15

Historic Trails

Prepared by Margie Coffin Brown, Historical Landscape Architect, National Park Service,

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation INTRODUCTION

Trails take us to places of nature and history. They lead us through

rugged terrain, exceptional scenery, places of contemplation, and cultural

sites. Many contemporary trails once served as utilitarian routes for

hunting, migration, communication, and trade. Individuals, organizations, and government agencies have developed recreational and heritage-related trail systems to provide access to scenic areas, as links

between communities, or as alternative paths for non-vehicular travel.

The resulting trails vary in length, purpose, and physical characteristics.

Many are built and maintained with simple tools and extensive hand

labor, containing highly-crafted works of stone, iron, and wood. Though

seemingly simple, a trail’s route, construction methods and materials, and

inherent landscape characteristics can embody a significant chapter of

American history and make it eligible for listing in the National Register

of Historic Places.

Effective treatment and management of these trails requires an understanding of their historic context, design principles, and construction

methods. Trail managers are often faced with questions regarding the

repair of trails, especially those constructed in the late 1800s or early

1900s. Heavy use, limited funds for maintenance and other treatments,

and lack of treatment guidelines have caused trail managers to seek

economical materials and methods to accomplish their work, often

resulting in the loss of historic features or changes in character. Management practices that fail to consider the historic value of America’s trails may

diminish their historic character and significance.
2 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

This Landscape Line describes an approach to treatment and management of historic trails that balances

historical considerations with contemporary concerns.

Using the methodology of the Cultural Landscape

Report (CLR), this Landscape Line describes the process

of historical research, existing conditions documentation, and analysis and evaluation for historic trails with

an emphasis on developing historically informed

treatment recommendations.1

 It provides an overview

of federal guidelines that relate to historic trails and is

supplemented with case studies from a range of historic

trail treatment projects. The document focuses on

treatment of the trail prism, which incorporates the trail

tread, associated features and the associated corridor

leading through the landscape.

In this publication, the term “historic trail” refers to a

route that is currently managed for interpretive or

recreational purposes and is limited to pedestrian and

non-vehicular traffic (See Sidebar 1). Heritage trails

accessed by automobiles and multi-use recreational

trails that allow bicycles, horses, and other means of

transportation besides walking have special requirements that are not addressed in this document.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF

AMERICA’S TRAILS

To fully understand the origin of a trail, one must trace

the broad patterns, historical events, and individuals that

shaped its development through time. The following

brief history pertains to many trails in the United States

that are now considered “historic trails.”

Native peoples, often following animal tracks, established the earliest network of overland and water trails

for hunting, seasonal migration, trade, and ceremonial

purposes. Footpaths often followed the most direct,

flat route between waterways or through mountain

passes. Routes were sometimes marked with

debarked trees, rock cairns, petroglyphs, burial

mounds, and objects left as spiritual offerings. A few of

these trails are extant (Figure 1).

With the arrival of Europeans, some primitive trails

became migration routes and were widened for carts

and subsequently became roads. For example, when

charting the Oregon Trail in 1812, trappers located

the South Pass over the Continental Divide by following an existing Crow Indian trail. With easy grades and

proximity to the upper reaches of the Platte River, the

route was later followed by thousands of pioneers.

Recreational walking and mountain climbing trails,

referred to as “paths,” became popular in the early

nineteenth century.2

 American artists and writers,

particularly those connected with the Hudson River

School in New York, portrayed vast unspoiled

landscapes as icons of a new flourishing country and

often explored remote areas on foot. Public appreciation of paintings by artists such as Thomas Cole and

Frederic Church prompted nature tourism as an

escape from the growing industrial cities and engendered a sense of public ownership of these magnificent

landscapes. Popular during the mid 1800s, the

“American Grand Tour” encompassed a circuit of

grand hotels, each with recreational paths, located

along the Hudson River, the Catskills, Lake George,

the Erie Canal, Niagara Falls, the White Mountains,

and the Connecticut River Valley (Figure 2).3

This growing appreciation of landscape scenery led to a

style of path development based on the “picturesque”

Figure 1. Trail worn into lava from centuries of foot traffic

through the Waikola petroglyph field on the recently designated

Ala Kahakai (Trail by the Sea) National Historic Trail. The

ancient path, extending for approximately 175 miles along the

coast of the island of Hawaii, has been altered in sections by

natural changes such as lava flows, floods, and high surf, but

also widened for horse and cart use, and later for paved roads

and resort developments. (CRM, Steve Elkinton, 1997)
HISTORIC TRAILS 3

and “sublime.” Andrew Jackson Downing (1815-1852)

suggested that garden walks lead through the landscape

in an ever-changing manner, winding with easy, flowing

curves to highlight picturesque landscape scenery or

turning abruptly at an obstacle of dramatic interest, such

as a sublime rock formation. He believed that constructed features, such as bridges, steps, seats, and

shelters along a path could provide comfort, as well as

enhance one’s appreciation of the landscape. 5

 In the

late nineteenth century, Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr.

(1822-1903) laid out picturesque parks with carefully

separated but intertwined pedestrian paths, bridle paths,

and carriage roads with bridges and underpasses to

accommodate traffic flow. Routes that encouraged

contemplation were gracefully curved along the natural

SIDEBAR 1: DEFINITIONS

Trail: A travel way established by construction or use

for foot traffic, bicycles, wheelchairs and/or pack animals.

Trails designed for motorized off-road vehicles are not

emphasized in this document. 

Historic trail: A trail built or in use during a significant

event or historic period; associated with themes in our

country’s heritage (e.g., prehistory, history of commerce,

communications, community planning and development,

conservation, recreation, landscape architecture, engineering, military, religion, or transportation); and eligible

or listed in the National Register of Historic Places. 

National Historic Trail: Federally designated longdistance trails, preserved for public use and commemoration by an act of Congress. Most National Historic Trails

(NHT) cross state boundaries and trace nationally

significant routes such as Ala Kahakai NHT. The

National Park Service administers many NHTs, while the

Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service manage

others. Designated trails need not be on federal land or

be contiguous and can be sites and segments linked by

adjacent auto tour routes.4

 Some of these trails are

associated with historic events and differ in character

from the trails described in this document. The Selma to

Montgomery National Historic Trail, which follows a road

corridor traversed by Civil Rights advocates, is an

example of this type.

National Scenic Trail: National Scenic Trails (NSTs)

are long-distance trails designated for the nationally

significant scenic, natural, and cultural qualities of the

region through which they pass. Examples include the

Appalachian National Scenic Trail and the Pacific Crest

National Scenic Trail. 

Figure 2. A short distance from New York City, the Catskills

were laced with footpaths and hotels by the 1820s. Nearby

lakes, waterfalls, and mountains were viewed from a network

of paths, ornamented with rustic ladders and places to rest.

(Engraving from The Scenery of Catskill Mountains as

Described by Irving Cooper, 1876)

terrain, whereas routes that encouraged social interaction were cut as broad, straight promenades.6

 As large

tracts of land were set aside for public enjoyment, the

principles of Downing, Olmsted, and other influential

landscape architects of the period, were often applied in

the development of new road and trail circulation

systems to wind through scenic landscapes, sometimes

obliterating earlier more direct routes (Figure 3).

By the late 1800s, land protection and recreational

hiking were firmly rooted in American politics and

society. In the Northeast, hotel companies built

footpaths as part of their facilities, while in the West

similar hotel trails were designed for stock and pack

trains into remote country. In California’s Yosemite

Valley, a network of tourist trails begun in the 1850s

expanded as the area was protected as a state park in

1864 and later as a national park in 1890 (Figure 4).
4 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

Figure 3. Plan by Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. for Mount Royal, in Montreal, Canada, showing circulation system of carriage roads and

foot paths, 1877. (Frederick Olmsted National Historic Site archives)

Figure 4. The Nevada Falls Trail in Yosemite near Nevada Falls

constructed in 1869 and 1870. Trails that ascended the valley

walls were built for saddle tourism but never became roads.

(NPS Historic Photo collection, Harpers Ferry Center, HFC000532)

As railroads traversed the country, speculators and

concessionaires built extensive “trail” systems as part of

tourist hotel operations. Trails, such as the Grand

Canyon’s Bright Angel Trail in Arizona, built in 1890 by

a private entrepreneur as a toll trail, received greater

use after the arrival of the railroad in 1901.8

 In

Montana, the Glacier Park Hotel Company, a subsidiary of the Great Northern Railway, constructed an

equestrian trail network in the 1910s to link tourist

chalets and tent camps. The 163-mile trail system,

consisting of three loops, earned Glacier the title of

America’s “Trail Park.”

Economic ventures often spurred western trail development, while local village improvement societies and

regional hiking clubs constructed many eastern trails.

Village improvement societies, widespread throughout the

Northeast after the Civil War, used membership dues and

funds donated in remembrance of community members

to hire local laborers for civic enhancement projects.

Promoting picturesque landscape principles, attractive

sidewalks, footpaths and drives became a hallmark of the

village improvement movement.9

 Walks were extended

beyond villages to surrounding scenic points, symbolically

linking civilization and nature (Figure 5).

In more remote areas, hiking clubs formed in the

1870s and 1880s were responsible for a proliferation

of new trails, guidebooks, and maps, such as those

produced by the Appalachian Mountain Club. Formed

in 1875, the club engaged in explorations and organized

volunteers to construct trails and shelters for recre-
HISTORIC TRAILS 5

ational use, primarily in the White Mountain Region of

New Hampshire.10 Each improvement society and

hiking club fostered philanthropy, volunteerism, and a

land protection ethic. Their interests broadened in the

early twentieth century as many organizations became

effective advocacy groups for local, state, and federal

land protection and recreational trail networks. In

Vermont, the Green Mountain Club formed in 1910

to “make the Vermont mountains play a larger role in

the life of the people.” The group established the Long

Trail, a 270-mile footpath across the state (Figure 6).

While hiking clubs grew in popularity, village improvement societies waned in the early 1900s when their

efforts were eclipsed by publicly funded land management agencies, professional planners, American involvement in the World Wars, and the Great Depression of

the 1930s. Similarly, the railroad concessionaires and

great hotels were supplanted by automobile touring and

family camping.

Federal agencies such as the US Forest Service (USFS),

established in 1905, and National Park Service (NPS),

established in 1916, became increasingly involved in

trail construction and maintenance. The USFS developed an extensive network of trails for timber harvesting and fire control, while the NPS added many trails to

accommodate motorists by creating connections with

Figure 5. The Emery Path was built in the 1910s by the Bar

Harbor Village Improvement Association on Mount Desert

Island, Maine (now part of Acadia National Park), which

included extensive stonework. (Acadia National Park archives,

1922)

Figure 6. Early hikers along the Long Trail in Vermont pictured

in a 1927 promotional brochure published by the Central

Vermont Railway. (Appalachian Trail Conference, Potomac

Chapter archives)

Figure 7. A rustic footbridge over Indian Creek in Yosemite

Valley was designed by the NPS Landscape Division and built in

1928 with unpeeled logs, following the picturesque design

principles put forth by A.J. Downing. (National Archives, Record

Group 79)
6 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

parking areas, campgrounds, visitor centers, and other

dispersed facilities located within designated park areas.

In the 1920s and 1930s, the NPS played an active role

in the development of trail design standards and trail

construction. An emphasis on master planning or

development plans for parks ensured that there was an

integrated network of foot trails, bridle trails, road

systems, visitor facilities, and park buildings. Constructed features were to be “laid gently on the land,”

so as to harmonize with the setting and native materials

of the park. Wood, stone, and clay were fashioned

with rustic building techniques for bridges, culverts, and

retaining walls, with the avoidance of straight lines and

right angles in all aspects of design.11 NPS landscape

architects, supervised through the NPS Landscape

Division, perpetuated the nineteenth-century naturalistic

design principles on a grand scale (Figure 7).

The NPS constructed two main types of trails. The

first type consisted of narrow, rough trails, cut along the

line of least resistance, which were to be used by park

staff to monitor game animals and areas vulnerable to

wildfires—similar to trails constructed on USFS lands.

The second type consisted of tourist trails to lead park

visitors through attractive scenery. For these trails, the

NPS aimed to construct trails four feet in width that did

not exceed a fifteen percent grade.12 By 1932, the

NPS had built over 700 miles of tourist trails within 15

parks, including 216 miles in Glacier National Park and

150 miles in Sequoia National Park in California.13

Another type of trail, constructed in proximity to visitor

facilities at the earliest national parks, were wildflower

garden trails, which showcased the native flora, such as

Castle Crest Wildflower Garden at Crater Lake

National Park.

During the same period, private organizations coalesced

to build new trails and lobby for the protection of trail

corridors. The New England Trail Conference formed

in 1916 to coordinate trail-making agencies and clubs;

this led to the founding of similar organizations in other

regions. Five years later, Benton MacKaye articulated

his vision for the Appalachian Trail between Maine and

Georgia, eventually leading to the formation of the

Appalachian Trail Conference (ATC) in 1925. Mackaye

asserted that, just as “The railway ‘opens up’ a country

as a site for civilization; the trailway should ‘open up’ a

country as an escape from civilization.” The ATC

successfully organized land protection advocates and

trail volunteers in the fourteen states along the 2,174-

Figure 8. Myron Avery (right), involved with the construction of

the Appalachian Trail between 1927 and 1952, was one of

several influential leaders who carried forth a grand regional

vision of a foot path through “wilderness” from Maine to

Georgia. Largely conceived, marked and built by volunteers,

the trail required extensive coordination between regions and

partnerships between public and private landowners.

