In December of 1998, the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly adopted the KPB Trail Plan as an element of the Borough’s Comprehensive Plan (KPB Ordinance 98-62).

Background information is included for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute statements of policy or goals. Inclusion of any specific trail project, proposal, or organization in the narrative portions of this plan does not constitute borough endorsement of that project, proposal or organization.

The following plan was prepared by the Kenai Peninsula Borough Trails Commission, with staff assistance from KPB Planning Department, and the Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program of the National Park Service. The volunteer members of the Trails Commission have dedicated many hours of research, community outreach, and discussion in an effort to address the major trail issues in the Kenai Peninsula Borough. The commission is to be commended for the remarkable level of dedication and effort demonstrated in producing a plan of this scope.

Members of the Kenai Peninsula Borough Trails Commission

Dale Bakk, North Zone Representative

Ed Berg, South Zone Representative

Kenton Bloom, Chairman, South Zone Representative

Charlie Crangle, East Zone Representative

Bill Grimm, North Zone Representative

Pete Sprague, Central Zone Representative

Gary Titus, Vice Chairman, Central Zone Representative

Celeste Thorne, East Zone Representative

Ann Whitmore-Painter, Planning Commission Representative

Scott Byrne, Alternate

Jeff Estes, Alternate

A number of other groups and individuals have also contributed expertise, and special efforts during the trail planning process and deserve recognition, as listed below. Inclusion in the list is not intended to imply that each person or agency agrees with everything in the plan, only that they have helped during the process. While they deserve credit for any successes brought about by the plan, borough staff accepts responsibility for any errors or omissions. Special thanks to:

Allison Arians, John Crawford, Kevin Keeler, Roger MacCampbell, Pat O’Leary, George Oliviera, David Rhode, Bruce Talbot, Anchor Point APC Trail Committee, Kachemak Bay Nordic Ski Club, Cooper Landing Community Club, North Peninsula Community Council, Moose Pass Advisory Planning Commission, Kachemak Bay Advisory Planning Commission, and the Caribou Hills Cabin Hoppers.

The Trails Commission is especially appreciative of the many people in communities throughout the borough who took interest in the trail planning process by attending meetings, filling out trail comment forms, and providing invaluable comment and information on local trails and trail use. There is a great deal of enthusiasm and interest in trails in the Borough. The continued involvement of community residents is indispensable to achieving the goal of providing a legal, safe, and convenient Borough transportation and recreation trail system for trail users of all ages and abilities.

Borough Administration:

Mike Navarre, Mayor

Lisa Parker, Planning Director

Collette Thompson, Borough Attorney

Margaret Spahn, Planner

Chris Clough, GIS Technician

Merlyn Paine, Consultant

 

---

For many years, borough residents and trail users have looked to public agencies for assistance with public trail preservation and development. This plan presents major trail related issues in the Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB), and recommended borough policies and actions to address these issues. This plan is the first step toward providing assistance in addressing trail issues in the Kenai Peninsula Borough. The KPB Trails Commission has set out to:

• identify the principle recreational and transportation trails in the Borough
• evaluate public demand for trails and trail development
• identify and analyze major trail related issues hindering trail development or preservation and offer possible policies and actions to address problems and enhance opportunities
• provide guidance for borough staff and other agencies on trail related development issues in the Borough
• identify community priorities for trail actions
• improve coordination between government agencies

This plan presents major trail related issues in the Kenai Peninsula Borough, and recommended borough policies and actions to address these issues. The KPB Trail Plan is intended to be a tool to assist the Borough and other public agencies in identifying and preserving important transportation and recreational trail corridors for public use. Through identification of important trail corridors and delineation of borough goals and policies, the trail plan will help facilitate the coordination of trails with other land development. When adopted by the Borough Assembly, the Trail Plan will become an element of the Borough’s Comprehensive Plan.

There are a limited number of improved trails within developed areas of the Borough. There are many unimproved, unmanaged trails with historic use, but no legal status as public trails. Support for legal public trails is strong and borough-wide. In a public opinion survey conducted by the Kenai Peninsula Borough in 1991, 82 percent of respondents favored development of bicycle or pedestrian trails. Goal 3.9 of the KPB Comprehensive Plan is to "provide quality outdoor recreation areas and facilities for borough residents and visitors. Objective 3 under this goal is "to establish a network of trails to provide recreation and transportation opportunities for pedestrians, bicyclists, off-road vehicle users, dog teams, and equestrians". In 1992, a Draft Comprehensive Trail Plan was developed in response to the Federal Highways Administration's emphasis on providing additional recreation and transportation opportunities through the development of improved bicycle and pedestrian trail networks. This plan included only the areas eligible for Federal Highway funding aid. Many important trails in the Borough are not eligible for this type of funding, but other sources do exist that require identification in an adopted municipal plan.

Protection and dedication of recreational and transportation trails has continually been identified as a major concern in public meetings and in comments received during vacation and platting actions. Members of the public have expressed dissatisfaction with the vacation of rights-of-way and section line easements used as trails. Public comment during Trail Commission meetings has indicated strong continued support for preservation of existing trails, and development of new transportation and recreation trails for all users. Many people consider trails to be an essential part of the community infrastructure, and support planning structures that make trails a safe and integral part of the local transportation system.

The public is concerned that trails are being eliminated during public land sales and in the subdivision and development of private land. The population of the borough is expected to increase by 53% by the year 2020. At the same time, recreation and tourism are expected to play an increasingly important role in the economy of the Kenai Peninsula. The increased development of private land associated with this growth will lead to the loss of many commonly used trails.

The time is ideal to establish and protect a system of legal multi-use, and specific-use trails to serve the current population and provide for the future needs of borough residents and visitors. Assuring that a viable public trail system is available to serve future residents of communities in the borough requires both long-range planning and decisive action. An organized effort toward establishment of legal public trails and resolution of trail access conflicts is urgently needed.

A sound community trail network contributes to the overall health of a community in a variety of ways. Trails

• improve community interactions by

                    -     promoting healthy lifestyles

-     increasing social interactions among neighbors

-     strengthening neighborhoods by creating a sense of place where people know and care about one another and their environment

                    -     promoting civic pride

• enhance transportation systems by

-     providing a safe, independent means of travel for children

                    -     providing safe, trail-based transportation alternatives

                    -     reducing traffic congestion and parking demands

                    -     provide opportunities to access remote regions of the Borough

• enhance the local economy by

                -     creating an attractive climate for the location of new businesses and residential developments

                -     increased sales of recreational equipment

                -     increasing year-round demand for lodging and commercial services

                -     Increased property values

                -     providing a venue for organized sporting events

This plan represents a "master plan" or vision document to guide Borough involvement in trails and trail management. It's the first step toward making the vision of a complete and integrated trail network in the Kenai Peninsula Borough a reality.

The area covered focuses on the "rural district" of the Kenai Peninsula Borough. As defined in KPB 21.04.010, the "rural district" includes all of the area of the borough outside of cities that have adopted zoning authority. Trails within city limits are covered by the city's trail plan or comprehensive plan. Trails in the Chugach National Forest, Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, National Parks, and State Parks are covered by their own master plans. Discussion of trails in these areas is included in this plan because they are integral to a coordinated and comprehensive trail system in the borough.

The KPB Comprehensive Trail Plan is primarily concerned with trails within developed areas and trails linking communities to established backcountry trail systems on public lands. The focus is on trail issues of borough-wide concern, and the delineation of goals and policies intended to address those issues.

The plan is intended to be used as:

• a Borough policy guideline
• a tool to promote public dialog
• a tool to coordinate trails with land planning and development activity
• a guide to help protect existing trail corridors
• a resource guide containing information on trail use and specific community needs, and methods of accomplishing trail actions.
• a tool to assist in coordination of trail efforts among agencies, trail users and community groups

While the KPB Comprehensive Trail Plan can provide a starting point for development of an integrated recreational and transportation trail system in the Kenai Peninsula Borough, there are some things the Trail Plan cannot do. The Trail Plan:

• cannot succeed without support and effort of borough residents, trail users, and community groups
• cannot change constitutionally protected private property rights. It does not give the Borough legal authority to simply designate trails that cross private property as legal public access.
• cannot require action on the part of other government agencies. This is a Borough plan outlining only KPB policies.
• cannot achieve overnight success. Implementation requires dedication, action, and ongoing effort of private citizens and government agencies alike.

The KPB Trail Plan should be considered a dynamic document. Conditions and community trail needs and priorities change over time. The plan is designed to be flexible and should be updated periodically.

