Re: [nct-l] build it right!

At 07:21 PM 11/14/99 -0500, Paul Haan wrote:
>>-- Is marking a route on roads in areas of predominately private ownership
>>a legitimate way of extending the trail, even on a temporary (or
>>extended-temporary) basis? Should we continue with unconnected
>>steppingstones of off-road trail?
>
>Now this is a good question.  At first blush, I would say "no" because I
>think this reduces the push to get trail built.  In west Michigan, I've
>seen trail building efforts get shrugged off where a marked connector route
>exists.  I'd even go one step further and ask should we allow the blazing
>of seasonal roads?  I hiked a section of the NCNST today where the trail
>has followed two tracks for short sections for a LONG time...and there's no
>good reason other than the roads were already there and this was the
>easiest way to go when trail building.
>
>Bottom line, I think we need to have very high and uniform standards for
>trail building.  Poorly built trail that struggles to get certified does
>nobody any favors.  We should strive to get it right the first time.
>
I'm not talking about forest country trail. I'm talking about farmlands,
where there's little if any public land, and we just don't have the
millions of dollars and land acquisition authority needed to get the
appropriate easements. I think in these areas, marking a temporary route on
quiet back roads may be an
appropriate way to do things.

-- Wes

* From the North Country Trail List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

==============================================================================
To:            nct-l@backcountry.net