(Appalachian Trail Conference, Potomac Chapter archives)

Figure 9. The lookout platform at Massai Point, Chiricahua

National Monument, completed by the CCC in 1935, is an

example of highly crafted stone steps, stone walls, and

ironwork constructed to harmonize with the natural scenery.

(NPS Historic Photo Collection, Harpers Ferry Center)
HISTORIC TRAILS 7

mile route, and enabled the connection of many trail

networks along the Appalachian Mountain range. The

trail is heralded as one of the first major acts of regional

planning that promoted the concept of a linear protective zone or greenway (Figure 8).

In the West, a similar vision for a long distance hiking

and equestrian trail was articulated by Clinton Clark in

1932 for a route along the ridgelines of the Sierra

Nevada and Cascade regions from Canada to Mexico.

Forming the Pacific Crest Trail Conference, the group

eventually created the 2,658-mile trail, now designated

the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail. Ironically, the

automobile contributed to the development of longdistance trails between mountain ranges by facilitating

access to dispersed trailheads.

Trail development flourished during the 1930s as a

means of combining conservation and economic relief.

As a result of federal recovery programs such as the

Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and Works

Progress Administration (WPA), many trails were

constructed on state and federal lands. Relief crews

carried out projects all over the country in accordance

with specifications for trails and related structures, which

were issued in 1934, 1937, and 1938.14 With tight

controls on design and construction techniques, most

trails were highly crafted and durable (Figure 9). The

large crews of young men developed a set of skills to be

passed on to the next generation of trail builders and

maintainers. With the onset of World War II, however, the crews disbanded and without subsequent

maintenance, many trails fell into disrepair during the

1940s. Other trails were left incomplete or were

poorly routed and soon abandoned.

The greatly expanded network of trails suffered from

lack of maintenance during the 1940s and early 1950s.

For NPS trails, relief came through the Mission 66

program, initiated in 1956 to upgrade park facilities,

staff, and resource management before the fiftieth

anniversary of the agency. With a different set of

objectives, crews built short trails in association with

park facilities and educational initiatives, such as selfguided nature trails and paved multi-use trails. Rather

than rely solely on locally available rustic materials,

Mission 66 standards employed modern materials such

as pipe drains, concrete bridge forms, cut stone, and

Figure 10. Two views of Inspiration Point in Yellowstone

National Park, showing rustic wooden overlook in 1925 and

steel and concrete overlook built in 1956 as part of the

Mission 66 program. The Mission 66 program, established to

bring the National Parks into the modern age, funded the

construction of modern roads, trails, utilities, camp and picnic

grounds, and many kinds of structures needed for public use or

administration to meet the requirements of an expected 80

million visitors by 1966. (NPS Historic Photo Collection,

Harpers Ferry Center)
8 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

asphalt surfaces. (Figure 10). A resurgence of NPS

master plans documented the expansion, relocation,

and in some cases reduction of park trails. Outside of

parks, many communities and resort areas installed offroad multi-use trails to provide safe routes separated

from increasing vehicular traffic.

Several federal laws established to protect cultural

resources in the 1960s have affected trail management.

The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of

1966, with subsequent amendments, established the

National Register of Historic Places, to protect districts,

sites, buildings, structures, and objects of national, state,

and local significance in American history. The National

Trail System Act of 1968 established legislative authority

for the federal establishment and protection of significant

long-distance trails such as the 2,174-mile Appalachian

Trail, which was designated a National Scenic Trail at

that time. In 1978 the act was amended to include

national historic trails to commemorate significant routes

of exploration, migration, military action, civil rights, or

commerce (See Sidebar 1 and Figure 11). On federal

lands, a 1996 Executive Order to protect Indian Sacred

Sites led to the closure and rerouting of trail sections in

significant religious and ceremonial sites.15

Another group of laws enacted in the late 1960s and

1970s established protective measures for natural

resources and influenced the management of many trail

systems. The Wilderness Act of 1964 established

millions of acres of federally protected wilderness lands

“for the use and enjoyment of the American people in

such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future

use and enjoyment as wilderness.” This act protected

many of the country’s primitive trails from alterations by

mechanized equipment yet at the same time resulted in

their abandonment due to lack of use. Additional acts

affecting all trails include the National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, the Endangered Species Act

of 1973 regarding the protection of critical habitat for

endangered, threatened, or candidate species, and the

Clean Water Act of 1977 with associated guidelines for

protection of floodplains and wetlands.16 All require

careful documentation, a systematic analysis of impacts,

and a public review and regulatory process. Protection

of natural resources resulted in the seasonal closure of

trails for nesting and migration, the reroute of trails

around wetland areas, increased use of boardwalks, and

restricted use in wilderness areas. Similarly, protection

of cultural resources such as sacred sites and archeological areas has resulted in reroutes of trails around

sensitive areas or the development of parallel trails.

Trail planning now requires full public involvement and

consideration of feasible alternatives.

A growing interest in recreation in the 1970s paired

with limited maintenance programs resulted in extensive erosion, disrepair and deterioration of structures

along many trails as they were “loved to death.”

Managers struggled to develop trail maintenance

programs and crews, and a new generation of volunteer programs emerged, including the Youth Conservation Corps formed in 1970, and state-run conservation

corps. To fix trail problems, managers increasingly

relied on non-native or imported materials using

overland vehicles and helicopters to transport stone,

gravel, cement, asphalt, steel, and planks, often replacing the rustic log and stone work from the CCC era.

Similarly, high use and liability concerns resulted in the

closure of many trails, reroutes of damaged or dangerous sections, and increased use of railings, often set in

concrete walls and footings.

Figure 11. In Idaho’s rugged mountains, the Nez Perce

National Historic Trail marks part of a 10,000 year-old route

used by Columbia Basin Indians seeking buffalo in the Great

Plains. In 1805, it became the path followed by Lewis and

Clark. In 1877, the non-treaty Nez Perce Indians, attempting

to escape the U.S. Army, fled east along this route. Segments

of trails, totaling 1,170 miles, are now protected as the Nez

Perce (Nee-Me-Poo) National Historic Trail and administered by

USFS and NPS. (Nez Perce National Historic Trail)
HISTORIC TRAILS 9

In the 1980s and 1990s an increasing number of

heritage routes and scenic trails were recognized either

as significant national historic trails, national scenic trails,

or listed in the National Register of Historic Places as

historic districts, historic sites, or as part of a thematically-linked multiple property nominations (See Sidebar

6 for trails recently listed). In some cases, notable

features along trails such as bridges, are listed as historic

structures. With an increased awareness and understanding of preservation practices, many additional trails

and trail features will likely be listed. Recognition of

trails as historic resources raises issues related to their

management such as reroutes, addition of new features,

resource protection, and treatment guidelines as will be

discussed further in this document.

HISTORIC TRAILS AND THE CLR

With the tremendous use of historic trails and concomitant maintenance concerns, a clearly defined approach

for treatment and management is essential. A Cultural

Landscape Report (CLR) provides a comprehensive

approach to guide treatment and management decisions

based on historical research, existing condition documentation, and analysis and evaluation. Other studies

and planning methodologies may also guide management of a historic trail. A Comprehensive Management

Plan (CMP) is mandated for all trails designated as

National Scenic or National Historic Trails while a

General Management Plan (GMP) is required for all

National Park System units. Also, other cultural

resource specific studies as described in Sidebar 2 may

inform trail management decisions.

The historical research component of the CLR clarifies

the general context and intent that influenced the trail’s

development, and supplies information about the

original layout, design, workmanship, materials, setting,

and construction process. The existing condition

documentation provides a comprehensive account of

the trail’s current physical appearance, paying particular

attention to aspects that have been identified as character-defining features from the period of primary significance. Comparing current conditions to historical

precedents reveals the extent to which the trail’s

Figure 12. View of Lock 37 on the Ohio & Erie Canal in the

late nineteenth century, showing a dwelling and general store,

paired with view nearly one century later, showing the Towpath

Multi-use Trail within the Cuyahoga Valley National Park. The

park was established in 1974 to protect historic resources and

create a recreational corridor along the canal. (Cuyahoga Valley

National Park)

In the 1970s, a growing interest in recreation, urban

open space, linear parks, and environmental protection

led to a network of multi-use trails developed on

abandoned railroad tracks, former canals, and other

unused transportation routes. Many of these trails

preserved industrial remnants including water towers,

switching signals, stations, bridges and tunnels. Some of

these corridors are listed in the National Register as

significant symbols of American industry, engineering

and labor. Their relatively recent conversions to trails

may, in the future, be considered part of an important

trend in American history (Figure 12).
10 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

SIDEBAR 2:

PLANS, REPORTS AND INVENTORIES WITH HISTORIC PARK TRAIL INFORMATION

Below is a list of plans, reports and inventories that may contain information about historic trails. Ideally, a historic trail

would have been addressed in a General Management Plan, but in absence of this overarching document, or in conjunction with a master planning effort, a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR) is a valuable tool. 

Documents Specific to National Scenic or Historic Trails:

Comprehensive Management Plan [CMP]. A plan required for all designated National Scenic and Historic Trails

that typically provides a historical overview, identifies significant resources associated with the historic trail, and outlines

objectives, practices, and responsibilities for the managing agencies associated with the trail. The plan defines a marking

system with design guidelines to ensure consistency, identifies responsibilities for all cooperators, and provides a prioritized

list of the tasks necessary for implementation. An example is the “Comprehensive Management and Use Plan, Trail of

Tears National Historic Trail.”17

Documents Specific to the National Park Service:

General Management Plan [GMP]. The overall plan for a National Park System unit that ensures that the park has a

clearly defined direction for long-term resource preservation and visitor use. GMPs typically contain mission goals and

management prescriptions that address the preservation of park resources, types and areas of development, visitor carrying

capacities, and potential boundary modifications. It is critical that historic trails be identified within a park GMP.

Historic Resource Study [HRS]. A HRS for a trail system evaluates associated cultural resources within historic

contexts. Through documentary research, typically led by a historian, and field investigations, this report describes the

integrity, authenticity, associative values, and significance of the trail and related resources. This report includes National

Register nominations for all qualifying resources and is used as a basic report for completing more detailed studies such as

a CLR or interpretation plan. An example is the “Historic Resource Study, Pony Express National Historic Trail.”18

Historic Structures Report [HSR]. A report that serves as the primary guide to treatment and use of a historic or

prehistoric structure. The purpose, content and use of the report parallels that of a CLR. The treatment and use of an

adjacent structure can directly affect the trail.

Cultural Landscape Inventory [CLI]. An evaluated inventory of all cultural landscapes in the National Park System

having historical significance. The CLI provides baseline cultural landscape data for a park, including trails and trail-related

resources. The information collected about a landscape includes location, description, historical development and significance, landscape characteristics, and management decisions.

List of Classified Structures [LCS]. An evaluated inventory of all historic or prehistoric structures in the National

Park System having historical, architectural, or engineering significance. The LCS provides baseline structure data for a

park, including the location of historic and prehistoric structures, description, historical development and significance, and

management decisions. 

Archeological Overview and Assessment. A report that describes and assesses known and potential archeological

resources in a park area. The overview reviews and summarizes existing archeological data while the assessment evaluates

the data. Further investigation requires an archeological identification and evaluation study to identify the location and

characteristics of some or all sites in a geographical area. Data is then added to the Archeological Sites Management

Information System (ASMIS).

Ethnographic Overview and Assessment. A report that reviews and summarizes existing information on park

resources valued by associated traditional communities. 

National Register of Historic Places. The National Register Information System (partially available on-line at

www.nr.nps.gov) includes information on historic trails that have been listed in the National Register. The full text of

nominations and copies of supporting documentation can be obtained by contacting the National Register of Historic

Places. 
HISTORIC TRAILS 11

purpose, users, or physical characteristics have changed.

The analysis and evaluation component helps to identify

treatment and management issues. The CLR may be

based on or expand on existing studies such as Historic

Resource Studies or National Register nominations, but

in some cases the CLR can serve as an initial analysis and

evaluation of the trail’s significance and integrity.

The CLR is intended to address a range of concerns,

from basic historical research and definitional criteria to

broader managerial issues. The questions that the CLR

should provide guidance in answering include: What is

the historic trail or trail system? Is it part of a larger

circulation system or a single linear trail? Why is it

significant? How should it be protected and enjoyed?

HISTORICAL RESEARCH

Historical research for a CLR provides an in-depth

understanding of the trail’s evolution and lays the

foundation for subsequent analysis and treatment.