Simply put, a trail is a corridor, on land or in water, which provides public access for recreation or transportation, and is protected from other forms of development. Trails are established either through construction or use, and can be multi-purpose, or serve a particular use type. They vary in width, surface treatment, terrain. Trails provide recreational opportunities, and also provide alternative means of transportation. Some are completely separate from road rights-of-way, others are separated from the roadway, but within the road right of way, while in some cases the roadbed itself serves as a trail link.

Since trails are so diverse and serve many functions, they can be categorized in a variety of ways. But perhaps the most important distinction to be made with regard to trails in the Kenai Peninsula Borough is the distinction between trails with legal protection for public use and trails without legal protection.

Trails with legal protection for public use are specific routes that have been reserved or dedicated for public use. Trails of this type are also referred to as formal public trails, dedicated public trails, or reserved public trails, or Trails (with an uppercase "T"). These can cross both public and private land.

Trails crossing private land may be protected for public use via a public trail easement, or section line easement. Or a trail may be within a public trail right-of-way, or dedicated street right-of-way. The public has a legal right to use these trails for the purpose specified in the legal documentation. Legal public trails on private land include trails that have been dedicated to public use by the owner of the private property, trails that have been reserved by government prior to disposal of public land, section line easements, and ANSCA 17(b) easements. 17(b) easements are federal easements reserved across Native Corporation land. These easements are intended to provide public access through ANSCA Corporation land to public land or water. Legal public trail corridors traversing private land provide access across private land and do not allow any other public use of the private land, such as hunting or fishing.

Formal trails on public lands are also dedicated or reserved for public use via easements or rights-of-way. A trail easement or right-of-way on public land assures that public access will continue should the land ownership or management intent change. Trails of this type include Federal and State Recreation Trails such as those managed by the U. S. Forest Service, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and the Alaska Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation.

Some trails on Borough land (such as Tsalteshi Trails) have been permitted under Chapter 17 of the Borough Code to meet specific community needs. The Tsalteshi Trails have been surveyed and dedicated to public use, and are managed under by volunteers in the Tsalteshi Trail Association through a Borough land use permit.

Trails without legal protection as public routes can also occur on public or private land. Trails of this type are referred to as informal trails, historic use trails, undedicated trails, or trails (with a lower case "t"). Many trails have been created across vacant private land because it provided the best route between point A and point B. These trails often evolved with the community, and usually follow a historically preferred route without regard to land ownership or environmental soundness. Trails of this type often provide important community transportation links and local recreational opportunities that are highly valued by the community. But without formal dedication to public use, or written documentation from the private land owner in the form of a public easement, the public is not guaranteed use of these trails. They remain open to public use by the goodwill of the land owner. The Trails Commission examined the subject of trails across private land in order to understand current trail use patterns and identify needed public access routes.

This plan in no way endorses or encourages the use of trails lacking full legal public access. These trail routes are the most fragile and in greatest need of protection for public use. Legal dedication of these trail routes or alternative routes is encouraged in order to develop a legal system of public trails. When public easements or rights-of-way are acquired, these trails should be identified and managed as public trails by the borough or through management agreements with trail user organizations.

Informal trails on public land are open to public use if such uses are generally allowed by the land manager. However, the land manager has no obligation to preserve such trails for public use should the ownership, intended use, or management of the parcel change.

Many public trails occur on Borough owned and managed land. Some are of a spontaneous nature, while others, such as McNeil Canyon ski trails have been formally laid out to provide a facility for the public. There are also many informal, undedicated trails on borough owned and selected land, and numerous cases of undeveloped borough rights-of-way and section line easements being used as community trails. Informal, primitive trails have also been established along side of developed borough roads.

Formal Trail planning in the Kenai Peninsula Borough began in 1991 with a Trail Plan prepared cooperatively with the Alaska Department of Transportation. That plan was intended primarily to identify existing and proposed transportation routes for pedestrians and bicyclists, which would be considered and accommodated in State Intermodal Transportation planning. Phase One of the KPB Comprehensive Trail Plan was adopted by the KPB Assembly in July of 1992 by KPB Resolution 92-83.

In May of 1997, KPB Ordinance 97-11 established a KPB Trails Commission for the purpose of identifying trail needs and planning expanded trail access throughout the borough. The commission was formed to address the concerns of borough residents that community trails are unintentionally being lost as public and private land is developed, and to examine conflicts associated with trail use.

The KPB Trails Commission is comprised of nine Borough residents, appointed by the Mayor to represent different geographic regions in the borough. To provide fair geographic representation on the commission, two Trails Commissioners were appointed from each of four "zones" - East, South, Central, and North. These "zones" are illustrated in Figure 1. In addition, one Trails Commissioner was appointed from the KPB Planning Commission.

The Trails Commission held monthly public meetings in communities throughout the Borough from September 1997 through April 1998 to gather public input and identify trails of community importance. Public meetings were held in Soldotna, Seward, Homer, Nikiski, Cooper Landing, Hope, and Seldovia. In addition, several work sessions were held in Soldotna. All meetings were advertised in local newspapers and open to the public. Input and advice was solicited from individual trail users, property owners, trail organizations, and community groups regarding the location of trails of local and regional importance, concerns for trail use, maintenance and management, and to begin identifying community trail priorities. Land managers from State and Federal Agencies, and Native Corporations were also actively involved in Trails Commission meetings and discussions. Public comment and agency input has been indispensable in identifying trails and trail issues of borough-wide and community concern.

"Topic sheets", presenting background information relating to specific trail issues, were prepared by the Planning Department for the KPB Trails Commissions and the public. Topics include Population Trends, Legal Access, Trails and Property Values, Landowner Liability, Multiple Use, Acquisition of Trail Corridors, and Maintenance and Costs. These are available from the KPB Planning Department.

While a great deal of public comment has already been submitted, once individuals and groups are able to examine the issues and policies outlined in this plan, they may feel more informed and able to provide additional input and comments. The public review period will allow additional comments to be considered prior to Assembly action on this plan.

The availability of trails for public use in the Kenai Peninsula Borough is inextricably linked to land ownership and efforts to reserve and improve legal public access. The outstanding trail resources currently found on the Kenai Peninsula are largely a matter of where the boundaries of public and private lands were drawn throughout the century. While much effort has been made to both retain lands in the public domain and develop private ownership, little has been done to provide for public trail access throughout the communities of the Borough.

At the turn of the 20^th Century, nearly all of the lands on the Kenai Peninsula were in public ownership, allowing free passage almost anywhere to anyone. Over the course of this century, human settlement focused on the most habitable or easily traveled lands for development and accompanying private ownership, leaving the marginal settlement lands of mountains, tundra, and icefields to the public sector.

Today, many outstanding trail opportunities are found on these large tracts of public land. Yet many small but important connections to these public lands, along with other important trail corridors close to home, may be lost if efforts are not made to establish and maintain public access. If it can be said that one of the big jobs of the 20^th Century was to draw the lines between private and public lands, one of the biggest challenges of the 21^st Century will be connecting them.

Native Alaskans, explorers, gold seekers, trappers, big game hunters and settlers blazed trails into the wilderness of the Kenai Peninsula from its coastline, often following the same routes of their predecessors. Many of the trails used on the Peninsula during the first part of the century are important transportation routes today, some covered with asphalt or steel track and ties, while others remain a cleared dirt path.

Indigenous native inhabitants of the Kenai Peninsula depended on the abundance of the ocean and salmon-filled streams. Rivers and lakes were used as trails to reach the hunting and fishing grounds of the Peninsula’s interior, along with the occasional game trail.

From 1741 to 1867 the Russians used the same waterways as natives to explore the interior of the Peninsula in search of gold and furs. After the purchase of Alaska by the United States in 1867, Americans entered the region and took the same approach to commerce as the Russians. Improvements to trails were limited to the cutting of brush and access was open to all.

In 1896, a gold rush in the Hope-Sunrise placer district brought the first major wave of use and improvements to the trails of the Kenai Peninsula. Miners roamed throughout the interior of the Peninsula in search of gold, blazing new trails to reach new prospects on gold-bearing streams. Summer trails were traveled by foot, horseback, and boats; winter routes by dog sled and snowshoes. Private land was limited to relatively small settlements and mining claims along mountain stream channels.

In the fall of 1897, Colorado big game hunter Dall DeWeese arrived on the Kenai Peninsula in search of big game. DeWeese used the Kasilof River to access Tustumena Lake country hunt the surrounding areas for moose and sheep. He left the Kenai with several trophies and stories regarding the trophy moose to be found in this region, thus starting the era of big game hunting on the Kenai Peninsula.

