Sustainable Trail Design, Not Hiker Permits, is Necessary for Environmental Preservation in New York State’s Adirondack Park High Peaks

Khang T. Huynh1*, Christopher M. Koudelka2* 1University of Rochester, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Rochester, New York 2Finger Lakes Community College, Department of Environmental Conservation and Horticulture, Canandaigua, New York *Authors contributed equally http://doi.org/10.38126/JSPG170111 Corresponding author: khuynh2@ur.rochester.edu, ckoudelka@fingerlakes.edu

to the late 1800s, and trail misuse have jeopardized the health of these fragile natural habitats (Lynch 2016;. The problem has been exacerbated by an uncoordinated plan for maintenance on a meager budget, threatening the state's moral and constitutional duty to protect the health of the Adirondack Park.
Here, we advocate the New York State Legislature to enable the Department of Conservation to rebuild the region's hiking trails using sustainable design techniques. This requires an understanding of the unique characteristics of High Peaks environment that facilitate erosion, paramount to preserving the biodiversity and natural resources in this region. This ambitious project can be funded through a selfsustaining entrance fee. These actions will ensure the longevity of the fragile lands in the High Peaks.

II. Factors impacting the longevity of High Peaks trails i. Current management of High Peaks trails
The High Peaks Wilderness falls under the jurisdiction of the New York State Department of Conservation (DEC), who are responsible for managing and maintaining the park. Management of the park is outlined in the Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan (APSLMP), as mandated by the Adirondack Park Agency Act of 1971. The current plan, adopted in 1999, identifies various issues with the current hiking trails and offers broad guidelines on maintenance (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 1999).
Most trails in the High Peaks remain unchanged from when they were first blazed. Hikers sought the most direct paths to the summits and the concept of trail longevity was not considered (Lynch 2016;. These straight-line trails, such as those in Figure 1, fail to avoid dangerous obstacles, and are subject to severe erosion and damage to vegetation. The DEC acknowledges the problems on these legacy trails and identifies the need to repair or reroute them (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 1999, 143). However, the APSLMP offers very few guidelines on the equipment, data, and personnel needed to reroute a trail; the standards to which they evaluate successfully rehabilitated trails; and the financial resources required to fund these projects.
ii. Criteria for sustainable trails Sustainable trail design refers to practices in trail construction that ensure hiker safety, prevent soil loss from anticipated traffic, facilitate water drainage, and minimize the need for repair (Marion and Wimpey 2017, 46-57). Trails in the High Peaks generally fail to meet these criteria.
Principles of good design include: • Routing through soils resistant to erosion.
A soil's susceptibility to erosion principally depends on its texture, characterized by its constituent proportion of sand, silt, and clay. Soils containing high proportions of coarse sand resist erosion, while silt and very-fine sand comprise the most erodible soils (Brewer 2012;Wischmeier and Mannering 1969, 135-36;Vermont Environmental Conservation n.d.;Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy n.d.). Dislodged soil can end up in waterways, disrupting the ecosystem and promoting the growth of harmful pathogens such as Escherichia coli and Giardia lamblia (Marion et al. 2016, 352-62). • Side-hill trails. Trails should zigzag gradually rather than directly climb a peak. Steep slopes facilitate erosion by channeling snowmelt and precipitation directly down the trail. Furthermore, side-hill trails provide flexibility for trail designers to navigate around dangerous obstacles such as large boulders (Marion and Wimpey 2017, 46-57). • Proper water drainage. Muddy surfaces incentivize hikers to avoid these obstacles, disrupting the native flora and exposing more soil to erosion. Placing wood or stone barriers across side-hill trails effectively directs water away from exposed trail, limiting soil loss (Marion and Wimpey 2017, 46-57). • Hardening with crushed gravel. Mixing crushed gravel with native soil hardens trails, increasing their resistance to erosion (Aust, Marion, and Kyle 2005, 23-25).
Most trails in the High Peaks are in desperate need of rerouting and rebuilding. The map of the central High Peaks in Figure 1 shows the slopes of High Peaks trails that exceed an 8% grade, a commonly accepted threshold for erosion (Marion and Wimpey 2017, 46-57 Yet, the DEC continues to remedy only their aesthetics, neglecting the underlying problems inherited by these century-old trails. It operates these efforts on a meager budget estimated to be ~$87,000 when adjusted for inflation ($55,000 in the 1998 budget published in the APSLMP; the DEC has not published expenditure figures for subsequent years). Much of the work is outsourced to conservation