Historic trail research should begin by placing the

development of the trail within the broader trends and

events in American history. The political, social,

economic, and environmental context can offer insights

into the purpose of the historic alignment or method of

construction. Research should then clarify the intent of

the trail with respect to the origin, destination, and other

trail or landscape characteristics (See Sidebar 3).19 For

trails that are highly crafted, it is important to provide

information on the development of specific trail characteristics and features such as layout, grade, tread width

and composition, step construction techniques, other

stabilization measures, drainage systems, bridges, and

associated features. Tracing the appearance of trail

characteristics and features through successive historic

periods may reveal the influence of changing social

patterns, land uses, construction practices, management

philosophies, and funding situations. A trail may have

been relocated in response to natural processes such as

a flood or fire, changes in land ownership, the shift from

trains to automobiles as the primary means of accessing

trail heads, or evolving tastes in scenery or recreational

activity. Legislation to limit the type of use or restrict

access to traditional tribal properties might also alter trail

SIDEBAR 3:

RESEARCHERS CHECKLIST

Historic Context

• Themes or associated events that influenced trail

development or use

• Builders and users of route, owners, managers, and

jurisdiction

• Adherence to local, regional, or national design

standards, laws, and policies

Development History

• Evidence of prehistoric use or associated sites, especially springs and grave sites

• Evidence of segments capitalizing on natural routes, i.e.,

dry floodplains, natural sandhill benches, or mountain

saddles

• Designers and builders of the trail, design intent, width,

grade, origin, route or alignment, destination, views,

natural features, cultural sites

• Materials used and sources, local or imported

• Tools and equipment used for construction and

maintenance, professional skills of builders

• Types and extent of built features such as drainage

systems, steps, retaining walls, ladders, railings, tread

preparation, and bridges

Management History

• Maintenance and stewardship responsibilities for the

trail, advocacy groups, volunteers and users

• Location and frequency of repairs for trail sections or

rationale for trail closures and reroutes 

• Descriptions of trails by users: recommendations and

concerns

• Successes and failures of maintenance solutions,

particularly in high use areas

• Changes in origin, destination, tread materials, width,

or use

• Maps or other documents that locate features difficult

to find in the field, such as closed trails, drainage

systems above the trail, closed culverts, iron work, or

retaining walls that may be obscured or in poor

condition
12 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

location and appearance; a formerly unimproved trail

may require stone steps, puncheon bridges, or scree

wall curbing to withstand increasingly heavy use;

changing safety standards and accessibility regulations

may call for hand rails, grade changes, and surface

alterations. The timing, nature, and reasons for such

changes should be thoroughly documented and clearly

articulated.

Sources for historical information on trails include old

maps, trail guides, hiking club annual reports, travel

journals, maintenance logs, paintings, sketches, photographs, aerial photographs, postcards, newspaper

articles, oral histories, and interviews with maintenance

staff and trail users. In some cases, trail archeology may

be studied to either understand how the trail was built

or determine if the trail is associated with a historic or

prehistoric use. For trails on public lands, extensive

records for the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and

other New Deal federal work programs are held by

Figure 14. Historic photograph of horse trail, retaining walls, and

guard rail built by the CCC in 1935 for a trail south of Sunset

Rock in Chickamauga & Chattanooga National Military Park,

Georgia. (National Archives; NARA MD, 79-42, GA, Box 14)

Figure 13. Historic photograph of rustic foot bridge

constructed in 1934 by the CCC on the Eagle Rock Creek Trail

in the Great Smoky Mountains in North Carolina. (National

Archives; NARA MD, 79--42, NC, Box 21)

the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, and

their satellite repositories across the country (Figures 13

& 14). Specific types of trails, such as pioneer trails,

may have associated repositories, like the National

Frontier Trail Center in Independence, Missouri.

To ensure that data gathered is well organized and

retrievable, it is helpful to create a database and assign a

code to each trail or trail section. A database can

generate a chronology of trail construction, sort trail

segments by land ownership or region, and compile

types of built features. Information can also be linked to

maps produced through Geographic Information

Systems (GIS) as described in the next section.
HISTORIC TRAILS 13

EXISTING CONDITIONS

DOCUMENTATION

Documenting the trail’s existing condition is an essential

component of the CLR process. The existing condition

documentation includes a geographical survey and field

verification to locate and assess the current condition of

general landscape characteristics and specific features

associated with each trail. A US Geological Survey map

at 1:24,000 scale may serve as the base for a survey.

GIS and Global Positioning System (GPS) computer

technology can be used to develop an electronic map

with links to a GIS database with standardized terminology and attributes.20 The database can contain historic,

contextual, and trail-specific information. The graphic

layers and data can then be manipulated to produce

plans that illustrate past periods of development,

rerouted sections, existing conditions, and proposed

management actions (Figure 15).

Figure 15. Geographic Information System map layers including an aerial photograph projected with three-dimensional

topography, showing the configuration of open and closed historic trails on Mount Joy at Valley Forge National Historical Park,

with close-up showing the condition assessment for Trail Section A. (NPS, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, Mark

Davison, 2003)

Contemporary photographs are useful for documenting

the current condition of trail features, particularly when

paired with historic photographs taken from similar

vantage points, as shown in Figure 12. A video of a trail

is also useful. With visual documentation it is important

to maintain a concise record of the trail name, number,

and location within the trail. For highly crafted trail

features, sketches, measured sections, and plans are

useful for subsequent phases of analysis and treatment.

All features of a trail should be inventoried, if possible, at

a cursory or comprehensive level (Sidebar 4). For a

cursory inventory, a map and a scale bar are used to

determine the length of trail segments. The types of

features and conditions encountered on the trail are

recorded but not their specific location. The width of

the trail should also be measured at key points. For a

comprehensive inventory, a measuring wheel or GPS

unit should be used to document the trail route, length,
14 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

Trail Conference has developed an assessment process

to identify key features and analyze trail maintenance

and land management needs for trail sections within the

long distance trail.22

ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

The analysis and evaluation component of the CLR

compares existing conditions with historic conditions in

order to assess the integrity of historic trails and associated features. To determine the historic character of a

trail, one must understand its historic and existing

conditions, as well as its associated contexts. A trail may

be historically significant for its association with historic

events or notable persons, its distinctive construction, or

its association with prehistory or history. The National

Register of Historic Places has articulated the general

criteria for assessing the significance and integrity of

historic districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects.

These criteria can be adapted to the evaluation of

historic trails for CLR purposes as demonstrated in the

accompanying sidebars (Sidebars 5 and 6).23 This

comparison is facilitated by the identification of landscape characteristics and features that contribute or do

not contribute to the historic character of the trail.

Landscape characteristics and features, including processes and physical forms, are the tangible evidence of

the activities of people who shaped the landscape or

trail.24 The evaluation includes a brief description of

historic and existing conditions, as well as a determination of whether a particular characteristic or feature of

the trail contributes to its significance as a whole. Trail

characteristics or features defined as “contributing” are

those that were present during the period of significance

and survive or are replacements in-kind of historic

features. The analysis and evaluation section identifies

features that should be preserved and those that should

be removed or mitigated.

Many trails are listed in the National Register of Historic

Places. Trails can be listed as historic sites, as parts of

historic districts, or as part of a multiple property

nomination. A major trail feature such as a bridge,

cairn, earthwork, or tunnel may also be listed as a

historic structure. A trail-related feature such as a

SIDEBAR 4:

SAMPLE LIST OF TRAIL-RELATED FEATURES

Design and Layout: origin, destination, relationship to

significant natural features, width, grade/profile, curvature, switchbacks, junctions, views and vistas, cut/fill

slopes, planted vegetation

Guides: fences, stiles, scree wall curbing (stone or log),

railings, signs, blazes, cairns, plaques

Drainage Structures: culverts, side drains, water bars,

water dips, ditches

Retaining Structures: coping stones, log or stone

walls, checks, log or stone cribs, rip rap, iron pins 

Crossings: stepping stones, bog bridges (split-log,

topped-log; timber), stream bridges (note material, design

& construction techniques: log, timber, or laminate;

stringer, truss, suspension, etc.; style, materials, and

dimensions of footings & pilings, railings, etc.) 

Steps, Rungs, and Ladders: stone steps (rock-and-earth,

set/tuck-behind, rock-on-rock or slab-laid, cut steps), log steps,

foot and hand rungs, steel rung ladders, log ladders

Tread: edgings (log or stone), surface materials (soil,

gravel, ledge, stone, concrete, bituminous asphalt,

corduroy logs), turnpiking

Trail-related Structures: benches, shelters, tent sites,

camp grounds, lookout towers, comfort stations and

privies, trail heads, assembly areas, parking lots, constructed water features

Associated Cultural Features: archeological sites

(including associated vegetation), traditional use sites,

historic sites 

Associated Natural Features: water (streams, water

falls, lakes, ponds, springs), native vegetation (woodland,

prairie, desert), wildlife, geologic formations

and features. Written notes should be supplemented

with photographs keyed to the linear distance from the

trailhead. The materials, dimensions, and construction

style should be recorded.

The inventory can be combined with a log of corrective

work needed, which can also be keyed to linear

distance from the trailhead. A comprehensive inventory

is useful to both augment archival research and inform

subsequent steps in the CLR process. This record of

existing conditions will serve as the benchmark for

ongoing management of the trail.21 The Appalachian
HISTORIC TRAILS 15

monument or marker may also be listed as a historic

object. Typically trails are listed as part of a historic

district or a thematically-linked multiple property

nomination. Using the National Register criteria for

evaluation, trails may be significant in many ways as

previously highlighted in the brief history. For example,

trails may be recognized for their association with

events that have contributed to our country’s history

(Criterion A), such as the Oregon Trail; recognized for

their association with significant individuals (Criterion B),

such as explorers Meriwether Lewis and William Clark;

possess high artistic or architectural values (Criterion C),

such as the trails in Zion National Park built by the NPS

between 1917 and the 1930s; or may yield information significant in the country’s prehistory or history

(Criterion D), such as the earliest trails in Yosemite

National Park.25

The National Register defines seven aspects of integrity

that can be used to evaluate the degree to which a trail

retains its historic character (Sidebar 5). A trail that was

partially rerouted, leaving a section closed or no longer

maintained may still retain its historic integrity. However, if the origin, destination, or trail corridor has been

substantially altered or if historically significant sections

have been closed, changed or obliterated, integrity may

be compromised and only a portion of the trail may be

significant. For example, along designated National

Historic Trails there are many sites and even trail

segments that are listed in the National Register of

Historic Places, such as the Barlow Road on the

Oregon Trail. In other cases, an individual trail may not

be noteworthy, but a network of trails may be significant

as part of a larger circulation system such as the trail

system at Acadia National Park. Studying the resource

holistically is recommended, such as an integrated

circulation system of roads, bridle paths, trails and

associated developed areas within a park. Sidebar 6

provides several examples of National Historic Trails

and National Park trails, the criteria for which they were

listed, and the physical aspects that contribute to their

integrity.

TREATMENT APPROACH

After documenting a trail’s historical development,

determining its significance, and evaluating its integrity, a

long-term treatment and management approach should

be chosen. The development of a CLR treatment

section is typically a collaborative process, involving

managers, field staff, representatives from associated

communities and organizations, and multidisciplinary

expertise such as a historian, archeologist, ethnographer,

wildlife biologist, and historical landscape architect.

Goals for treatment are defined and a range of alternatives may be developed. Based on the Secretary of the

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties

with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes,

four types of treatment are defined below with trailspecific examples of each.

Preservation allows for measures necessary to sustain the

existing form, integrity, and materials of a trail. This

treatment includes stabilization work, ongoing maintenance, and repair of historic materials and features, such

Figure 16. The West Rim - Angels Landing Trail in Zion

National Park, which ascends 1,700 feet to the summit, is

listed in the National Register under criterion C for its

exceptional rustic style design and construction and contains

extensive switchbacks, stonework, railings, and chiseled steps.

(Zion National Park)
16 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

SIDEBAR 5: EVALUATION OF INTEGRITY FOR TRAILS

Aspect of 

Integrity

Trail Characteristics and Features Retains 

Integrity

Does Not 

Retain Integrity

Location • Describe how the route is influenced by natural systems and 

features, including the surrounding landforms, geology, and 

hydrology

• Describe changes in microclimates and plant communities. 

• Describe the three dimensional spatial organization of a trail, 

including the ground, vertical and overhead planes, which is 

often referred to as the trail corridor. 

• Identify a boundary width for the trail corridor, which may be 

widened to protect adjacent resources and critical viewsheds.

Continued use 

of the historic 

route or the 

presence of 

the historic 

route that is 

abandoned but 

not obliterated

Substantial 

reroutes and 

obliteration of 

the historic route

Design • Describe the evolution of the trail route and its lack or 

presence of constructed features, including associated roads, 

canals or other circulation systems. 

• Determine whether the trail route was selected to orient 

the traveler to framed vistas of a peak, tower, or landscape 

features that are designed or natural. 

• Determine if there are clusters of buildings, structures and 

associated spaces that relate to the trail and historic links to 

places obscured by subsequent development

• Determine whether the trail itself is a contributing resource 

to a larger designed circulation network.

• Describe the overall landform, as well as the trail’s slope, 

solar aspect, elevation, and response to topography. 

• Describe the trail character and whether it is straight, 

winding, connected to water bodies, or evenly graded 

between scenic knolls with extensive switchbacks.

• Consider whether the historic route is a contributing 

characteristic and should be preserved through an 

ecologically sensitive area.