By 1908 big game hunters were required to hire guides while hunting on the Kenai Peninsula. Guides and hunters established and further improved trails across the peninsula in order to reach the big game country. Soon the Kenai Peninsula was known as the best hunting ground for moose in the world.

The Alaska Central Railway started construction in 1903 at the coastal town of Seward, heading North through the eastern Kenai Peninsula to the interior. Many trails departed from the rail line to the gold fields and big game country of the Kenai Peninsula, providing easier access than the previous rough trails.

In 1905, the Nelson Act established the Alaska Road Commission. The Road Commission was staffed by army officers who supervised the design, construction and maintenance of a system of wagon roads and trails through Alaska. In 1907, the 34 mile Johnson Pass Military road was completed between the rail line at Moose Pass and the Hope-Sunrise area. The wagon road was twelve feet wide and improved with bridges over streams, and felled trees (corduroy) over wetlands. Today 23 miles of the historic route remains as the Johnson Pass Trail, one of the more popular trails in the Chugach National Forest. The remainder has since been covered by the Seward Highway and the Hope Spur Road.

In response to threatened land grabs by "big money syndicates", President Teddy Roosevelt put the new American philosophy of "conservation" into action by establishing the Chugach National Forest in 1907. Extending from Copper River in the east to the shores of Cook Inlet in the west (including all of the lands surrounding Kachemak Bay), the national forest was established to promote the orderly use of public resources. Boundary changes later in the century shrunk the size of the Forest, although still the second largest national forest in the nation.

During the Great Depression years, Civilian Conservation Corps work camps were set up at Quartz Creek and Cooper Landing and trails and other recreation facilities were developed throughout the Peninsula. The Kenai National Moose Range was established as a public wildlife refuge in 1941 in reaction to declining moose populations.

Community and road expansion during the early and mid-20^th Century focused on established areas and routes. Land for community expansion was transferred from the public domain to private hands under homesteading programs administered by the Bureau of Land Management (then called the General Land Office). Rail travel provided dependable transportation through the eastern Peninsula. Travel by car or horse and wagon between such far-flung communities as Kenai and Cooper Landing took most of the day over routes that might be called a trail today. And most of the Peninsula’s 2,400 residents were only a short walk away from the nearest trail, often depending on these trails for their daily routine.

At the end of World War II, homesteading increased on the Peninsula, bringing in new settlers to the area who developed additional roads and trails as they proved up on their homesteads. By 1950, Homer and Seward were connected by a road that followed the trails of the Peninsula’s earlier inhabitants. Total population of the Peninsula was almost 5,000.

In the late 1950’s oil was discovered at Swanson River. With the development of oil and gas resources both on and off shore, the Peninsula’s population grew, and the economy began to change as more families had the security of a regular paycheck, disposable income, and leisure time pursuits.

Around the time the Kenai and Cook Inlet oil fields were developed, Alaska was granted statehood and an entitlement to select certain lands for the purpose of community development, transportation, and resource development. As the state developed, it provided a similar land entitlement program for borough governments. Both the state and the Kenai Peninsula Borough pursued programs to place public lands in private ownership, in most cases failing to provide legal public access for historic trails.

A vast new system of trails was unintentionally created in the 1950’s and 1960’s with the clearing of hundreds of miles of seismic exploration lines. These routes were quickly appropriated for the newest form of winter trail travel in the 1960’s – the snowmobile. Today these routes form an extensive network of trails heavily used by riders from around the state.

During the 1950's and 1960's, trails in the Chugach National Forest benefited from the attention of Youth Conservation Corps (YCC) crews based out of the newly constructed US Forest Service Crown Point facility (now known as the Kenai Lake Work Center).

In 1971, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) was passed, establishing regional and village native Corporations, and enabling the selection of large tracts of federal public lands for private native corporation ownership. Also included in ANCSA was a subsection known commonly as "17(b)" that provided for the establishment of public trail and road easements across native selected lands to public lands and water. Today these "17(b) easements" provide legal access routes to public lands and waters otherwise isolated by tracts of land selected and transferred to native corporations.

On state lands, Kachemak Bay State Park and Kachemak Bay State Wilderness Parks were established in 1970. Also during the 1960's and 1980's, extensive land disposal programs were carried out by the state, providing lands to anyone who could "prove up" for homesteading, recreation and agricultural purposes.

In 1980, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) was passed. Within the Kenai Peninsula Borough, this legislation created Kenai Fjords and Katmai National Parks, and Lake Clark National Park and Preserve from general federal lands. The boundaries of the Chugach National Forest and Kenai National Moose Range were also extended. The Moose Range was also renamed the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge.

In 1964, the Kenai Peninsula along with land on the west side of Cook Inlet was incorporated as a second class borough. (Second Class status refers to acceptance of certain mandatory municipal powers and the option to adopt certain other powers and authorities.) The Kenai Peninsula Borough provides education, solid waste disposal, planning, platting, land use regulation, and 911 communications on an area-wide basis. Other services, such as road maintenance, hospitals, and fire protection are provided on a non area-wide or service area basis. Except for within the North Peninsula Recreational Service Area, the Kenai Peninsula Borough does not have clear authority to manage, apply for grant funding, or expend money for trails or associated facilities, such as trailheads.

Since incorporation in 1964, the population of the Borough has increased from 10,000 to 48,100 - an increase of nearly 500 percent in 34 years. Between 1964 and 1998 an unknown number of commonly used but unauthorized trails were both created by public need and closed to public use by development. In the mid 1960's, trails were pioneered casually with little regard for land ownership. As the decades passed, some were closed by lack of use and/or maintenance, while others were closed by private ownership and development. As the pace of land development increases, the number of informal trails closed to public use may also increase.

While the trend in trail closures is thought to be far reaching, it is sometimes not perceived to be so by the users of informal trails across private property. Often vacant private land is held for many years without being developed, or other nearby vacant land allows trails to be temporarily rerouted around newly developed properties (again without authorization). Therefore, while it seems that there is plenty of open space for trails, in actuality the options for the legal establishment of trails are shrinking.

Most community trails in the Borough have been established through common historic use but are not legally established via mechanisms such as dedicated rights-of-way (ROW's) or easements. For instance, in a 1995 inventory of 54 trails covering 112 miles in the Homer area, 60 miles of trails have been established through common historic use. Of these 112 miles of trails, only 35 miles have formal public ROW's or easements. All of the 77 miles of trails without legal public access could be closed at any time.

One indicator of the overall potential loss of public access throughout the borough is the number of annual requests for platting actions. Requests for platting actions typically include subdivisions, property line changes, vacations of rights-or-way or section line easements - and rarely include actions that increase the number of legally accessible public trails.

The economic boom of the mid-1980's brought an upturn in platting activity, followed by a relative lull during the economic downturn of the late 1980's. During the 1990's there has been a steady increase in the number of platting actions, increasing from 141 in 1992 to 260 in 1996. Of the 260 platting actions in 1996, 53 included requests to vacate public rights-of-way, utility, and section line easements. Another 42 requests were made to vacate public access in 1997. Taken over the course of a decade, such a rate of terminations could lead to situations where the only method to provide public access is through (re)acquisition.

Along with legal public access, the existence of trails depends heavily on maintenance. During the 1980's and 1990's, budget conscious federal and state public land managers relied heavily on a variety of low-cost youth crews to establish, improve, or maintain trails. Student Conservation Association crews established the Harding Icefield Trail in Kenai Fjords National Park and worked on other trails throughout Chugach National Forest and Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. In Kachemak Bay State Park, the Alaska Youth Conservation Corps developed an extensive system of popular trails. At Kachemak Bay State Park, much of the trail development cost has been underwritten with Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS) settlement funds.

Trail managers are also applying new technology to the establishment and improvement of trails. Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) systems facilitate accurate surveying and mapping of trails, especially when applied to computerized map data. Small-scale construction equipment, including excavators, bulldozers, loaders and material totes have been used in the Chugach National Forest to rebuild storm damaged trails in a manner that replicates the size and feel of hand built trails but at a fraction of the cost. And high tech materials such as lightweight plastic culverts, geotextile fabric and grids, and recycled plastic lumber have shown promise in the fight against deterioration of trail drainage and erosion control devices.

Local trails often benefit from the Alaskan "do-it-yourself" spirit, spawning volunteer development and maintenance of community trails. This is particularly true on winter snowmachine and ski trails. Perhaps because many Borough residents are busy making a living during the summer, and winter provides more leisure time, literally hundreds of miles of maintained snowmobile and cross-country skiing trails have "sprung up" around the Peninsula. A major challenge to these volunteer efforts is gaining legal public access for these trails, which often pass over a variety of land ownerships.