III. Proposed policies
The consensus among Adirondack conservation advocates is that overuse primarily drives trail deterioration and that a permit program to limit the number of hikers is a potential remedy (Levine 2019; Gibson 2019; Amato 2018; Adirondack Mountain Club 2020). Yet most studies on trail conditions suggest that proper trail design contributes more to longevity (Cole 1983;Dixon, Hawes, and McPherson 2004, 305-20;Olive andMarion 2009, 1483-93) than a reduction of visitor traffic (Farrell and Marion 2001, 31-59).
The above observations are supported by commonly accepted principles of trail design. Poor trail design results in trail widening as hikers, avoiding roots and rocks exposed by erosion, seek easier surfaces on which to walk (Hammitt and Cole 1998, 118). Trails that climb steep slopes and fail to divert surface water are subject to accelerated soil erosion with or without visitor use (Hammitt and Cole 1998, 124). Erosion is more distinct in shallow soils, soils high in silt and fine sand, areas with little vegetation cover and areas where concentrated runoff occurs (Hammitt and Cole 1998, 45).
Well-built trails deteriorate minimally over time (Hammitt and Cole 1998, 208), effectively mitigate and manage problems associated with high use (i.e., soil erosion, trail widening), and provide sensitive alpine vegetation with time to recover from trampling (New York State Department of  1999,72), which are highly susceptible to erosion. Therefore, sustainable reconstruction of poorly designed trails, rather than a quota on hikers, will more effectively limit erosion in the High Peaks.
Thus, we advocate for the DEC to reroute or rebuild existing trails in accordance with sustainable design principles as the optimal management strategy. A master plan outlined below details the personnel required, the necessary planning for these efforts, and a mechanism through which these projects are funded. The time between hiring essential personnel and physical work on trails may be lengthy. Suitable office space, whether in Albany or near the High Peaks, must be acquired. Public hearings and negotiations with conservation groups and other stakeholders are required to organize a list of priorities based on susceptibility. Finally, insurance fees and wages may increase as wilderness work requires traveling to and living in remote, primitive conditions for extended periods of time. Even with these hurdles, a team with the appropriate expertise and driven by clearly defined milestones will more efficiently tackle >200 miles of trails than underfunded conservation groups that focus their efforts on short-term projects.

ii. Research environmental factors in the High Peaks that impact trail design
The DEC must devote appropriate funds and personnel into research of biotic and abiotic factors as a crucial step of trail redesign. Biotic considerations include locating rare alpine species in order to plan routes around them. Interpretation of slope, soil, hydrology, and vegetation data using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is essential to inform planning decisions for trail work in the region.
Trail design also requires knowledge of abiotic factors in the High Peaks, many of which lack extensive documentation. A systematic study to identify and evaluate proposed trail routes must include factors such as soil properties, drainage patterns, and vegetation. Characterizing soil texture, percent composition of fine sands, and soil permeability on-and off-trails at intervals much finer than those in USDA databases is imperative in determining the most suitable redesign strategy (Wilson and Seney 1994, 78-79;Rangel et al. 2019). During wet seasons, (November 1-December 15; April 1-May 15) (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 1999, 115), access to trails that experience ponding must be restricted.
Crucially, physical work on a section of a trail cannot commence until these environmental assessments are completed, as the poor resolution of publicly available data is insufficient even for planning. Inclement weather, including heavy snowfall that blankets the region for much of the year ("NY State Average Annual Snowfall Data" n.d.; Adirondack Daily Enterprise Staff 2020), and the presence of hikers in the summer months further inhibit progress. It will take time for the DEC team to determine a threshold for an adequate rate of progress and the optimal number of employees to complete them in a timely manner. Restricting access to trails can facilitate this work at the expense of convenience to some hikers.

iii. Raise revenues through park entrance fees
The cost of rebuilding the High Peaks trails is estimated to be $4,000,000 (approximately $20,000 per mile). We estimate the project to span 10 years (20 miles and $400,000 per year). The total cost, based on a 2005 study published by the U.S. Forest Service and adjusted for inflation, includes material and labor (Aust, Marion, and Kyle 2005, 15 (Figure 2). As such, many booth operators can be campground workers, and can be supplemented by 20 additional workers for a total per annum wage of $600,000. Construction of each booth is estimated to cost $10,000, with an additional $1,000 in maintenance costs (Guardian Booth n.d.).
A $10 per visit entrance fee would raise the requisite amount of money over 10 years to fund sustainable trails and booths, while providing surplus for conservation efforts in other areas in the park. Stipulating that entrance fees can only be directed towards conservation efforts within the Park creates a self-sufficient revenue stream that circumnavigates potential budgetary squabbles in the state legislature. A park entrance fee is preferable to a hiker permit system, which is more difficult to enforce due to the vastness of the park and remoteness of many trails. Furthermore, the entrance fee seeks to raise revenue for the park without limiting the number of hikers through arbitrary quotas, especially since the number of hikers is not well-documented ( . Rather than allocating ~$1.5 million to fund shuttle busses to trailheads (Adirondack Almanac Editorial Staff 2020), which counters these groups' views against increasing hiker accessibility, funds should be instead dedicated to trail work. It is possible that the proposed entrance fees can be reduced if the shuttle bus funds can be reallocated.

IV. Recommended policy options
Even though the policies outlined above are designed to be self-sustaining, they require initial investments for the new hires, office space and materials, and construction of the toll booths. As part of the next Fiscal Year Executive Budget passed by the state legislature, appropriations to the DEC for the explicit use on High Peaks trail redesign must be made. Once the revenue collection from entrance fees becomes profitable, the DEC must pay back to the state the initial investments.

V. Conclusions
The Adirondack High Peaks is home to rare alpine species, an abundance of natural resources, and opportunities for recreation. The State Legislature and the DEC must employ a hands-on conservation plan outlined here with haste. Neglecting our ethical duty to protect the Adirondacks will deprive future New Yorkers the opportunity to appreciate our state's unique ecological history. We must recognize that once these resources disappear, so too will our ability to keep them forever wild.