Evidence of 

the design 

style or design 

standards from 

the period of 

significance

Redesign, 

realignment, 

or obliteration 

of design from 

the period of 

significance

Setting • Describe how the surrounding land use may have changed 

through time and influenced trail development or use. 

• Describe historical and contemporary land uses and 

determine what types are appropriate.

• Identify overlooks, summit destinations, and routes along 

ledges that may have been selected for broad, open views; 

or determine if migration or hunting trails may have been 

strategically located for protection and concealment. 

• Describe the overall character of a trail, exposed or 

concealed, and specific views and vistas that may be 

contributing. 

The presence 

of the setting 

or views from 

the period of 

significance

Loss of the trail 

corridor setting, 

important sites, 

destinations 

and views due 

to subsequent 

development

Materials • Describe the materials used for structures that are 

associated with the route, such as culverts, trailheads, 

retaining walls, bridges and tunnels. 
HISTORIC TRAILS 17

SIDEBAR 5: EVALUATION OF INTEGRITY FOR TRAILS

Aspect of 

Integrity

Trail Characteristics and Features Retains 

Integrity

Does Not 

Retain Integrity

Materials

(continued)

• Describe materials used for buildings, such as hotels, cabins, 

shelters, monuments, towers, or developed areas that are key 

nodes or destinations within a trail system. 

• Identify constructed elements that are contributing features 

and recent elements that are not.

• Document the materials used for constructed water features, 

such as dams, canals, springs, constructed waterfalls, or 

reservoirs, which may influence the route and purpose of the 

trail. 

• Describe stone, wood, and iron small-scale features such 

as retaining walls, railings, and steps, that contribute to trail 

character. 

• Document the types and dimensions of construction 

materials that are contributing characteristics.

• Identify native plant communities or cultivated landscapes 

that may be associated with the trail’s alignment or historical 

use. 

• Determine whether wooded or open areas, individual trees, 

groves, or wildflower meadows are contributing features.

The repair of 

tread, crossings, 

drainage 

features 

or plant 

communities in 

the same style 

as the period 

of significance

Loss or 

replacement of 

materials from 

the period of 

significance

Workmanship See materials above.

• Describe the construction methods used for structures that 

are associated with the route, such as culverts, trailheads, 

retaining walls, railings, steps, bridges and tunnels. 

• Describe the construction methods for buildings, such as 

hotels, cabins, shelters, monuments, towers, or developed 

areas that are key nodes or destinations within a trail system.

• Document constructed water features, such as dams, canals, 

springs, constructed waterfalls, or reservoirs, which may 

influence the route and purpose of the trail.

The presence 

of trail 

structures and 

features, such 

as bridges, 

walls, steps, 

planting design 

and associated 

buildings that 

date to the 

period of 

significance

Loss of 

workmanship 

from the period 

of significance

Feeling See setting, design, materials, workmanship.

• Describe the overall feeling of the trail corridor with respect 

to its setting, topography, views, designed elements, presence 

or lack of built structures, and associated trail features.

The presence 

of a trail 

corridor 

or setting, 

views, design 

elements, and 

materials from 

the period of 

significance

Dramatic change 

in use, setting, 

views, design 

elements, or 

destinations

Association • Identify cultural events and practices that may have influenced 

trail development and route, such as seasonal or ceremonial 

use. 

• Determine whether traditional uses are so significant as to 

influence restrictions on the use of a trail for a particular day 

or season, or result in the development of parallel routes for 

non-traditional users.

• Determine whether prehistoric and early historic trails 

contain archeological sites that require protection.

Physical 

evidence of 

associated sites, 

uses, or cultural 

traditions 

Loss of associated 

sites, uses, or 

cultural traditions
18 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

SIDEBAR 6: EXAMPLES OF TRAILS LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER

Bold titles indicate the name on the National Register or National Historic Landmark forms.

The Glacier National Park Multiple Property Listing includes three distinct trail loops, North Circle, South Circle, and Inside Circle

(made up of 13 individual trails), with a period of significance of 1890 to 1945 and key dates of 1911 and 1919. The trails were initially built by

the Glacier Park Hotel Company to link scenic areas with tent camps and eight chalets. Beginning in 1929 the NPS reconstructed the trail

system. The 163-mile district is listed under criteria A and C as an exceptional recreational system and for the physical development of rustic

architecture and landscape design by the NPS. The trail boundary is ten feet to each side of the centerline, with broader areas to incorporate

associated buildings and structures.

The Bryce Canyon National Park Multiple Property Submission identifies the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) as building the

Under-the-Rim Trail, 32 miles long, and Riggs Spring Fire Trail, 8 miles long, between 1934 and 1944. The trails are listed under criteria A and

C. The nomination relies on the context provided by the multiple property documentation form entitled “Historic Park Landscapes in

National and State Parks (1993).”26 The trail boundary is ten feet to each side of the centerline.

The Mount Rainier National Park National Historic Landmark District identifies the 93-mile Wonderland Trail as a contributing

resource that encircles Mount Rainier. The nominated historic district includes most of the front-country developed areas within the park, as

well as historic backcountry structures associated with the trail. The NHL district was designated under the themes of “Expressing Cultural

Values” and “Transforming the Environment” for the period of 1904 to 1957 because of its many examples of rustic architecture, park village

plans, and other aspects of 1920s and 30s national park planning and design. The trail passes through a federally designated Wilderness Area

and maintenance must be accomplished within the guidelines for this area. For most sections of the trail, the boundary is five feet to each side

of the centerline, with broader areas to incorporate associated buildings and structures.

In Multiple Resources for Zion National Park seven trails are listed in the National Register. The Angels Landing – West Rim Trail, East

Rim Trail, Canyon Overlook Trail, Emerald Pools Trail, Grotto Trail, Hidden Canyon Trail, and Gateway to the Narrows Trail are all listed

for their NPS and CCC construction and improvements between 1925 and 1949, some of which were built under the direct supervision of

Chief Engineer Frank Kittredge. All have exceptional stonework including rubble stone walls, chiseled steps, handrails, switchbacks, and are

intertwined with natural features. The trails are listed under criterion C as exceptional examples of NPS Rustic style design and construction.

The East Rim Trail, is also listed under Criterion A for Native American origins and use by pioneers with an extended period of significance

that includes 1875 to 1949. A boundary width is not defined.

The Lolo Trail National Historic Landmark is a 92-mile-long trail that extends from Lolo, Montana to Weippe Prairie, Idaho. The route is

listed as a transportation corridor under Criterion A for its association with exploration and settlement and for Native American ethnic

heritage, and Criterion B for its association with Meriwether Lewis, William Clark, Toby (Shoshoni guide), and Sacajewea (Shoshoni

interpreter). The prehistoric route connects the Columbia River basin and the Missouri River basin through the Bitterroot Mountains. The

route was used by the Nez Perce in their annual journeys to the buffalo plains in the east and was followed by Lewis & Clark and their

Shoshoni guides in 1805, representing one of the most arduous stretches of their expedition. The route also contains significant ethnographic, archeological, and historic resources associated with Nez Perce and the Nez Perce War of 1877. The trail extends over private, local,

state, and federal lands, with most owned by the U.S. Forest Service. The 92-mile corridor covers 86,000 acres and is at least a half mile wide

and defined by a boundary line of 400 miles. Some sections are up to a mile wide where the trail diverges, wanders through difficult terrain, or

is difficult to locate. The route has a high level of integrity with 32 contributing sites and 382 identified segments.27 To preserve the sensitive

cultural and natural resources associated with the trail, the U.S. Forest Service established a permit system for access to the area.

The Hood River County Historic District in Oregon includes a 30-mile section of the Barlow Road, a segment of the Oregon Trail listed in

the National Register under Criterion A as an exploration, settlement and transportation route. The route was marked by Samuel Barlow in

1845 and operated as a toll road from 1846 to 1919, providing pioneers with an alternative route to the Willamette Valley. The route crosses

over local and state owned land, but is predominantly on U.S. Forest Service lands within Mount Hood National Forest. Many sections of the

original route and wagon ruts are still evident. The trail boundary is 600 feet to each side of the road trace, with some wider sections.

In Historic Resources of Acadia National Park Multiple Property Listing, the historic trail system of 250 individual trails covering 225

miles has been determined eligible for the National Register, with a period of significance from the 1860s to 1942. A network of

unconstructed recreation trails grew in popularity beginning in the 1860s. In 1890, local village improvement associations began marking,

mapping, and maintaining these trail and built many additional highly crafted trails. In the 1930s the Civilian Conservation Corps further

expanded the system. The trails are eligible under criteria A and C for the unprecedented role of the local village improvement associations in

land protection, community development, and exceptional trail construction and high quality stonework, and for the role of the CCC. Many

of the trails are no longer marked or actively used but can still be found in the park. These have been documented using GPS and GIS

technology. The trail boundary is fifteen feet to each side of the centerline, with broader areas to incorporate associated buildings and

monuments.

In Yosemite National Park, as part of the Yosemite Valley Historic District, four trails built between 1858 and 1920 are listed. The trails

include the Mist Trail to Vernal and Nevada Falls, the Four Mile Trail up to Glacier Point, the Yosemite Falls Trail, and the Valley Loop Trail.

The district is listed for Criteria A, B, C, and D for its seminal role in the preservation of natural scenery, association with preeminent artists

and conservationists, high quality stonework, significant trail design, and archeological sites. The trail boundary is ten feet to each side of the

centerline.
HISTORIC TRAILS 19

trail for the purpose of depicting its appearance at a

specific period of time and in its historic location.

Though this is an uncommon treatment, reconstruction

of a trail or trail segment would be appropriate if it had

been destroyed or if the pre-trail landscape was

determined so significant that its re-creation was critical

to the interpretive mission of the park and only if the

documentation exists to reconstruct an accurate

duplication of historic features. For National Park

Services resources, this treatment requires the approval

of the Director of the National Park Service.

For large trail networks, with multiple layers of significance and management needs, treatment alternatives

may differ within management zones. Defining these

management zones requires multidisciplinary input, as

underscored by the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act

(NHPA) compliance procedures. Management zones

can be used to organize the CLR treatment section and

recommendations.

Compliance

Selection of a treatment and management approach is

done in accordance with the National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 106 of the National

Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) to ensure interdisciplinary involvement and systematic consideration of the

human environment. For parks, following compliance

procedures involves completing an environmental

screening/project review form and determining the

potential effects on cultural resources that are either

listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic

Places. Management alternatives may need to be

developed in accordance with NEPA to consider the

impacts of major federal actions on the affected

environment. Compliance ensures meaningful participation by the public and other stakeholders, development and evaluation of alternative courses of action,

rigorous application of scientific and technical information in the decision making process, consultation with

expertise through multidisciplinary teams, and attention

to mitigation measures, pollution prevention measures,

and sustainable management principles.28 For historic

trails, actions that require NEPA compliance include

opening, major relocation, or closing a major trail;

as the repair of a wall that has collapsed or steps that

have slipped. Because preservation prescribes maintenance of trail features as they currently exist, it is often

the best treatment approach for a recently designated

historic trail, where a detailed inventory of historic

features has yet to be completed. For a trail that has

suffered from severe erosion and subsequent loss of

surface material, it may not be possible or desirable to

preserve the existing condition. Preservation may

require restrictions on the number of trail users by

determining a carrying capacity for the route that

prevents further erosion. Preservation may not be

feasible if trail features were originally constructed with

local natural resources that can no longer be used for

repair work, such as large fir or redwood trees, or

pond-side gravel.

Rehabilitation acknowledges the need to meet continuing or changing uses through alterations or new

additions, while retaining the historic character. This

treatment allows for compatible yet distinguishable

materials, which may be brought in from non-local

sources. For example, tread material can be imported

to stabilize the pathway in sensitive natural and cultural

resource areas. For trails with high use, rehabilitation

allows for updating trail markings and sign systems,

applying new surface materials and drainage features,

rerouting sections of trail without obliterating historic

features, or other measures necessary to sustain a

durable and safe tread. All modifications require careful

specifications to ensure that historic materials, features,

and spatial relationships are protected.

Restoration is the process of accurately depicting the

form, features, and character of a trail at a particular

time in history, while removing evidence of other

periods. This treatment requires a thorough understanding of the construction methods and materials for

the period of significance. For trails with high design,

ceremonial, or archeological significance, where

limitations on use are feasible to protect restored

features, this approach may be appropriate. For softsurface trails that are heavily used, restoration may be

difficult because of the need to modify the tread

material, retaining walls, and/or drainage features.

Reconstruction allows for new construction that replicates the form, features, and detailing of a non-surviving
20 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

extensive vista clearing; management of trails in fragile

environments or rare habitats; and construction of

associated features such as parking areas and facilities.

Compliance may be necessary for activities such as

extensive regrading for accessibility, rerouting, restoration, or rehabilitation of a historically significant trail or a

trail that passes through a significant cultural site.29 For a

long term or extensive trail rehabilitation project, a

programmatic agreement with a list of programmatic

categorical exclusions may be developed for repetitive

procedures or a series of rehabilitation projects within a

historic trail network.