The maintenance of summer trails outside of public recreation or conservation lands has not fared as well as that of winter trails. Often the only type of maintenance occurring on summer trails is through actual use. Trail routes are selected casually, with little thought for soils, drainage, and erosion control. There are miles of wide, muddy, rutted corridors, parallel trails, and damaged vegetation in wetland areas, often due to the use of ATV's. Frequently the routes have been created to reach remote cabins or homesites, rather than for recreational purposes.

A natural phenomenon that may significantly affect Peninsula trails in the 21^st century is the spruce bark beetle outbreak. It is estimated that almost half of the Peninsula's spruce forest, covering over 1 million acres, has been infested or killed by the spruce bark beetle. Trail maintenance needs through previously healthy forests can be expected to increase, as wind blown trees fall and block trails at an increasing rate. Another potential effect on trails and access may be the establishment of extensive logging roads and firebreaks throughout the forests. The clearing of linear firebreaks and roads could create a similar set of opportunities and problems as experienced with the seismic lines cleared in the 1950's and 1960's.

Demand for recreation and transportation trails on the Kenai Peninsula and throughout the state continues to grow at a high rate. Borough Trails Commission meetings held around the Peninsula in 1997 and 1998, and public meetings held in late 1997 by Alaska State Parks for the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) show a strong interest in trail activities and issues.

Although statistically valid surveys of borough residents' use of trails are not available, the 1997 statewide survey for SCORP gives some indication of trail use by the average state resident. Statewide data is relevant to the Peninsula as the combined populations of the Kenai Peninsula and Mat-Su Boroughs and Anchorage make up half of the state's population.

Over 65% of state residents walk for fitness, day hike or mountain bike; almost 50% backpack in the backcountry, and about 35% ride snowmachines and ATV's. Other trails or public access dependent pursuits include sportfishing (75% of residents), bird/wildlife watching (72%), berry picking (61%), clamming or beachcombing (53%), and sport hunting (35%). Significant increases have occurred in participation rates for bird/wildlife watching, walking, backpacking, snowmachining, and ATV riding in the past five years.

Along with the increased rates of trail related recreation comes strong support (statewide) for improved facilities and strategies to minimize trail use conflicts. Fifty-one percent (51%) of state residents are negatively affected by hearing motorized vehicles while recreating, and 74% felt that more trails should be developed where no motorized vehicles are allowed. Fifty-six percent (56%) also felt that more trails should be developed for the legal use by ATV's, and almost the same percentage were in support of multi-use trails. Seventy-six percent (76%) want more trailheads, and 60% agree that "parks and recreation facilities are often too crowded when I use them" (a 13% increase in dissatisfaction rates in 5 years).

The borough has also experienced a marked increase in the number of visitors in recent years, many wanting to use trails, public access, or open space. Anchorage residents are the predominant visitors to the peninsula. In 1991, 180,000 Anchorage residents visited the Peninsula an average of 4 times annually. While fishing was the main motivation for visits, over two-thirds of the visitor-days were spent in activities other than fishing.

Although Borough-wide data is not available, surveys at regional information centers show increased visitation. Visitors to the Kenai Visitor and Cultural Center increased from 49,000 in 1992 to 70,460 in 1997. The Kenai Peninsula Borough Information Center in Soldotna (open from mid-May to mid-September) served 7,000 people in 1988, and 47,000 in 1997. Traffic at visitor's centers in Homer has more than doubled between 1993 and 1996 from 11,000 to 24,000, and in Seward for the same period, it has nearly tripled from 11,000 to 30,000. And with the development of new attractions such as the Seward Sealife Center and the Kenai Challenger Center, all indications are that visits to the Peninsula and demand for trails will continue to grow.

Following is a description of the types of communities, land ownership, geography, economy, trails, trail uses, and issues for the different zones represented by the Trails Commission. The West Side of Cook Inlet (comprising 47% of the land mass in the Borough, but only 1% of the population) will be treated as a separate area.

The North Zone is entirely coastal lowlands, consisting of low rolling forested moraines and depressions filled by lakes and muskeg, connected by many rivers and streams. Kenai and Nikiski are the major population centers in the North Zone. Private lands are limited to a corridor approximately 6 miles wide along Cook Inlet and the Kenai River corridor. Development in the region is primarily residential and industrial.

The largest tract of public land is the northwest portion of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. Captain Cook State Recreation Area is also found at the north end of the Kenai Spur Highway.

Relatively few tourist facilities and attractions exist in this area. Trails and open space are used primarily by residents. Roadside pedestrian facilities are very limited outside of the City of Kenai, which provides some sidewalks and bikepaths. Major dedicated and maintained public recreational trails include those in the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (including the Swanson River Canoe Trails), and those in Captain Cook SRA. The beaches of Cook Inlet are also frequented by both residents and visitors.

Outside incorporated cities, the North Peninsula Recreational Service Area is the only recreational service area in the Borough, and provides well-used recreational facilities for the residents of the Nikiski and the central peninsula. Winter ski trails have been developed and maintained at the High School and at the Nikiski Pool. The City of Kenai also provides recreational services and manages some recreational trails for residents.

Most trails in developed areas of the North Zone occur on private land without landowner permission. This less-than-legal use is because the area is significantly underserved in mileage of legal, public recreation and transportation trails for both motorized and non-motorized use. There are few dedicated and improved trails or trailheads in the zone. Yet with large amounts of accessible (although not necessarily legal) open space, many of the area residents are not inclined to drive to another part of the Peninsula to use a trail.

A large network of informal, undedicated, summer and winter trails exists on both public and private land in the North Zone. This is especially true in the area from Gray Cliff to Point Possession. Snowmachine and ATV trails have been developed for access and recreation, most of which have no legal protection for public use. Utility corridors, which generally are not intended for public access, are also heavily used. Undeveloped public rights-of-way are also used as trail access.

Residents have expressed a desire for more trails to provide safe transportation for both motorized and non-motorized users, and additional backcountry nordic ski trails to connect recreational facilities. Major trail issues in this region include the potential loss of many trails that cross private lands, and the unauthorized use of utility corridors and pipelines as trails. Other issues include the need to manage and/or separate conflicting trail uses, landowner concerns for liability from trail use on their property, and a lack of commonly accepted and practiced trail etiquette.

Population centers in the central zone include Soldotna, Sterling, Funny River, Cooper Landing, Kasilof, and Clam Gulch. Major tracts of public land include western portions of Kenai National Wildlife Refuge and Chugach National Forest, a portion of the Clam Gulch Critical Habitat Area, and large tracts of general state land. In addition, there are several smaller State Recreation Areas in the Central Zone.

This area ranges from the Kenai lowlands along Cook Inlet to the Kenai Mountains in the east. Development in the region is primarily residential and commercial, and is primarily located within a few miles of the Sterling Highway.

Summer tourism plays an important economic role in this area, with sport fishing attracting many summer visitors, who participate in other public access dependent pursuits when not fishing. Goods and services, commercial fishing, health care, and light industry also contribute significantly to the economic health of this zone.

Backcountry trails throughout this zone are used heavily by both residents and visitors. The region enjoys many miles of dedicated and maintained public backcountry trails. Some trails in the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge and the Chugach National Forest that have gained national recognition (e.g. The Resurrection Pass Trail has been identified by more than one national magazine as being one of the top ten mountain bike and hiking trails in the United States). These trails are often the sole destination for a visitor’s trip to the Kenai Peninsula. Most, but not all of the trails in the Refuge and National Forest are designated for non-motorized use during the summer; most of these public lands are open to snowmachining in the winter.

Snowmachiners have developed an extensive system of trails in the Caribou Hills area, with access points along the roadways from Kasilof to Homer. The approximately 100 mile system of trails is maintained, groomed, and signed by volunteers. Volunteer organizations have been thwarted in attempts to gain grant funding for maintenance and operations because of discontinuous legal public access along these routes.

The City of Soldotna manages a system of parks, trails and recreational facilities, and has included bicycle paths in its transportation planning. Volunteer developed and maintained nordic ski trails are found adjacent to Skyview High School, and in the Cooper Landing area. A common source of conflict between winter users in these areas are snowmachiners riding on trails that have been groomed and signed for skiing only.

As in other areas of the borough, there are many informal, undedicated, summer and winter trails occurring in both private and public land.

