubon Society 37 Dramstad, W. 5 interactions of wildlife and Austin Metropolitan Trails Council 27 recreationists 7 interpretation 23, 24, 35, 36, 37 E interpretation plan 31 B ecological assessment 33 interpretive programs 23 Babbs Creek Canyon (California) 38 ecological edge 6, 18, 20 balancing needs across landscapes 9 ecological evaluation 18 beaver ponds 14 edge effects 6 J biodiversity 20 edges 10 jays 6 biological diversity 8, 20 education 22 Jefferson County (Colorado) 36 biological inventory 30 effects, negative 6 bird watching 20 Endangered Species Act 16 blinds 24 environmental education 23, 24, 31 K Bluff Lake (Denver, Colorado) 33 erosion 38 Knight, R. 5 boardwalks 24 expert advice 17, 19 Kruger, F. 12 breeding areas 21 breeding birds 14 broader landscape 10 F L buffers 10 facilities 24 land managers 29 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 26 federal lands 26 landscape 10 areas of critical environmental feed, weed-free 22, 24 landscape ecology 10 concern 16 feeding 20 landscape structure 11 Fielder, J. 12 landscape, broader 29 fishing 14 landscapes, urban 19 C flushing distances 20 Larson, R. 24 Chatfield State Park (Colorado) 36 Forman, R. 5 Latilong data base 13 checklist 27 fragmentation 8 legal status of species and habitats 16 Clean Water Act 17 Longmont (Colorado) 39 closures, trail 21, 23 Colorado Division of Wildlife 16 G Colorado Fourteeners Initiative 38 game 17 M Colorado Natural Diversity Information goals 29, 30 management 23, 24 Source 30 goals, wildlife 19 management strategies 31 Colorado State Natural Areas 16 Godron, M. 5 management zones 23 Commerce City (Colorado) 33 gradient of human modification 18 management, adaptive 23 community choice 25 grazing 14 matrices, landscape 10 community decisions 8 Gutzwiller, K 5 Meaney, C. 12 community values 16 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space conflicts, resolving 24 District (California) 37 consensus, reaching 25 H migration 20 conservation advocates 11 habitat blocks 8, 10 modification by humans 19 conservation organizations 29 habitat fragmentation 8 monitoring 23, 32, 35, 39 Cooperrider, A. 5 habitat restoration 14 core areas 10 habitat types 12 corridors 10 Hellmund, P. 5 critical habitat 16 Humboldt Peak (Colorado) 38 Crown Hill Park 36 hunting 20 Huron Peak (Colorado) 38

49 INDEX

San Mateo County (California) 37 trailheads 6 N San Rafael (California) 37 trails as catalysts for restoration 14 National Environmental Policy Act Sand Creek Regional Trail (Denver, trails, edge 8 (NEPA) 26 Colorado) 33 trails, existing 22 National Parks Service Rivers, Trails, and screening 12, 21 trails, social 14, 23 Conservation Assistance Program 27 seasonal closings 35 trails, spur 17 natural variability 6 seasons of special concern 30 trampling 14, 22 nesting 20 Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 17 tundra 12 Noss and Cooperrider 5, 10 Senate Bill 40, Colorado law 16 Noss, R. 5 sensitive areas 16 separation, spatial 35 U separation, temporal 35 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 17 O Shipley Environmental 26 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 16 objectives, competing 10 slash piles 39 urban settings 27, 36 Smith, D. 5 USDA Forest Service 26 snags 39 Utah State Parks 35 P Snowmass, Colorado 39 ute’s ladies tresses orchid 40 patches, habitat 10, 11 Snowmass’s Tom Blake Trail 39 patches, isolated 11 South Platte River (Denver, Colorado)33 patches, small 8 species decline 8 V patterns 10 species of concern 11 visitor behavior 23 plan, preferred 31 species, generalist 6, 24 volunteers 23, 24, 31 plans, alternative 31 species, sensitive vs. non-sensitive 6 Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado 24 plants, exotic 22 species, specialist 6 plants, native 22 species, threatened and endangered 16, 22 potential vs. actual species 12 St. Vrain Greenway (Longmont, Colorado) W predictability 7, 20, 24 39 weed control 22 project vision 29 Stapleton International Airport (Denver, weeds 22, 39 property owners 29 Colorado) 33 wet areas 22 protection, land 29 stepping stones 9 wetlands 15, 17 public involvement techniques 25 stewardship 23 Wheat Ridge Greenbelt 40 public process 25 stream buffers 14 Wheat Ridge (Colorado) 40 public values 25 stream confluences 14 wild and scenic rivers 16 publics 25 stream crossings 14 wilderness 18 street lighting 38 wilderness areas 16 sustainability 25 wildlife advisory committee 35 R Swainson’s hawk 36 wildlife characteristics 20 raccoons 6 wildlife corridors 10 raptors 17 wildlife habitat, critical 35 references for further reading on wildlife 5 T regional view 10 time 10 regulations 23 toilets 22 Z resiliency 12 tours, guided 23 zones of influence 5, 6 restoration 29, 39 trail benefits 6 zoning 36 riparian areas 11, 14 trail characteristics 6 riparian corridors 37 trail closures 36, 39 roadless areas 16 trail concepts 29 roosting 20 trail density 8 rules of thumb 5, 6, 10 trail distance effects 6 trail experiences 7 trail facilities 6 S trail management 23 San Francisco Bay Trail Project 37 trail restrictions, enforcing 35 San Jose (California) 37 trail users 29 San Leandro (California) 37

50 Please send us your comments!

Use this form to suggest ways of improving this handbook or go on-line to tell us at: www.dnr.state.co.us/parks/ Send this form to: Stuart Macdonald, Colorado State Parks—Trails Program, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 618, Denver, CO 80203, email: [email protected], fax:303-866-3206. Thank you.

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 2. WILDLIFE AND TRAILS PRIMER Any additional topics to cover? Rules of thumb to suggest? Additional reading to add for a topic?

CHAPTER 3. WILDLIFE AND TRAILS CHECKLIST Any comments on the overall process? Additional steps to suggest?

CHAPTER 4. CASE STUDIES Do you have other trail projects to recommend where important wildlife lessons were learned?

CHAPTER 5. SOURCES OF INFORMATION Do you have other sources of information to recommend?

CHAPTER 6. GLOSSARY Any other terms to include? Better defintions to suggest?