Format of a CLR Treatment Section

Once a treatment approach is selected, a CLR treatment section should convey three levels of information:

1) An overall treatment philosophy and guiding

principles (Sidebar 7);

2) Guidelines for types of features common to many

trails or trail segments; and

3) Specific guidelines for individual trails or trail

segments.

For primitive trails with few constructed features, a

recap of the evolution of the trail and its historical

functions, an overview of its general appearance and

character-defining features, and a summary of contemporary issues, such as carrying capacity and types of

appropriate use, provides the necessary background for

treatment recommendations.

For trails with many constructed features, more

extensive descriptions of the historic materials, construction methods, and contemporary management

concerns are needed to develop treatment recommendations. Since many trail features are rustic and

assembled with local wood and stone, guidelines can

offer a range of parameters, e.g., bridge railings to

consist of logs between 4 and 6 inches in diameter or

stone steps must be between 16 and 24 inches wide.

SIDEBAR 7: EXAMPLE OF TREATMENT

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following treatment recommendations were developed for the rehabilitation and maintenance of the

historic hiking trail system in Acadia National Park.30

• Preserve as much of the historic trail system as

possible. Replace in-kind or rehabilitate historic

features such as steps, bridges, walls, ladders, rungs,

drainage, tread, markings, memorial plaques, and other

historic trail features

• Maintain historic trail routes, with their winding or

straight character, and names where possible

• Reroute trails only when necessary to preserve historic

resources or stabilize the tread, try to retain the

character and design intent of the trail

• Retain original trail width where possible and allow for

rehabilitation work to guide and contain foot traffic on

designated trails

• Protect associated scenic, natural, and cultural features

that are part of the attractions and destinations of the

trail system, including rock formations, vegetation,

water bodies, views, buildings, structures, developed

areas, plaques, and monuments

• Preserve the original choice of materials and methods

used to construct the trails

• Prevent further dissection of natural areas by roads,

reduce traffic, and disperse hikers to preserve the

wilderness setting of the trail system

• Preserve and rehabilitate village connector trails to

preserve the feeling of hiking from a village into

wilderness

• Encourage public transportation to trailheads to reduce

automobile use and enhance the island experience

• Use modern construction materials and methods that

reduce material and labor costs and enhance durability

where they are not visible or do not detract from the

historic character

• Use historic or contemporary methods to produce the

same style of historic workmanship

• Preserve association with the four surrounding villages

and their local trail systems

• Preserve cultural traditions and protect archeological

sites

• Preserve association with park recreation areas and

facilities.
HISTORIC TRAILS 21

For both primitive and highly constructed trails, historic

and contemporary photographs, diagrams, and text

should convey the guidelines or parameters for trail

work. Historic photographs can be used to show the

construction of historic features, or be paired with

contemporary photographs to illustrate compatible yet

distinguishable differences in construction. Historic

photographs also can be paired with diagrams to

demonstrate underlying maintenance and construction

techniques (Figure 17). Diagrams can be developed to

show concealed features that aid in preserving historic

character by improving durability. In all cases, graphic

illustrations supported with concise text, aid in conveying the character, scale, and composition of the historic

trail and its unique features. These guidelines are

typically developed in collaboration with field staff to

ensure their feasibility.

Figure 17. Historic photograph of Great Pond Trail constructed

by the CCC in 1937 and contemporary detail showing walled

causeway construction for a pond-side trail. (National Archives;

NARA MA and Acadia National Park, Barter and Baldyga)

TRAIL TREATMENT CONSIDERATIONS

This section discusses concerns common to many trail

systems, with examples from across the country. In

order to determine the best treatment and management strategy for a trail, it is essential to understand the

features that contribute to the trail’s historic character

and significance.

Primitive and Vernacular Trails

Many historic trails are significant for their primitive

origins and association with Native American use such

as the Lolo Trail from Montana to Idaho. Others are

significant for their association with more recent broad

social or historical patterns, such as American pioneer

and settlement trails and long-distance recreation trails

such as the Appalachian National Scenic Trail. For

historic trails associated with broad social patterns,

because of the scarcity of constructed features, the

associated archeological sites, traces, or erosion caused

by wagon ruts define their historic character. For

recreational trails, distinctive design and construction

features or key location decisions define their historic

character. In both cases, the routes may be direct, have

multiple branches, or lead through rugged terrain.

Adding constructed features, making improvements for

increased use or accessibility, or applying highly crafted

trail design standards may be inappropriate. These

decisions need to weigh the need for change versus the

effects on the historic integrity and appearance. For

trails to retain their primitive character, it may be

necessary to determine a carrying capacity and limit use

through a permit process or to restrict trail use during

seasons when the trail is most vulnerable to erosion.

In some cases rerouted sections or a parallel route may

be necessary to support contemporary use of a primitive trail. For example, steep and eroded sections of

the Appalachian National Scenic Trail have been

rerouted to follow side hill alignments with a more

gradual slope and improved drainage. Trail sections and

campsite locations near sensitive archeological sites or

fragile environments have been relocated to prevent

impacts to natural and cultural resources. Steep

sections of trail on exposed ledges with erosion have

also been relocated to follow safer routes.
22 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

Safety

Safety-related trail treatment measures include signs,

railings, barriers, tread, and bridges. Historic barriers,

such as dry-laid stone walls or iron, wood, or cable

railings at precipitous overlooks, have often proved

inadequate. The potential for loss of life or serious

injury must be considered carefully on trails that attract

high numbers of users with varying abilities. Handrails

along ledges, over bridges, and at overlooks must be

capable of withstanding exposed conditions and heavy

use, such as extensive leaning, sitting, hanging, and

vandalism. To meet the Secretary’s of the Interior’s

standards, any added safety features should be compatible yet distinguishable from historic features. In many

cases this may result in the substitution of steel for rustic

wooden features or the addition of steel rails and pins

to rustic stone retaining walls (see Figure 10).

In remote areas, warning signs that are difficult to

remove or vandalize may be added to alert travelers

that a particular route contains hazards such as exposed

ledges, drops, loose footing, or potential flood conditions. Use of signs may be limited in designated

wilderness areas where use of the area is acknowledged to be at the visitor’s own risk. Warning signs

may be more appropriately placed closer to the trail

head, where information may be paired with accessibility information.

Accessibility, Topography, and Signs

The United States Access Board is currently developing

Accessibility Guidelines for trails as described in the

Report of the Regulatory Negotiation Committee on

Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas.

31

These guidelines describe the ideal provisions for tread,

width, openings, protruding objects, obstacles, passing

space, running slope, cross slope, rest intervals, edge

protection, and signs. The report describes exceptions

that define allowable departures from these provisions.

For historic trails, exceptions are allowed where

compliance would cause substantial harm to cultural,

historic, religious, or significant natural features or

characteristics. Exceptions are also allowed where the

provisions are not feasible due to terrain or prevailing

construction practices. Despite these allowable

Figure 18. Proposed sign format provides more information on

trail conditions for users with disabilities. (Beneficial Designs, Inc.)
HISTORIC TRAILS 23

exceptions, many historic trails are accessible to people

with disabilities. In some cases, measures taken to

improve accessibility may also enhance historic character and sustainability. For example, the CCC built

many trails with an uninterrupted tread surface 42

inches wide, including closed culverts and bridges that

were surfaced with compacted gravel. After years of

neglect or low maintenance, the original closed culverts

may have been replaced with open culverts and split-log

bridges. If a higher level of maintenance can be reestablished, restoration of historic features and improved accessibility may be achievable. In many places,

the accessible trails with gentler grades may be the

most sustainable as they are less susceptible to surface

erosion. In addition, trails built with a substantial

subgrade may drain better and retain a hard compacted

surface that benefits all users and reduces long-term

maintenance requirements. Materials may be added to

increase the smoothness and durability of the tread.32

A key component to accessibility is providing information to the public on trail characteristics. People tend to

select trails based on their personal interests and

abilities. Trail signs and maps can be improved to

provide specific information about the trail conditions

and difficulty levels. One example is the Universal Trail

Assessment Process (UTAP) developed by Beneficial

Designs, Inc. to create informative signs, guidebooks,

and web sites. A recommended UTAP sign lists the

trail length, destination, average and maximum grade,

along with information about the cross slope, duration

of steep grades, average and minimum trail width,

surface hardness, and the presence of obstacles,

hazards, and facilities (Figure 18). Such signs can also

include drawing of the trail profile to show changes in

grade and length.

Many historic trails have changed names or marking

systems several times. This creates a dilemma as to

which name and marking system to use. If subsequent

trails are added, there are questions about whether to

use the same marking system. For National Historic

Trails, a uniform marking system helps users associate

trail fragments and associated historic sites and features

(Figure 19). At Acadia National Park, trails dating to

different historic periods are all marked with similar blue

blazes in order to minimize confusion in remote areas.

Figure 19. National Historic Trail logo for the Oregon Trail.

Figure 20. Historic cairn at Acadia National Park. The length

of the top stone indicates the direction of the trail. (NPS,

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 1995)
24 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

Trails built in Acadia in the 1800s and early 1900s

continue to be marked with historic cairns, which are

rebuilt when toppled (Figure 20). This style of cairn is

not used on contemporary additions to the trail system.

An overabundance of trail blazes and signs can detract

from the scenic purpose of a trail. Many trail maintenance guides contain explicit guidelines on the use of

blazes, signs and markers to discourage overuse and

ensure their proper location.33

Many historic trails have multiple names that have been

used during different historic periods. Management

documents should promote the consistent use of

names for trails with clearly identified endpoints to

minimize confusion.34

In some situations, historic trails may be deliberately left

unmarked, or a historic marking may be removed in

response to evolving cultural or environmental concerns. For example, trails to sacred sites may be left

unmarked and a non-historic route constructed to

direct trail users around these historic trails and sacred

sites. Similar actions can help preserve natural areas that

have been deemed too fragile to accommodate

contemporary use. Interpretive waysides may be used

to explain the significance of the area.

Historic trail signs are considered souvenirs to vandals.

For trail users, a missing sign can result in confusion, or

worse, becoming lost. Since there is little protection

for historic signs in the field, they may need to be kept

in a museum. Replacement signs should resemble

historic signs but will be most likely manufactured using

contemporary tools. Strategies for minimizing vandalism include: bolting rather than nailing signs to posts and

using specialized bolts that are impossible to remove

without specific tools, such as Tufnut,TM Vandlgard

NutTM and Teenut.TM 35 Other strategies include

inscribing information on posts that are sunk into the

ground, installing posts with underground anchor bolts

or crossbars, and piling large stones at the base of each

post.

Another dangerous practice is the construction of false

cairns that lead people off the marked route. Options

for preventing this situation include using a unique

construction style that is difficult to replicate, using iron

pins to anchor route cairns, educating hikers on how to

distinguish a historic cairn from a contemporary fabrication, or increasing ranger patrols.

Natural Features, Systems, and

Resource Management Issues

Many trails were built in association with a natural

feature, such as a river, lake, rock formation, or

mountain, or as a connection between two such

features. These features, often referred to as “control

points” in trail construction manuals, are key elements

in the trail planning process. The trail serves as a safe

and comfortable connector between these points.

Identifying and protecting these control points is critical

to preserving the intent and integrity of a historic trail.

Like natural features, natural systems such as waterways,

geological formations, soil types, or plant communities,

may have influenced the route of a historic trail.

Identifying the relationship of the trail to these natural

systems may result in the development of treatment

guidelines for land management practices, such as the

preservation of field patterns, along with opportunities

for educational information on waysides or brochures.

Most historic trails predate natural resource protection

policies for threatened and endangered species, invasive

plants, clean water, wetlands, and resource extraction.

Preserving the trail route or the materials used to

construct a historic trail may conflict with these policies.

Botanists, biologists, or wildlife specialists may survey

areas to locate natural resources of concern.

In some areas, such as wetland and alpine zones,

historic trails often become rutted, eroded, and

braided.36 Either the natural resources or the trail itself

may benefit from closure during particular seasons.

These trails may require rerouting or a higher level of

construction than was historically present. In wet areas

it may be necessary to stabilize the historic trail and

protect the surrounding resources by using raised log or

board-walks, or construct stone causeways with

adequate cross-drainage systems. Alternatively, a

reroute may be necessary. These improvements may

be added using historic construction methods and

materials found elsewhere on the trail or imported
HISTORIC TRAILS 25

from other locations. While the resultant built features

themselves are not historical, the route and experience

are preserved.

In alpine areas, scree or coping stones to define the trail

edges, cairns placed at regular intervals, raised log or

boardwalks, or causeways with adequate drainage may

be added to direct hikers through fragile habitats. These

built features should be unobtrusive but provide clear

guidance along a comfortable and dry treadway. In

addition, educational signs may be posted or increased

ranger patrols may be desirable. Trails may be closed

for nesting or migration season. Ideally, reroutes

should not eliminate a control point along the trail that

relates to the purpose of the trail, such as a significant

view.

Trail Corridor Protection

Documentation of the history and significance of a trail

may be part of a larger effort to protect a scenic

corridor. Definition of the physical dimensions of the

trail corridor, views, and its historic use and feeling may

lead to zoning and development guidelines or land

protection and acquisition priorities. For example, the

Appalachian National Scenic Trail includes a buffer zone

of up to one mile in order to protect the wilderness

setting of the trail corridor.