Trail needs in the Central Zone include the development of more trails both along roads and away from roads that provide safe transportation for non-motorized users, link communities, and connect public facilities. Trail links between intensively used community recreational areas are also needed (for example, connecting the Tsalteshi Trails with the KNWR ski trails, and the Kenai Peninsula Sports Center). Lighted ski trails have also been identified as a community need. Because most of the private development in the Central Zone occurs within a six mile wide corridor that is surrounded by public land, additional trail links between residential areas and public lands have been suggested.

Other major trail issues in the Central Zone include the negative effects that land transfers between federal, state, and borough government have had on trails, the unauthorized use of utility corridors as trails, and inadequate trail etiquette education leading to conflicts between trail users and/or users and landowners.

All of this area is within the Kenai Mountain Range and contains many glaciated areas and peaks over 6000 feet. Glacial scouring and tectonic movements have created a coastline of dramatic rocky fjords. Forest vegetation is primarily Sitka spruce and mountain hemlock.

Development in the region is geographically constrained by virtue of the mountainous terrain, leading to a more densely populated settlement pattern than in the Western Kenai Peninsula. Private lands are found in a narrow corridor along the Seward Highway. Seward, Moose Pass, Hope and Sunrise are the major population centers in the area. The economy is diverse, with fishing, forestry, services, government, and tourism contributing to the overall economic health. Recent years have seen a marked increase in the numbers of visitors and related development, particularly in the Seward area.

Major tracts of public land include the Chugach National Forest, Kenai Fjords National Park, the eastern portion of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, and Caine's Head State Recreation Area. This region enjoys an extraordinary system of backcountry trails managed by the U.S. Forest Service. These trails are heavily used by both in-state and out-of state visitors, particularly in the summer.

Most National Forest land is open to snowmachining in the winter. Recent advances in technology have allowed snowmachiners to climb steep mountains onto glacial icefields that only ten years ago were inaccessible. Currently it is not uncommon for snowmachiners to travel across the icefields of the eastern Peninsula to overlook Prince William Sound. The surge in popularity of motorized pursuits has also been accompanied by increased demand for areas of the National Forest to be set aside for non-motorized recreational uses.

The City of Seward has incorporated pedestrian access in its city planning. The Seward Nordic Ski Club has developed a system of ski, mountain bike and running trails at Mile 12 which provides a much needed facility for community and school use. The State DOTPF is developing a separated bike path along the Seward Highway linking the Granite Creek campground and Canyon Creek.

Because most of the land in the East Zone has been historically managed for public access, the number of casual trails and conflicts associated with them is less than in other areas of the Borough. One potential conflict is due to the selection and transfer of parcels of federal lands to state government, and similarly from the state to the borough. In the former case, small trailhead parcels and the lands beneath the beginning segments of trails have been selected by the state. Because portions of a single trail are managed by different agencies, there is a potential for conflicting management strategies and inadequate enforcement capabilities. The effect of discontinuous management could be to create both safety and etiquette conflicts between users and damage to trails not designed for intense uses.

Another potential conflict is between holders of mining claims and trail users. The holders of claims are concerned about the potential liability for injury to trail users passing over their claims, and have in some cases attempted to close public access across mining claims. Trail users are concerned about the potential for public access to be unnecessarily or illegally closed across mining claims.

Trail needs in the region include more dedicated public trails within communities, trails to separate motorized and non-motorized users, the development of user safety and etiquette programs, and trail links between communities and backcountry trails. The Alaska Mountain and Wilderness Huts Association has proposed a backcountry trail system of staffed huts linking Ptarmigan Creek Trail and the Paradise Valley Trail. Because of heavy use, terrain, and the potential for storm damage, trail maintenance costs are generally greater in this area.

The terrain in this region is characterized by coastal lowlands from Clam Gulch to the head of Kachemak Bay, and the Kenai Mountains and coastal fjords on the outer peninsula. Development north of Kachemak Bay is characterized by dispersed residential areas along the entire Cook Inlet and northern Kachemak Bay shoreline. Homer, Anchor Point, Ninilchik, Nikolaevsk, Seldovia, Port Graham and Nanwalek are the main centers of settlement in the South Zone. The economy is diversified with tourism, fishing, forest products, and services contributing to the economic picture.

Compared to other zones, this zone has the least amount of federal land. The state is the primary land owner, followed by native regional corporations, the federal government, and private individuals. Major tracts of public land include Kachemak Bay State Park and Wilderness Area, and the Anchor River and Fritz Creek, Fox River Flats, Clam Gulch, and Kackemak Bay Critical Habitat Areas. The major dedicated and maintained public trails in this region are found within Kachemak Bay State Park.

The extensive system of snowmachine trails in the Caribou Hills (discussed in the Central Zone section) extends from Tustumena Lake to Caribou Lake. This trail system suffers from discontinuous legal public access along trails and a lack of developed trailheads.

The beaches and shoreline areas are popular trails and destinations throughout the region, and legal public access to shorelines, along with trailhead facilities, are increasingly important as the population of the area grows. The community of Anchor Point has sought a legal public trail connecting the town with the beach for many years.

The city of Homer provides for pedestrian and bicycle access within the city limits. Recreational ski trails have been developed by volunteers on public land at McNeil Canyon School, Lookout Mountain, and Baycrest Hill areas. The city of Seldovia has also worked cooperatively with a citizen-driven effort to develop recreational trails in that community.

No other region in the borough so clearly illustrates the problems created by establishment of trails through common historic use without the benefit of legal public access. The terrain in the Kachemak Bay area leads to the development of access between private lands by the most expedient route. An extensive network of undedicated trails has grown up on undeveloped public and private land. Land ownership and legally dedicated public access were not a concern when the population was sparse. As private land development has accelerated, the loss of public access to historically used trails has become an increasingly common occurrence. A 1995 inventory of 54 commonly used trails covering 112 miles in the Homer area, showed that 77 miles were without legal public access in the form of public easements or rights-of-way.

Residents of this region have expressed a desire for a system of legal trails to provide alternative transportation as well as recreational opportunities linking communities with backcountry regions. Trail users and landowners alike have expressed a desire to educate trail users on the legal status of trails, and to dedicate historically used trails or reroute them to avoid private property. Snowmachiners have expressed interest in trails linking McNeil Canyon School, the Watermelon Trail, and Anchor Point with the Caribou Hills trails. Cross-country skiers have proposed a non-motorized 4-season trail linking McNeil Canyon School, Lookout Mountain, and Baycrest Hill.

Major trail issues in this region include the potential for loss of public access to informal trails through development of private land, a need for safety trails along roadways, needs for trailhead development, separated trails for motorized and non-motorized users, and trail management and maintenance.

There are 4.7 million acres of land in the Kenai Peninsula Borough west of Cook Inlet. This area includes some significant coastal lowland areas in the north, and the glaciated, volcanic peaks of the Aleutian Range. Development on the West Side consists of oil and gas production and processing facilities, and small settlements. This vast area has a resident population of under 200 people, primarily in the native village of Tyonek, and the small settlement at Beluga.

Major tracts of public land include Lake Clark National Park, Katmai National Monument, Redoubt State Critical Habitat Area, McNeil River State Game Refuge and Sanctuary, Trading Bay State Game Refuge, Kalgin Island State Critical Habitat Areas and Tuxedni State Wilderness Area.

There are very few established and dedicated public trails in this area. Roads have been developed for access to oil and gas production and processing facilities, timber harvest areas, and the Chuitna coal fields in the north. Many of these roads cross private land or are private easements to access resource development areas on public land. The haul road between Iniskin and Pile Bay provides overland access to Lake Iliamna, and is used to access Bristol Bay. Because the region is largely undeveloped, trails are primarily utilitarian, providing access to hunting and fishing areas, as well as transportation routes. The present-day trail and transportation system on the West Side of Cook Inlet might be compared to the transportation and trails on the East Side of the Inlet around the turn of the century. In 1998, The Kenai Peninsula Borough funded a study of tourism potential on the West side of Cook Inlet. The Alaska Mountain and Wilderness Huts Association proposes to look at the Chacachamna Lake area for potential development of destination trails with staffed huts for hiker accommodation.

Major trail issues include management of 17(b) easements across Native Corporation land, and unauthorized use of roads and trails. There is recent interest on the part of residents of the East Side of the Inlet, in developing new public access routes and trails on the West Side of Cook Inlet. Location, design, management and maintenance of these new trails is an issue for this region.

Following is an outline of nine major issues facing trails and trail users in the Kenai Peninsula Borough. Each issue is discussed briefly, and is followed by recommended Borough Goals and Policies to address the issue.

Lack of a regional trail governance structure is an enormous barrier to establishing a system of legal public trails in the Borough. Success of a public trail system is tied to the capabilities and constraints of a sponsoring public agency. As a second class borough, the Kenai Peninsula Borough does not possess area-wide powers to administer recreation land or provide parks and recreation facilities (including recreational trails). A vote of Borough residents is required to assume trail or recreational powers on a borough-wide or service area basis.