Multiple Users, Traditional Use

Patterns, and Archeological Resources

To meet multiple interests, segments of a historic trail

may be rehabilitated for various users, including people

with wheelchairs, horses, bicycles, or dogs. Alterations

necessary to allow for multiple users should be evaluated for their impact on the historic route, grade,

associated features, and feeling. Through an evaluation

process that presents a series of alternatives, it may be

determined that certain uses damage the integrity of the

historic trail and are not appropriate. For example, a

towpath trail may be wide enough to accommodate

multiple users, whereas a narrow hiking trail with

historic stone steps may not. A comprehensive analysis

of all circulation systems within an area will aid in

developing opportunities for different types of use

(Figure 21).

Figure 21. Width studies for different sections of a new

interpretive trail to parallel the historic Battle Road within the

Minute Man National Historical Park. (Carol R. Johnson

Associates, Boston, MA)
26 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

Trails that are considered sacred to certain peoples

require careful treatment to protect spiritual sites or

archeological resources. These routes may have been

used for domestic purposes, work, trade, or led to

ceremonial places that were used by multiple generations or for one significant event. The treatment

approach should be developed in partnership with

affiliated groups and specialists. The use of such trails

for visitor enjoyment and education should be weighed

against impacts to affiliated groups and threats to cultural

resources.

Alternative routes may be necessary to direct people

away from sensitive resources. For example at

Tsankawi, a unit of Bandelier National Monument in

New Mexico, park staff worked in consultation with the

affiliated Pueblo tribe to reduce disturbances to religious

and spiritual sites by eliminating several public trails.

Eroded trails that remained open were hardened by

adding rustic steps, which were cut from non-local, but

similar tufa volcanic stone (Figure 22).

Trail-related Structures

Buildings, structures, and monuments can contribute to

the character and significance of a trail system and require

treatment guidelines to safeguard their integrity. A related

building such as a hotel, cabin, shelter, or tower may be

an integral part of the trail system. In some cases, the

structure will have been determined historically significant, but its relationship to the trail system may not yet

be defined and documented. Treatment recommendations may include the preservation of construction

methods and materials for both the trail and related

structure. Similarly, bridge and tunnel structures require

careful attention in terms of safety, construction methods

and materials. While historic trail bridges should be

replaced in-kind if possible, a compatible yet distinguishable bridge may be necessary to accommodate greater

loads, provide more safety features, or afford a higher

level of accessibility. For example, to replace a historic

wooden bridge of natural rough-cut logs, it may be

necessary to use wider dimensioned logs and secure

them with bolts rather than nails (Figures 23 & 24).

Concealed steel stringers may be added for structural

strength while key elements of the bridge design are

preserved. Materials may be transported to the site

Figure 23. Historic photograph of corduroy bridge constructed

by the CCC in Shenandoah National Park in Virginia. (National

Archives; NARA MD, 79-42, VA, Box 32)

Figure 22. Steps of a similar stone type were added to a

heavily eroded section of a Pueblo trail at the Tsankawi Unit of

Bandelier National Monument. (Bandelier National Monument)
HISTORIC TRAILS 27

instead of following the historic practice of cutting down

nearby live trees.37 For trails with more than one period

of significance, a historian or trail manager may be able to

discern bridge characteristics from different periods and

determine the appropriate treatment style (Figure 25).

Some trails include significant monuments, stone

markers, tablets, and benches that are associated either

with the trail’s construction, dedication, or some other

form of recognition. These features should be documented and inspected by a specialist, since markers and

monuments are vulnerable to damage by vandals and

natural processes. Significant trail-related features that can

not be protected should be catalogued, removed to

collection storage and an appropriate replacement should

be installed along the trail.

Interface with Other Circulation Systems, Reroutes, and Parallel Routes

Many trails are either former transportation corridors or

are linked to existing ones. Variations in width, surface

materials, marking systems, and associated features may

differentiate historical routes from other types of transportation corridors. If a rail line or canal towpath is

converted to a trail, the signals, structures, tunnels,

trestles, locks, or bridges should be retained. Features

such as waysides, kiosks, benches, and associated visitor

facilities may be added at intersections and other relevant

points. These additions should be compatible in character yet clearly distinguishable from historic elements.

Maintaining the historic route of a trail can be a challenging goal that will not always be perfectly attained. Many

historic trails were not designed to withstand the volume

of use that they must now accommodate. Native

American trails, early roads, and early recreational trails

often traveled the most direct route without regard for

drainage, sustainable grades or cross slopes. Even some

trails that were carefully built, such as those constructed

by the CCC, may not have adequately addressed water

flow, rock slides, and unstable slopes, or anticipated that a

beaver dam would flood the trail. If the trail cannot be

stabilized, or if there are additional constraints such as

sensitive archeological and ethnographic resources, a

reroute may be necessary.

Figure 24. Examples of alternative bridge decking

characteristics that reflect CCC era bridges. (Acadia National

Park, Barter and Baldyga)
28 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

Before rerouting, control points or key attractions along

the trail should be identified. Rerouted sections should

provide new access to the same points. When the

historic alignment is no longer tenable, another alternative is to design a parallel trail that enables users to

experience the same landscape setting and feeling

without adversely impacting the general location. At

Minute Man National Historical Park in Massachusetts,

an interpretive trail was added that parallels and

intersects with the historic Battle Road to improve

visitor circulation, safety, and enjoyment in the linear

park. The width and surface treatment of the road and

trail differ slightly, but both are compatible with the

interpreted eighteenth-century landscape (Figure 26).

Opening or Closing Historic Trails

Historic routes may be abandoned, forgotten, and

rediscovered. An abandoned trail or trace can serve as

an outdoor archive of historic features that are often

well-preserved from lack of use. Examination of built

features on abandoned trails can provide information

about historic construction methods that have been

altered on heavily used trails either by natural processes

Figure 26. Section of the interpretive trail system in Minute

Man National Historical Park that connects to and is similar in

character to the historic Battle Road. (NPS, Olmsted Center

for Landscape Preservation, Debbie Smith)

Figure 25. Example of bridge specifications for CCC era bridges. (Acadia National Park, Barter and Baldyga)
HISTORIC TRAILS 29

or detrimental treatment. Photographs and measurements of features such as culverts, steps, and retaining

walls on abandoned trails can inform treatment for

other trails. If an abandoned trail is to be reopened, it is

useful to research its origin, purpose, and reasons for

abandonment. It is also important to complete a

comprehensive inventory as soon as possible to

document its appearance prior to reuse.

Documentation may include photographs, video, maps,

measurements, and descriptions. A survey of associated

natural and cultural resources is very important,

particularly if the route leads to significant cultural sites

or bisects a large contiguous natural area. Reopening a

trail creates future maintenance requirements which

should also be considered.

A historic trail may also need to be closed or rerouted.

For example, many historic trails follow logical routes

through mountain saddles and cross streams where

there are broad, gentle banks. Such areas become

desirable camping and picnicking sites, but may also

contain sensitive archeological or natural resource sites.

When closing a trail section, it is better to cover and

obscure access with leaf duff and branches rather than

obliterate historic features, which should be documented and left in place for future reference. For

example, at Valley Forge National Historical Park in

Pennsylvania, a historic cart road that leads to a busy

road was closed and covered with branches and leaves,

but all subsurface features were left intact.

Views, Vistas and Vegetation

Management

Managing views can be difficult in areas where land was

previously cultivated for agriculture or cleared for

timber. These areas historically had expansive views. In

the East, changes in land use and increased land protection have caused many areas to revert to forest. Trails

once described as scenic are now often woodland

corridors to tree-covered summits. Many of the

outlooks that late nineteenth-century concessionaires,

early NPS designers, and the CCC built to provide

sweeping views have become overgrown. Identification of control points is helpful and may lead to selective

clearing for the most significant views. Depending on

the extent of clearing, these actions may require NEPA

compliance.

Natural processes also affect historic trail character

when trails that showcased certain types of vegetation

have their surroundings changed through forest succession. This phenomenon can be particularly problematic

when a name like the “Birch Grove Trail” refers to a

species that is no longer prevalent. The CLR treatment

section should address preservation of plant species,

designed planting configurations, selective thinning and

replacement-in-kind of certain species.

Trails through wooded areas typically require routine

trimming to maintain an open trail corridor. Extensive

removal of understory vegetation to improve views and

remove dead and downed wood for “forest cleaning,”

as was done by the CCC in the 1930s, may no longer

be appropriate from an ecological perspective. A

balanced approach to resource management objectives

may limit the clearing of understory vegetation in some

areas while recommending the thinning of canopy trees

to promote understory growth in other locations.

Revegetation is often needed to rehabilitate disturbed

sites after trail work. Once the characteristics of the

historic vegetation is identified, appropriate plants may

be propagated from local material (a process that may

require up to two years) or purchased from a nursery.

In sensitive habitats, imported tread material should be

sterile and devoid of non-native seeds.

Drainage Structures

Improving drainage with historically compatible design

techniques can improve durability and minimize

maintenance for many decades. For most trails,

drainage is a major issue requiring careful study of the

surrounding topography, soil types, total water flow,

seasonal flow, and direction of trail slope. Ideally, trails

are designed to work with the natural drainage pattern

and water runoff is controlled without eroding the trail

surface.

All drainage measures, even simple side ditches that

collect water and direct it along or away from the trail

require annual maintenance to remove leaves, duff, and
30 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

debris. Where water crosses the trail, drainage features

should suit the level of flow. For sections where light

surface water crosses the trail, out-sloped tread, water

bars, or water dips may be added (Figure 27). Water

dips are desirable because they are less obtrusive and

only minimally interrupt the trail surface, though they

may loose their effectiveness with heavy trail use or

with the heavy flow of storm water. Dips that flatten or

are routinely washed out may need to be replaced with

another form of drainage.

For trails with greater use or more serious drainage

problems, side drains, culverts, and possibly bridges,

should be constructed with the historically appropriate

style and materials. For example, early cart trails and

CCC trails were constructed with closed culverts for an

uninterrupted tread. Some of these culverts are like

small bridges and are remarkable examples of dry-laid

field stone masonry. Other culverts are less evident,

often overlooked and hence not maintained. A damaged section of trail may be the result of a clogged,

closed culvert.

Where such precedents exist, preservation and accessibility may benefit from the restoration, rehabilitation, or

addition of closed culverts. Rehabilitation is often the

most viable strategy. In some cases, historic culverts

may have been constructed entirely of stone, whereas

contemporary replacements may consist of buried metal

pipes with stone headwalls (Figure 28). Careful documentation of the location of drainage features should take

into account the location of the trail with respect to

topography, e.g. sidehill, direct or a switchback trail. The

exact location of drainage features can be documented

using a measuring wheel and/or GPS with field notes in

order to expedite maintenance routines.

New materials and additional drainage may be necessary to preserve sections of historic trails. Underground

drainage, such as concealed pipe culverts may be

necessary. Similarly, subsurface drains using perforated

pipe, gravel and geotextile fabric may aid in directing

water under the trail without altering its appearance,

though such a solution would not be appropriate in a

sensitive archeological area or wilderness area (Figure 29).

Figure 27. A water bar reinforced with stone. A water dip is

similar without the use of stone to direct water off of the trail.

(Acadia National Park, Barter and Baldyga)

Figure 28. A pipe culvert is concealed with stone headwalls and

covered with crushed stone and gravel to provide an

uninterrupted tread. (Acadia National Park, Barter and Baldyga)

Figure 29. Perforated pipes are added below the treadway to

improve drainage but not alter historic character of the

treadway. (Acadia National Park, Barter and Baldyga)
HISTORIC TRAILS 31

Figure 31. Photograph of the Precipice Trail in Acadia National Park and diagrams for installation of iron rungs. (Acadia National Park,

Barter and Baldyga)

Figure 30. Ascent of Half Dome at Yosemite National Park by

steel pipe and cables installed by the CCC in 1939. (National

Archives; NARA MD 79G-17C-4. May 1939)

Retaining Structures, Walls, and Steps

Most trails contain features that reflect their ceremonial,

functional, industrial, or recreational history. These may

include stone piles, railroad signals, iron rungs, or pins.

Some of the most remarkable trails are constructed of

simple materials, such as logs, iron pins, rungs and rails

(Figure 30).

Recognizing and documenting these features can often

guide future decisions on the appropriate use of materials, such as the use of stone instead of wood, or the use

of iron for reinforcement of log or stone retaining walls.

For example, at Mount Rainier National Park, the CCC

used drift pins in bridge construction. A local blacksmith
32 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

is now making similar drift pins to use for replacement

bridges. At Acadia National Park, trails ascend ledges by

iron rungs installed in the 1910s. While some original

rungs remain, many have been replaced using similar

materials and installation methods (Figure 31).

Most trails have some component of dry laid, rubble,

fitted, piled, or reinforced retaining wall, which aids in

travel across slopes and ravines and is often part of a

drainage system. Specifications for wall treatment

should include the type of wall, associated drainage

systems, foundation material, characteristics of the wall

face, batter or relationship of rise to run in the face of

the wall, backfill, and fill and tread surface materials.