There is currently one recreational service area in the Borough. The North Peninsula Recreation Service Area (NPRSA) was established by a public vote in 1974 to provide recreational services in the North Peninsula area. Funding for the NPRSA is derived from property taxes collected from within the service area boundaries. Additional funding is received through state and federal grants and facility user fees. A 5-member board, serving3-year terms, serves in an advisory capacity and may recommend policy and mil rate changes to the KPB Assembly and Mayor. Facilities of the NPRSA include an indoor swimming pool, multi-purpose playing fields, a hockey rink, a cross-country ski/running trail, tennis courts, and a picnic area.

Because a complete trail system provides both transportation and recreation, and involves both public land management and private land development, an effective trail program will require coordination and cooperation among various divisions within the Borough. A regional trails system required a commitment to cooperation and long-range planning.

The Kenai Peninsula Borough adopted road construction and right-of-way acquisition powers in 1981. Chapter 14.04 of the Borough Code states that the Borough may acquire rights-of-way for roads, streets, and trails, and related facilities, and may construct such roads, streets, trails, and related facilities. However, this power is linked to the obsolete State "Local Service Roads and Trails Program" (LSRT). Under this program the State Legislature granted right-of-way acquisition and road construction powers as part of the general powers of the municipality. It is not clear whether the Borough has the authority to acquire, construct, or manage trails that may be used for recreation as well as transportation, or whose main purpose is to provide recreation rather than transportation.

As the planning and platting authority, the Borough has the power and responsibility to provide a transportation and public facility infrastructure and to accept rights-of-way and easements (including trail easements and ROW's) for public use. Because there has been no real commitment to establishing a regional trail infrastructure on the part of the borough government, public trail easements have not been required as part of the Borough's subdivision process. While the need for dedication of trails must be balanced with other public needs, the authority and mechanisms to acquire rights-of-way for trails must be available to establish a legal system of trail routes.

Activities in section line easements are a frequent source of conflict between land owners and the public. Section lines are reserved by the state for "use as public highways." (Note: the term "highway" as used in the 1866 and 1923 laws establishing section line easements may refer to a right of free passage, as opposed to a toll road, rather than its contemporary meaning as a major thoroughfare.) There is currently no borough oversight on road or trail activities in section line easements. An individual may construct a road or trail along a valid section line easement with approval from the State Department of Natural Resources. The State of Alaska does not issue permits or oversee construction of public roads in section line easements. Property owners may not block passage along section line easements. Utility companies may construct powerlines in unused section line easements (AS 19.10.010). The DOTPF and the Borough issue permits for use of section lines by utilities.

Title 17 of the Borough Code, which governs Borough Land Management, allows reservation of trail corridors for public use, and requires such reservations when Borough land is sold or leased. However, no procedure has been established for identifying, reserving, or managing these trails. Under borough land classification, land used for trails needs to be classified as "recreation". This land classification is exclusive; it cannot be combined with another land classification. While a "recreation" classification may be appropriate where concentrated recreational trail use is expected, most trails can co-exist with other land uses.

Additionally, without recreation powers, borough land classified as "recreation" cannot be managed for this purpose. Trails have been developed and maintained on Borough lands through management agreements with community organizations and trails user groups (e.g. Tsalteshi Trail System). Several other community and trail user organizations have requested establishment of a management agreement with the Borough. The lack of trail or recreation authority in the Kenai Peninsula Borough makes the administration of management agreements problematic both to the Land Management Division and to the volunteer groups.

There is considerable public interest in preserving and expanding recreational trails throughout the borough. In a public opinion survey conducted by the Kenai Peninsula Borough in 1991, 82 percent of respondents favored development of bicycle or pedestrian trails. Communities throughout the borough have identified a need for additional trails and trail management. A number of non-profit organizations and trail user groups have organized to improve, maintain, or plan trails. Lack of regional trail authority often hinders these volunteer efforts.

The clear authority to obtain and manage legal public rights-of-way and easements for public trail use is essential to establishing a permanent trail system in the Kenai Peninsula Borough. Establishment of trail authority will allow existing trails to be reserved and managed for public transportation and recreational use. It will allow the borough to regulate uses on trails, obtain new trail corridors, and maintain existing trails, and expend grant money for trails purposes.

Policy 1.1.1: Pursue available options for establishing trail powers and authority and will adopt these powers and authorities in accordance with the desires and needs of the citizens of the Borough.

Objective: Pursue placement of a ballot question regarding the adoption of Trail Powers before KPB voters.

Policy 1.3.1: Define the specific responsibilities of the different departments within the Borough involved in establishing and managing a system of Borough trails.

Objective 1: Amend Title 17 of the KPB Code of Ordinances to allow dedication of public trails across borough owned or managed lands regardless of the classification.

Objective 2: Amend Title 14 of the KPB Code of Ordinances to extend enforcement authority to dedicated trail rights-of-way and dedicated trail easements.

Objective 3: Establish clear procedures for dedication of trail rights-of-way on Borough owned or managed land.

Objective 4: Establish clear procedures for acceptance of trail rights-of-way from private landowners.

Objective 5: Establish clear procedures for the establishment of cooperative agreements with trail user groups interested in managing or maintaining Borough trails.

Objective 6: Coordinate with the KPB Road Service Area Board for establishment of trailheads and accomodation of trails within existing road rights-of-way.

Objective 7: Work with the Alaska Departments of Natural Resources and Transportation and Public Facilities on a management agreement for section line easements.

Fragmented or non-existent legal status along trails is a major obstacle to a dedicated system of community trails. Many of the trails that are important to communities have been informally established over time on historically preferred routes without regard to land ownership. As a result, some trails traverse a patchwork of land ownership. Even though a trail may exist on the ground, and be well used by the public, without some form of legal protection, the public has no assurance of being able to use that trail in the future.

Except as provided by public access easements, private land is not open to public use. Often, trail users are unaware of the ownership status of the land.

Since statehood, extensive changes in both land ownership and land use have occurred. Public lands have been conveyed to Native Regional Corporations or other private parties. Other areas previously open to public use have been restricted by transfer to the University of Alaska or the Mental Health Land Trust or by inclusion in certain state or federal conservation units. Many public land transfers have occurred without reservation of trails or adequate area for trailheads. Furthermore, previously vacant private land is being developed at an ever increasing rate.

Trails historically used by the public are being lost to public use. Dedicated public access must be established in order to protect public use of trails for recreational and transportation. Establishing legal public access can sometimes be accomplished on existing trail routes. Other trails will need to be rerouted to take advantage of available public land, or to avoid private land. It is essential to identify important transportation and recreational trail routes, and potential alternatives, and begin protecting those routes as soon as possible. Existing trails of local or regional significance may need to be accommodated or relocated as private land is developed.

Legal public access is available in several forms. The most important distinction to be made in legal public assess is that between an easement and a right-of-way. A public easement is a non-possessing interest that allows use of a trail. The ownership of the land over which the trail corridor passes is owned by whomever owns the land surrounding the trail. A public right-of-way (ROW) is a linear strip of land held by the public for a particular use. In the case of a public right-of-way, the public owns the land directly beneath the trail corridor.

Public access in the form of an easement or right-or-way can be obtained or established in a variety of ways such as reservation by a public agency, dedication by a private land owner, dedication during platting, or purchase. The use of "prescriptive rights" is legal in the State of Alaska, and may be applied to public use of roads or trails. However, claiming prescriptive rights for recreational purposes has been controversial and unsuccessful in most legal suits. The Borough will not use prescriptive rights (prescription means the acquirement of title or right to something through its continued use or possession over a long period of time) for the establishment of recreational trail routes. An exception to this policy might occur when use of a "friendly condemnation" is beneficial to all parties. Cooperative methods, such as tax incentives, fee simple purchase, or conservation easements are recommended for establishing legal trail access. The borough should remain flexible in the types of access arrangements it accepts. For example, some land owners are reluctant to provide a public easement, but might agree to a trail on a "try and see" basis, allowing a one year trial period. The borough should also be prepared to seek alternative public access routes where continuous dedicated public access cannot be obtained.

Utility easements and pipelines are often used as trails by the public. These easements are not legal public access routes. They are established specifically for use by a utility company or pipeline. Use of high speed snowmachines and ATVs in the vicinity of utility poles, pipeline valves, or other above ground devises creates liability concerns for utility companies. Public trails should generally be established in a separate location from utility easements with above ground facilities.

Ownership of land and water bodies is held for the public by federal, state and local governmental entities. Government agencies operate under different management directives, and have varying responsibilities with regard to trails. Federal land includes national parks, forest service lands, BLM lands, national wildlife refuges, etc. The federal government also owns water rights in certain designated lands such as national parks, wildlife refuges, national forests, has some jurisdiction over water bodies which meet federal navigability criteria.

State owned land includes state forests, state parks, game refuges, critical habitat areas, mental health lands, university lands, land used for specific facilities such as public transportation services, special management areas, the Alaska Railroad, as well as land not designated for a specific use. Many public lands are managed for specific purposes, and are not open to all public uses, i.e., state parks, game refuges, critical habitat areas, mental health lands, university lands, special management areas, the Alaska Railroad, etc.

All waters in the state are held and managed by the state in trust for the use of the people, regardless of navigability or ownership of the submerged lands, under the Alaska Constitution and the public trust doctrine. Article VIII, Section 3 of the Alaska Constitution reserves all waters occurring in their natural state to the people for their common use and also allows access to navigable or public waters of the state as defined by the legislature. With a few exceptions, the state also owns tide and submerged lands in Alaska up to and including the mean high water mark and to three miles off the coast.

The Borough and incorporated cities within the KPB received "municipal entltlement" land from the State of Alaska. A portion of this land is used for public facilities and services, other land is held for future public need, and some land is sold to private individuals for the purpose of increasing the tax base.

As mentioned previously, there have been extensive changes in land ownership and management in the Kenai Peninsula Borough over the last 30 years. As a result of public land transfers, some trails in the Kenai Peninsula Borough cross public lands managed by different federal, state and local agencies as well as private land. Alaska was granted management of a certain amount of federal land at statehood. The Kenai Peninsula Borough, in turn was granted a municipal land entitlement from the State. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act resulted in the transfer of large tracts of federal land to regional and village corporations. In addition, some Federal, State, and Borough land has been transferred to private ownership. In some instances, existing trails were not reserved for public use as land management or ownership was transferred. In cases where the easement was retained for public use, the responsibility for management of the trail may be in question.

Cooperation is needed among agencies in order for existing trails to be dedicated and managed for public use, and to assure that future trail planning and development leads to a network of recreational trails permanently established for public use.

Policy 3.1.1: Work cooperatively with Federal, State, and local agencies to encourage dedication and maintenance of trails which cross agency management boundaries.

Objective 1: Develop agreements among Federal, State, or local agencies involved with establishing or managing recreational trails to define responsibilities of various agencies for specific trails.

Objective 2: Maintain active involvement in the planning processes of other agencies to encourage development and protection of trails of community importance.

Objective 3: Support efforts to allow cross-enforcement of agency regulations where appropriate.

Objective 4: Review proposed state and local land sales to ensure that public access easements and areas for trailheads have been reserved where appropriate.

Policy 3.1.2: Cooperate with incorporated cities to establish trail system connections beyond the city limits.

Objective 1: Borough staff or KPB Trails Commissioners should participate in city trail planning meetings.

Policy 3.1.3: Cooperate with the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities in the planning and establishment of trails along state roadways.

Objective 1: Update Phase One of the KPB Comprehensive Trail Plan and incorporate as part of a regularly updated Borough Trail Needs and Priorities list.

Objective 2: Coordinate with the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, and the TRAAK Citizens Advisory Board to establish capital improvement priorities for trail uses adjacent to roadways in the Kenai Peninsula Borough.

Objective 3: Coordinate with DOTPF in establishment of an Adopt-a-Trail Program for construction and maintenance of trails along Borough and State road rights-of-way.

Liability relating to trails is a legitimate concern that warrants attention by the Borough. However, fear of a lawsuit is often disproportionate to the actual risk of a lawsuit. A review of court cases from across the nation indicates that liability suits related to trail use are actually rare occurrences. A U.S. Department of Agriculture study found a total of only 380 appellate cases in the 50 states involving recreational statutes in the ten-year period 1982-1992. These cases involved both publicl and privately-owned land whose owners were generally not found responsible for any injuries. The "success rate" for the plaintiffs was only 23 percent. Nevertheless, many landowners want to be assured that liability has been minimized to the greatest extent possible before granting a trail easement across their land or entering into a maintenance agreement on a particular trail.

Alaska Statute 29.71.020, "Dedication of municipal property", protects the Borough from liability for the condition of rights-of-way and easements dedicated to public use. According to this statute, acceptance of a right-of-way or easement dedication by a municipality may not be construed to require the municipality to maintain or improve the area dedicated.

In Alaska, private landowners who allow open access to their property enjoy near absolute immunity from liability for recreational injuries based on state recreational use statutes. The intent of these laws is to protect landowners from being sued when they give the public permission to use their land. Such laws also help to keep the cost of liability insurance low.

Alaska's recreational use statute, AS 09.65.200, entitled "tort immunity for personal injuries or death occurring on unimproved land", grants immunity to landowners for personal injuries or death suffered by recreationists. This applies to rural, urban or semi-urban lands and specifically includes trails. The statute provides uncompensated owners of "unimproved land" immunity from tort liability for injuries resulting from a natural condition of the unimproved property. Partly initiated by Native groups whose lands were increasingly being traversed, a 1988 amendment expanded the scope of this immunity by stating that a suit can only be brought against a landowner for reckless or intentional misconduct. This statute does not distinguish particular private or public landowners and thus applies to the Kenai Peninsula Borough as a landowner as well as to individual property owners.

The statute's primary weakness is that it specifies immunity to liability only on "unimproved land". Efforts to maintain the pathway to increase the value or usefulness of the land for the benefit of the property owner rather than to protect recreational users would probably not be considered efforts to improve the trail. Most other State recreational use statutes in effect around the nation are more explicit and provide greater level of protection to landowners. For example, New York State's statute reads, "Assuming no fee is charged and no other consideration is received, the landowner owes no duty to keep his premises safe for woodcutting or gathering of firewood, hunting, fishing, trapping, training of dogs, boating, canoeing, hiking, horseback riding, bicycling, motorized vehicle operation, cross country skiing, hang gliding and cave exploration" (NY General Obligations Law, Section 9-103).

While Alaska's recreational use statute does provide liability protection to landowners, improvements could be made to the statute to benefit both the trail user and to the property owner. Because outdoor recreation is popular in Alaska, several agencies and organizations are working to expand liability protection for the landowner. The National Parks Service, State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the City of Valdez, Municipality of Anchorage, and others are considering legal and legislative strategies for expanding liability protection through the recreational use statute, and by other means.

One of the most significant efforts has been spearheaded by DNR, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation which is working to propose a bill that grants full liability immunity to private landowners who grant a conservation easement. Called "An Act relating to the liability of landowners for civil damages for certain acts or omissions occurring on lands", the bill has been supported by the Alaska Municipal League, and is expected to be presented during the next legislative session. If passed, private property owners who allow public use of their property may be encouraged to place part of their land holdings into conservation easements so as to obtain the fullest possible protection from liability.

Multiple use trails are an efficient and economical way to provide trail opportunities to diverse users. Due to limited rights-of-way, multi-use trails are sometimes the only alternative. The conflicts that sometimes accompany shared use of trails can be very emotional and are not issues that land managers are likely to eliminate altogether. While conflict on trails is not the usual situation, it can be a serious problem in some areas. With cooperation, planning and management, shared-use trails can be an excellent way to accommodate many types of users with minimal conflicts.

In the Kenai Peninsula Borough, many trails accommodate multiple modes of travel and recreation. Cooperation and courtesy among trail users is essential on multiple use trails. There are many different perceptions among trail users and property owners about which types of trail uses are compatible with each other and with adjacent land uses. Most frequently, the principal issue centers around compatibility of motorized and non-motorized trail use. Many homeowners do not consider motorized trail use appropriate in residential areas. In rural areas where trail use is not as concentrated, fewer conflicts exist between different types of trail use. The intent of Borough trail planning is to provide adequate opportunities for both motorized and non-motorized users. Because there can be significant, and sometimes unresolveable aesthetic and safety conflicts between motorized and non-motorized uses, motorized trails may need to be separated from non-motorized trails and residential areas.

Reduction in user conflicts comes with the recognition of other legitimate trail activities. In a time of increasing population and decreasing budgets, trail users must work toward expansion of trail opportunities for all rather than restriction of opportunity for some.