For example, at Big Bend National Park in Texas, plans

were developed to rehabilitate a long rubble wall by

preserving the rustic exterior stonework, constructing a

more durable drainage system, foundation, and

backfilling to improve the overall strength of the

structure (Figure 32).

Trails designed primarily for foot traffic may contain

extensive arrangements of rock or wooden steps,

which often date to a historic period of intensive

construction. Although each step and staircase was built

in response to topography and typically used local

materials, work can often be categorized by period of

construction and characteristics. Treatment guidelines

should address layout, materials, step size, rise, run, and

Figure 33. Diagram of slab-laid steps, a common construction

used by the CCC in the 1930s. (Acadia National Park, Barter

and Baldyga)

Figure 34. Diagram of set-behind steps, a contemporary

method used to prevent stones from slipping downhill with

heavy use. (Acadia National Park, Barter and Baldyga)

Figure 35. Diagram of rip-rap steps with random size stones

used to blend into the surrounding landscape. (Acadia National

Park, Barter and Baldyga)

Figure 32. Nearly complete rebuilt wall at Big Bend National

Park. To preserve the rough appearance, stones were placed

with varied orientations. To improve stability, backfill was

carefully laid. The wall was topped with large coping stones

and the load was transferred down through the semi-laid

backfill. (NPS, Steve Griswold)
HISTORIC TRAILS 33

degree of uniformity. Stone steps may be slab-laid,

with each step set on top of the one below, or setbehind, with each step set behind and above the step

below it (Figures 33 & 34). Stones may be cut, uncut

or a combination. The term “rip rap steps” refers to

randomly laid, abutting stones, which provide a

seemingly natural staircase (Figure 35). Shims, or small

stones placed under steps to fill gaps or reduce wobble,

may have been used. The absence of shims generally

indicates a higher level of craftsmanship. Rock steps

may also be accompanied by coping stones, sidewalls,

iron pins, shims, railings, and associated drainage

features.

At Chiricahua National Monument, where there is

extensive CCC era step work, each step or stair type

was classified and a series of stabilization and repair

needs was identified. Guidelines included the repair of

associated walls and footings, mortar replacement,

repair of loose capstones and steps, and the reinforcement of steps using concealed iron retaining bars (Figure 36).

Wooden steps, which are generally less durable, were

usually constructed with locally cut logs. Squared

timbers were also used in more accessible locations.

Log steps were staked in place or secured with rocks,

anchor logs, pins, or trenching techniques. In some

cases, wood steps were used in combination with log

cribs or even more elaborate log ladders requiring a

high degree of craftsmanship. Current regulations may

prohibit replacement with native materials. When

repairs or replacements are necessary, the use of

compatible materials acquired from other locations

should be considered. Dimensions, design techniques,

and workmanship should follow historical precedents.

Tread

Most trails can be classified as either unconstructed,

such as the wagon trails used by pioneers, or constructed, such as those built by the CCC. Treatment of

an unconstructed wagon route, primitive trace, or

“opportunistic trail” formed by repeated use, is particularly difficult since management activities or increased

use can easily alter historic appearances. In some cases,

however, low or moderate use is essential for keeping

the trail open and defined. The carrying capacity of a

Feature FormTrail: Massai Point Nature Trail

Date: October 15, 1999

Feature #: MNT 27

Location: South portion of trail overlooking upper end of Rhyolite

Canyon – approximately 300 feet from trail head.

Context: Hilltop

Aspect: South

Feature Type: Stairway

Size: Small

Feature Description: Stairway constructed of flat tabular to

blocky slabs of rhyolite set in cement mortar on a rubble foundation

abutted to the base of rhyolite pinnacle. Each riser is composed of

two to five individual stones of variable size and covers a vertical

drop of approximately four feet. Voids are filled with small angular

fragments of rhyolite or cement. Stairs lead from trail down to a

platform, created by a stone retaining wall (MNT 28), that provides

a scenic overlook into the dense woodland and rhyolite pinnacles of

upper Rhyolite Canyon. In addition, a metal interpretive sign was

installed on one of the stair steps.Feature Condition: Stairway risers

all show signs of deterioration – cracked and missing stone, collapsed

stones, basal erosion of footings and loss of foundation material –

leading to uneven and potentially unstable step surfaces. While the

abutted portion of the stairway appears stable, the basal footings of

the outer side are actively eroding. The area adjacent to exposed

footings is unstable and subject to channeled drainage from trail

surface. Platform exhibits substantial loss of tread material, thereby

contributing to loosening of retaining wall (MNT 28). The

installation of a metal interpretive sign may have contributed to

deterioration of step. Previous repairs are evident in numerous

cement patches and placement of stones to provide support for

deteriorating stairway foundations.

Figure 36. Treatment work including step repair identified on

historic CCC trail in Chiricahua National Monument.

Chiricahua National Monument Feature Form
34 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

trail needs to be determined and the construction of a

parallel or alternate route may be necessary. For

example, along the Lolo Trail between Montana and

Idaho, continued use is helping to preserve the trail.

Increased use may prompt a permitting process to help

protect the trail from deterioration.

For both unconstructed and constructed trails, increased

use may lead to extensive degradation, particularly the

loss of surface material. Without adequate maintenance, a smooth, graded trail can become a treacherous collection of gullies, rockslides, exposed roots,

protruding stones, and puddles. Once conditions

become this severe, relocation may be necessary or a

major rehabilitation project must be initiated, requiring

extensive labor to stabilize loose materials, control

drainage, and replace surface materials. In such cases,

treatment guidelines need to comprehensively address

the improvement of drainage systems, the stabilization

of tread, and the development of effective maintenance

routines.

Trails that need substantial rebuilding or resurfacing may

require large quantities of stone and gravel. Historically,

these materials were extracted locally. If that is still a

possibility, archeologists, botanists, biologists or wildlife

specialists may need to determine if any local cultural

sites or habitats would be damaged by borrow pits. A

limit may be set on the amount of materials to be

extracted from an area. When larger quantities are

needed, the materials should be transported from

outside protected areas, using the safest, most efficient,

and most resource-sensitive methods available, which

may include wheelbarrows, trucks, all-terrain vehicles,

tractors, helicopters, or pack stock, some of which may

not be feasible in wilderness areas. For trail construction within a designated Wilderness area at Rafferty

Meadow in Yosemite National Park, mules were used

to bring additional tread material to the alpine meadow

(Figure 37). Such actions may require NEPA compliance.

To support a higher level of use, tread composition

may be strengthened by adding subsurface rubble,

checks, and/or surface material additives such as clay or

a soil stabilizer. Subsurface rubble was commonly used

in CCC trails, which typically contained a six to twentyfour-inch layer of stone rubble below the surface to

improve drainage. Subsurface rubble can greatly

improve drainage, but should be used in combination

with other drainage features such as culverts, side

ditches, and water dips. Some trail rehabilitation

projects have included a layer of geotextile fabric

between the rubble and surface material. This is not

recommended, however, especially in backcountry or

wilderness areas, as the fabric inevitably becomes

exposed over time.

Checks may be used to stabilize trail sections that have

gullied or have the potential to gully. Checks are

effective when trail slope is less than twenty percent and

it is not possible to shed water from the trail surface,

such as when a trail travels down a natural gully. When

Figure 38. Diagram showing installation of stone checks

before they are covered with surface gravel. (Acadia National

Park, Barter and Baldyga)

Figure 37. This stone-lined causeway with crowned tread

material was constructed in 1985 through Rafferty Meadow in

Yosemite NP to repair eroded alpine area. Because the trail is

located in a designated Wilderness area, materials were

imported by mule. (NPS, Steve Griswold)
HISTORIC TRAILS 35

added, such as EMC2TM or Road OylTM (a pine resin

binder) both by Soil Stabilization Products or Stabilizer,TM by Stabilizer, Inc., which is an organic binder

made from Plantago, a desert plant. Other methods

include mixing in dry Portland cement or similar binding

agents. The Plantago Soil Stabilizer was used effectively

as a binder and stabilizer on the Minute Man National

Historical Park interpretive trail (see Figure 26).

A series of test sections is recommended in order to

develop a surface mix that can withstand local environmental conditions and trail use, as well as provide a

compatible color and texture with native materials,

since ultimately some of the material will wash from

the trail surface. The material should also be checked

for non-native plant material, especially invasive species.

Figure 39. A section of checks installed to repair a gullied trail shown during and after completion on the Ocean Path at Acadia National

Park. (NPS, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation)

installed and maintained correctly, checks are not

visible, acting as “hidden steps” underneath the evenly

graded tread surface, holding back or “checking” the

uphill infill material—a more subtle and durable solution

than log cribbing. Checks are particularly useful on trails

that travel directly up slopes, such as early migration and

recreation trails that were not carefully laid out (Figures

38 & 39). Checks may not be effective in areas of

poor, loose soils and/or where there is high precipitation. The source of water above a section of checks

should be directed off the trail, if possible, using a

waterbar, dip or other drainage structure.38

For large resurfacing projects, a soil mix may be

imported, allowing for the mechanical mixing of desired

materials. The addition of clay can aid in forming a

compacted tread with a crown, much like a road.

Commercially available soil stabilizers may also be
36 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

CONCLUSION

Historic trails offer unique opportunities to retrace

America’s cultural heritage and experience a sense of

place, history, and natural splendor. Understanding

these resources and making thoughtful treatment and

management decisions enables contemporary users and

future generations to share these experiences.

Preserving a historic trail requires careful planning, a

dedicated group of respectful trail users, and ongoing

maintenance. This planning requires a substantial

amount of time and the involvement of a

multidisciplinary team, including affiliated groups and

specialists. The project team should strive to develop

clear goals and guidelines that are based on a thorough

understanding and analysis of the physical history and

existing conditions of the trail (Sidebar 8).

Trail users are often the best sources for information.

Many can offer multigenerational knowledge and

photographic documentation of historic conditions.

Trail users frequently also serve as stewards, advocates,

and volunteers for the trails. In fact, for the Appalachian

National Scenic Trail, the Long Trail, and many other

trails, volunteer-based organizations serve as full-fledged

management partners that are involved in every aspect

of trail management.

For many historic trails, use has increased dramatically

but maintenance programs have not changed. Dedicated crews depend heavily on oral tradition to pass

along techniques and rely on extensive hand labor and

simple tools, including hand saws, loppers, mattocks,

and pulaskis (Figure 40). Those responsible for the long

term care of a historic trail need to employ an appropriate mix of historic and contemporary construction

methods and materials to ensure the integrity of historic

trails is preserved. Faced with the challenges of limited

funding and the effects of increased use, maintenance is

an increasingly complex task. The best way to meet

this challenge is to develop an approach to trails

stewardship that brings together a wide range of

specialists and other stakeholders to collaborate in the

development of comprehensive, historically informed,

environmentally sensitive, and administratively sustainable treatment and management program.

SIDEBAR 8: CHECKLIST FOR

IMPLEMENTING A SUCCESSFUL PROJECT

• Document cultural and natural resources using all tools

available. Use the Cultural Landscape Report process,

other plans, reports, and inventories, and associated

compliance procedures for both historic (i.e., NHPA)

and natural resources (i.e., NEPA) to develop and work

through alternatives.

• Develop a treatment approach that incorporates the

project goals and objectives, while addressing issues

identified, including safety, structural stability, accessibility, and connections to other circulation systems and

facilities.

• Define historic details to replicate and/or develop new

details that will complement the historic trail. Select

materials that are compatible with the historic trail

system. Develop a consistent identity to link trail

fragments and associated features through signs,

guidance, and information systems.

• Evaluate and mitigate impacts to sensitive natural

resources or other cultural resources by evaluating

reroutes, seasonal closures, parallel routes, or restrictive use.

• Establish relationships with cooperating non-profit

organizations to assist in identifying issues and alternatives, and locating volunteers to work on a project.

• Develop a work plan with all interested parties. Use

experienced crew leaders to teach and serve as

mentors to other crew members.

• Plan for sustained funding of maintenance work.

Figure 40. California Conservation Corps trails crew with

pulaskis and mattocks at a scenic overlook along the trail,

2000. (Peter Lewis)
HISTORIC TRAILS 37

REFERENCES

Government Trail Programs

US Bureau of Land Management

National Landscape Conservation System

1849 C Street, NW, MIB 3123

Washington, DC 20240

US National Park Service

National Trails System Program

1849 C Street, NW (2235)

Washington, DC 20240

www.ncrc.nps.gov/rtca

US Forest Service

Recreation, Heritage, and Wilderness Resources Division

P.O. Box 96090

Washington, DC 20090-6090

US Fish & Wildlife Service

National Trails Program

4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 634

Arlington, VA 22203

Non-Profit Trail Organizations

American Hiking Society

1422 Fenwick Lane

Silver Spring, MD 20910

American Trails

P.O. Box 491797

Redding, CA 96049-1797

www.AmericanTrails.org

Appalachian Trail Conference

799 Washington Street

Harpers Ferry, WV 25425

www.atconf.org

Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics

P.O. Box 997

Boulder, CO 80306

www.lnt.org

Rails-to-Trails Conservancy

1100 17th Street, NW, 10th Floor

Washington, DC 20036

www.railtrails.org

Tread Lightly!, Inc.

298 24th Street, Suite 325

Ogden, UT 84401

www.treadlightly.org

Useful Websites

US Federal Highway Administration,

Forest Service Publications List

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/fspubs/index.htm

Herold, Philip, Jean Albreacht, and Laura Morales.

Trail Planning, Construction, & Maintenance.

University of Minnesota.

http://forestry.lib.umn.edu/bib/trls.phtml

South Carolina State Trails Program.

“Trails Bibliography.” and Jim Schmid, 2001.

“Trail Quotes: From Advocacy to Wilderness.”

http://www.sctrails.net/trails/LIBRARY/Quotes.pdf

Trail Manuals

Birchard, William Jr. and Robert Proudman. 2000. Appalachian

Trail Design, Construction and Maintenance. Second Edition.

Harpers Ferry, WV: Appalachian Trail Conference.

Birkby, Robert C. 1996. Lightly on the Land: The SCA Trail-Building

and Maintenance Manual. Seattle: The Mountaineers.

Demrow, Carl and David Salisbury. 1998. The Complete Guide to

Trail Building and Maintenance. Third Edition. Boston: Appalachian

Mountain Club Books.

Flink, Charles, Robert Searns and Kristine Olka. 2001 Trails for the

Twenty-first Century: Planning, Design, and Management Manual

for Multi-use Trails. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Griswold, Stephen. 1996. A Handbook on Trail Building and

Maintenance. Three Rivers, CA: Sequoia Natural History

Association.

Hesselbarth, Woody. 1997. Trail Construction and Maintenance

Notebook. Missoula, MT: US Department of Agriculture,

US Forest Service.

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/fspubs/index.htm

Kenway, Lester. December 1997. “Steel Tripods for Skyline

Systems,” The Register: A Stewardship Newsletter for the

Appalachian Trail. Harpers Ferry, WV: Appalachian Trail Conference.
38 L A N D S C A P E L I N E S

Trail Management Issues

Barter, Christian, Margaret Coffin Brown, Tracy Stakely, and Gary

Stellpflug, with illustrations by Sarah Baldyga. “Trail Treatment and

Maintenance Guidelines, Cultural Landscape Report for the

Historic Hiking Trail System of Mount Desert Island, Acadia

National Park, Maine.” Brookline, MA: Olmsted Center for

Landscape Preservation (draft, July 2004).

Bergmann, Roger. September 2000. Soil Stabilizers on Universally

Accessible Trails. Washington, DC: US Forest Service, 0023-

1202-SDTDC

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/fspubs/index.htm

Elkinton, Steven. 1997. “CRM and the National Trails System.”

CRM (Cultural Resource Management), 20: 1. Washington, DC:

US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural

Resources.

Griswold, Stephen. March 2000. “High Elevation Trailwork in

United States National Parks, and Peru and Nepal,” Fort Collins,

CO: High Altitude Revegetation Workshop Proceedings.

Hooper, Lennon. May 1973. “Special Report: National Park

Trails.” Denver, CO: US Department of the Interior, National Park

Service, Denver Service Center.

Montana Archeology Society. 1981. “Trails, Trails, and More Trails:

Another Historic Preservation Challenge.” Archeology in Montana,

21:3 (special issue #2). Bozeman, MT: Montana Archeology

Society.

National Park Service. Draft January 2001. “GIS for the National

Trails System: An Action Plan.” Washington, DC: US Department

of the Interior, National Trails System Program.

National Park Service. October 2000. “Preserving Historic Trails,

Conference Proceedings, October 17-19, 2000, Acadia National

Park.” Brookline, MA: National Park Service, Olmsted Center for

Landscape Preservation.

Trail History

Arthur, Guy B. 1937. Construction of Trails. Civilian Conservation

Corps, Project Training Series no. 7, Washington, DC: National

Park Service.

Beveridge, Charles E. and Paul Rocheleau, 1995. Frederick Law

Olmsted: Designing the American Landscape. New York: Rizzoli

International Publications, Inc.

Carr, Ethan. 1998. Wilderness by Design: Landscape Architecture

and the National Park Service. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska

Press.

Cordes, Kathleen. 2000. America’s National Historic Trails.

Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

Cordes, Kathleen and Jane Lammers. 2000. America’s Millenium

Trails: Pathways for the 21st Century. Champaign,IL: Bannon

Multimedia Group.

Downing, Andrew Jackson. 1991 reprint of 1865, seventh

edition. Landscape Gardening and Rural Architecture. New York:

Dover Publications.

Good, Albert. 1990 reprint of 1938 edition. Park and Recreation Structures. Boulder, CO: Graybooks.

King, Brian B. et al. July/August 2000. “Trail Years: A History of the

Appalachian Trail Conference.” Appalachian Trailway News, 61: 3.

Harpers Ferry, WV: Appalachian Trail Conference.

Kittredge, Frank. October 1934. “Standards of Trail Construction,”

San Francisco, CA: Office of the Chief Engineer, National Park

Service.

McClelland, Linda Flint. 1998. Building the National Parks:

Historic Landscape Design and Construction. Baltimore: The Johns

Hopkins University Press.

Sears, John, F. 1989. Sacred Places: American Tourism Attractions

in the Nineteenth Century. New York: Oxford University Press.

Waterman, Laura and Guy Waterman. 1989. Forest and Crag. A

History of Hiking, Trail Blazing, and Adventure in the Northeast

Mountains. Boston: Appalachian Mountain Club.
HISTORIC TRAILS 39

ENDNOTES

1 A Cultural Landscape Report serves as the primary guide to

treatment and use of a cultural landscape, and prescribes the

treatment and management of the physical attributes and biotic

systems of a landscape.

2 One of the earliest recreational trails was the Crawford Path

up Mount Washington in New Hampshire, cut in 1819 and

still in use today. Laura and Guy Waterman, Forest and Crag:

A History of Hiking, Trail Blazing, and Adventure in the

Northeast Mountains (Boston: Appalachian Mountain Club,

1989) 41-46.

3 John F. Sears, Sacred Places: American Tourism Attractions in

the Nineteenth Century (New York: Oxford University

Press, 1989) 3, 4, 61.

4 Associated resources, including historic structures, artifacts,

and memorabilia that tell the story of those who used the

route, are protected and managed through partnerships with

state, local, non-profit, and private organizations and citizens.

Examples include the 3,700-mile Lewis and Clark Trail and

the 54-mile Selma to Montgomery Trail. Designation

involves four steps: A Congressional amendment requesting

a feasibility study; the study by a land-managing agency; an

amendment establishing the trail; and a comprehensive

management plan to guide the management partnership.

Steven Elkinton 1997. CRM and the National Trails System.

CRM (Cultural Resource Management), 20: 1. (Washington,

DC: US Department of the Interior, National Park Service,

Cultural Resources, 1997).

5 Downing articulated the principles of American picturesque

landscape design in his widely read “Treatise on the Theory

and Practice of Landscape Gardening” (1841, eighth edition

1875), reprinted as Landscape Gardening and Rural

Architecture (New York, Dover Publications, 1991) 294-5,

399-401.

6 Junctions and scenic points were marked with an object, such

as a tower, bridge, monument, or rustic feature. Charles E.

Beveridge and Paul Rocheleau, Frederick Law Olmsted:

Designing the American Landscape (New York: Rizzoli

International Publications, Inc., 1995) 49, 51, 88, 89.

7 Beveridge, Charles and Paul Rocheleau. Frederick Law

Olmsted: Designing the American Landscape (New York, NY:

Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1995) 88.

8 An entrepreneur constructed the Bright Angel Trail in 1890 as

a toll trail from the south rim to the inner canyon and profited

for many years, until the federal government acquired the land.

9 The country’s first village improvement society, the Laurel Hill

Association, was formed in 1853 in Stockbridge, Massachusetts, to raise funds from residents to beautify the community,

and improve the public setting through landscaping. In 1895 a

path was built on Stockbridge’s Laurel Hill in memory of the

Association’s long-time president and natural areas were

donated to the organization. Egleston writes in Villages and

Village Life, “There are few things which could do more for the

social life and true enjoyment of a village than the making of

good footpaths.” Richard Cloues, “Where Art is Combined

with Nature: Village Improvement in Nineteenth Century

New England.” (Unpublished thesis, 1987) 27, 59, 65, 761-

776, 859-872.

10 Waterman, 192.

11 Linda McClelland, Building the National Parks: Historic

Landscape Design and Construction (Baltimore: Johns

Hopkins University Press, 1998) 2, 3, 7.

12 Frank A. Kittredge, Chief Civil Engineer, NPS “Trails of the

National Parks,” printed in American Civic Annual, ca. 1931

(National Archives, RG79: 600-633, Central Files 1907-39,

Roads, Trails & Bridges).

13 Correspondence from C. G. Parker to Bilkert, November 3,

1932 (National Archives, RG79: 600-633, Central Files

1907-39, Roads, Trails & Bridges).

14 Frank Kittredge, “Standards of Trail Construction” San

Francisco, CA: Office of the Chief Engineer, National Park

Service, October 1934. Guy B. Arthur, Construction of Trails.

Civilian Conservation Corps, Project Training Series no. 7,

(Washington, D.C.: 1937). Albert H. Good, ed. Park and

Recreation Structures. 3 vols. (Washington, D.C.: National

Park Service, 1938).

15 “Indian Sacred Sites,” Executive Order 13007 of May 24,

1996.

16 “Floodplain Management,” Executive Order 11988;

“Protection of Wetlands,” Executive Order 11990, Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended; Federal Water

Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) of 1977; and

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
17 National Park Service, Comprehensive Management and Use

Plan: Trail of Tears National Historic Trail, 2 volumes,

(Denver: Denver Service Center, #NPS D-2A, 1992).

18 Anthony Godfrey, “Historic Resource Study, Pony Express

National Historic Trail” (National Park Service, 1994).

19 See also Landscape Line 3: Landscape Characteristics.

20 For more detailed information, see Landscape Line 10:

Geographical Information Systems , and Landscape Line 11:

Global Positioning Systems. National trail data standards are

being developed by a federal interagency group. For the most

current information visit: http://www.nps.gov/gis/trails/

index.html

21 For National Park trails, documentation should be coordinated

with the Facility Management Software System (FMSS) to

organize and streamline information.

22 Birchard, William Jr., and Robert Proudman. Appalachian Trail

Design, Construction, and Maintenance (Harpers Ferry, WV:

Appalachian Trail Conference, 2000) 19, 35; and Appalachian Trail Conference. “Trail Assessment Handbook,”

appendix in Local Management Planning Guide (Harpers

Ferry: ATC, 1997). www.appalachiantrail.org/protect/

policies/lmpg.html

23 National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National

Register Criteria for Evaluation (www.cr.nps.gov/nr/

publications/bulletins/nrb15/). The document also contains

information on National Landmark criteria.

24 For further definitions, see to Landscape Line 3: Landscape

Characteristics.

25 For criteria definitions, see National Register Bulletin 15.

26 McClelland, 502, 503, 511.

27 Wells, Merle. “Lolo Trail.” National Register of Historic

Places, Nomination Form, Idaho State Historical Society,

Idaho. May 13, 1991.

28 NPS, “Director’s Order 12: Conservation Planning,

Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision Making.”

(USDOI, NPS, Jan 2001).

29 NPS Intermountain Region. “Technical Assistance Manual,

Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic

Preservation Act.” Release No. 5, (USDOI, NPS, Feb

2003).30 Barter et al., 2004, 12.

31 Recreation Access Advisory Committee. “Recommendations

for Accessibility Guidelines: Recreational Facilities and

Outdoor Developed Areas (U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, July 1994).

(www.Access-board.gov).

32 Bergmann, Roger. Soil Stabilizers on Universally Accessible

Trails (US Forest Service 0023-1202-SDTDC, 2000).

33 Birchard and Proudman, 145-147.

34 Changing the name of a trail to reflect an earlier historic name

requires coordination with the US Geological Survey and all

other map vendors.

35 Birchard and Proudman, 155-173.

36 Griswold, Stephen. “High Elevation Trailwork in United States

National Parks, and Peru and Nepal” High Altitude Revegetation Workshop, Fort Collins, CO, 3/2000.

37 Many examples of CCC bridges are shown in Albert Good’s

3 volumes of “Park and Recreation Structures.”

38 Griswold, Stephen. A Handbook on Trail Building and

Maintenance. CA: Sequoia Natural History Association, Fifth

Edition, 1996. Retainer bars, 79-83, 109-110.

The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and

cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to tribes.

U.S. Department of the Interior

National Park Service

Cultural Resources

Park Historic Structures & Cultural Landscapes

Credits: Reviewers and contributors to this document include: Sarah Baldyga, Christian Barter, Randy Biallas, Tim Davis, Mark Davison, Susan

Dolan, Tom DuRant, Steven Elkinton, Cari Goetcheus, Stephen Griswold, David Humphrey, Maureen Joseph, Courtney LaRuffa, Lucy Lawliss,

Peter Lewis, Linda McClelland, Donald Owen, Robert Page, Nick Parish, Charles Pepper, Shaun Provencher, Llerena Searle, Debbie Smith, Jim

Snyder, Tracy Stakely, Gary Stellpflug, Scott Travis, David Uschold, Jim Vekasi, and Kyle Zick.