User compatibility is the ability of trail users to tolerate other trail users. User compatibility depends on a trail user’s attitudes toward the environment, etiquette and standards of behavior, levels of tolerance for other people, as well as the design and physical condition of the trail. User conflict is generally the result of opposing expectations, attitudes, beliefs, and safety concerns. Quiet enjoyment and exercise may be a goal of one trail user, while the excitement of maneuvering a motorized vehicle at high speeds may be the goal of another.

Conflicts can occur between users of different levels of technology (canoe-motorboat, skiier-snowmachiner, hiker-biker). Conflicts between users of different levels of technology are often asymmetrical. For example, a cross country skier may be displeased in meeting a snowmachine on a trail, but a snowmachiner may be less likely to be offended by the presence of a skier. In general, trail users enjoy meeting like users, but dislike meeting others using faster and more mechanized means of travel.

Another type of trail conflict is resentment toward newcomers. People tend to want a particular place to remain the way it was when they first arrived. This attitude has been described as the "last settler syndrome".

Some trail conflicts are caused by adjacent land uses. Noise and smell from roadways and aircraft can have as much or more impact on trail experiences as conflicts with other users.

User education is one method to maximize enjoyment and reduce conflicts. Individual behavior ultimately ensures personal safety, protection of resources, and an enjoyable trail experience. Education of the public and users involves providing adequate information describing each trail in order to help form appropriate expectations, and advising potential users on expected behavior and trail etiquette. The better educated the user, the less regulation or enforcement is needed and more successful the trail will be in meeting user goals. Trail information should include the intent of the trail, reasons for specific rules, expected trail ethics, and penalties for violation of rules. The user will also need to know who is the managing authority and how to alert them to trail problems.

Communication and cooperation among user groups enhances the opportunity for enjoyable trail experiences for all users. Familiarity with the expectations of user groups is also important. Trail users who are unfamiliar with the needs and expectations of other users can make unrealistic demands to land management agencies. It’s important that trail users know and understand other trail users so they can effectively communicate among each other and with land management agencies.

Trail managers need to address difficult issues on a case-by-case basis. Safety is a primary concern in resolving trail use conflicts. Trail conflicts should be handled directly and openly to keep tension at a minimum, foster cooperation, and strengthen trail constituencies. The best approach will always be dictated by local conditions and available resources.

Policy 5.1.1: Encourage production and dissemination of educational materials to increase public awareness of trail issues and provide information regarding etiquette and safety rules.

Objective 1: Promote or produce appropriate educational materials to increase public awareness of trail courtesy, especially on multiple-use trails.

Objective 2: Provide clear, accurate information at trailheads regarding expected trail conditions and potential conflicting uses, and recommended trail etiquette.

Objective 3: Develop uniform signage and symbols for trail use designations.

Policy 5.1.2: The Borough Trails Commission will offer recommendations for the resolution of trail use conflicts.

Objective 1: The Trails Commission will establish a process for public discussion of trail use conflicts.

Objective 2: Involve trail users in resolution of trail use conflicts as early as possible.

Objective 3: Provide information to encourage trail user organizations to better communicate trail etiquette and user cooperation guidelines to their members.

Objective 4: Engage trail users in ongoing discussions and dialog to breakdown perceived trail user stereotypes.

Objective 1: Provide information regarding land status and allowable trail uses at trailheads.

Objective 2: Use unique trail markers to designate whether a public trail is crossing private or public land.

Policy 5.2.2: Work with private landowners to design and manage trails to avoid or minimize impacts on private property.

Objective: Promote development of handicapped accessible trails.

Policy 5.3.2: Establish designated uses on some individual trails or trail segments in order to ensure high quality experiences.

There will always be some who cannot be persuaded to cooperate with other users, or be considerate of adjacent landowners, and whose lack of consideration threatens the positive impact made by the majority of trail users. Multiple use trails may not succeed without regulations and effective enforcement.

Residents of Alaska have indicated a preference for the establishment of both multiple use and designated-use trails. Offering adequate opportunities for a variety of trail experiences will allow users to avoid trails with high potential for user conflicts. Many trail users currently avoid conflict by using less popular trails. As the population of the Southcentral Alaska increases, the frequency and intensity of trail use conflict will likely increase to the point that management of trail use will be necessary. Designating separate trails for different uses can minimize the need for such management.

Regulations and enforcement are most effective when developed with the input and cooperation of affected user groups, and when the reasons for regulations are clearly communicated. Regulation of trail use can include speed limits, restrictions on the time or season of use, allowable activities, and right of way (who must yield to whom) rules. Trail uses can be separated or restricted for reasons of safety, aesthetics, compatibility with surrounding land use, maintenance, and the potential for environmental degradation. Trail managers need to be concerned with maintaining user safety, protecting the environment, and providing high quality trail experiences.

Before new public trails are dedicated, adjacent land owners and trail users want assurance that the trails will be properly managed. Developing a trail management plan can assure all concerned that the trail will be adequately managed. The management plan should address maintenance, intended uses, enforcement, and other policies. The management plan should also include provisions for associated facilities, trailheads, restrooms, shelters, campsites, information Kiosks, cabins, or other proposed future facilities.

Enforcement of regulations can be extremely difficult in an area of the size and complexity of the Kenai Peninsula Borough. Local residents who take responsibility for a trail are often the most effective and diligent enforcement through "patrolling" the trail and educating trail users.

Policy 6.1.1: Provide for specific uses on some individual trails or trail segments in order to ensure high quality experiences and compatibility with adjacent land uses.

Objective 1: Involve adjacent landowners in the establishment of management guidelines that reflect the desires of local residents.

                    Objective 2: Provide legal open riding areas for motorized trail use.

Objective 3: Provide specific trails and areas that are open only to non-motorized use.

Objective 4: Provide adequate opportunities for mobility-impaired trail users.

Objective 5: Encourage and work with communities, land owners, and land managers to ensure recreational trails are available for a variety of recreational uses.

Objective 6: Encourage and work with communities, land owners, and land managers to establish non-motorized trails where need is identified.

Properly designed trails are the key to minimizing trail maintenance costs. Well-designed trails reduce maintenance costs and environmental impact. Improperly designed trails are expensive to maintain, present safety hazards, and may cause environmental damage or restrict users. Many informal trails climb excessive grades, traverse steep hillsides, cross wetlands, or degrade riverbanks. Acts of nature, such as floods, windstorms, earthquakes, and avalanches, can deplete a trail maintenance budget and take personnel and resources away from other trails. Impacts associated with acts of nature may be minimized by proper trail location.

With a lack of personnel and maintenance dollars, many trails, regardless of design, often aren’t maintained to the level that the public desires. When trails aren’t maintained, erosion can become a problem; trail users often reroute the trail around a poorly drained portion of the trail, causing even more maintenance problems. Brush or grass growing in the trail corridor can make sections of trail hard to find.

Few community trails in the Borough receive maintenance. Those that do, have generally been "adopted" by a trail user group, and are maintained to serve members as well as the general public. Limited funding for trail construction and maintenance can be used more efficiently by engaging assistance from volunteers. During the public comment process, many trail users indicated a willingness to volunteer time to improving and maintaining trails. However, the need for a certain amount of funding is unavoidable.

Trail users have indicated they want better marking of trails, signing, grooming, proper trailhead facilities, and information about of trail conditions. Trails intended for different uses have different maintenance requirements. Trails that are constructed or reconstructed without proper design can invite maintenance problems, as well as safety and aesthetic conflicts between users.

There are also liability questions concerning trail design and maintenance. The borough and user groups can reduce liability exposure by constructing trails to accepted national guidelines. When nationally recognized guidelines are incorporated into trail design and maintenance, liability risk is reduced.

Policy 7.1.1: Trails shall be considered an integral part of the transportation system, and where trails are associated with upgraded or newly constructed roadways, they shall be constructed at the same time as the road upgrade or construction. Costs of trail acquisition and construction shall be integral to the cost estimates for the roadway.

Policy 7.1.2: Develop trail design and maintenance standards that are consistent with accepted national standards, and accommodate user needs.

Objective 1: Develop specific design and maintenance standards for borough trails.

Objective 2: Establish consistent trail signage and a public information program, using uniform symbols for trail activities.

Objective 3: Create a resource library in the KPB Planning Department on trail design, construction, and maintenance.

Objective 4: Encourage trail user groups and volunteers to follow these standards on borough trails.

Objective 5: Develop a trail monitoring form for users to report trail conditions to land managers.

Objective: Develop a maintenance plan and guidelines that involve regular safety inspections.

Funding is critical for acquisition, construction, and maintenance of public trail easements and rights-of-way. While funding is always a challenge, it is not necessarily insurmountable. The main sources of trail funding are federal and state government, local taxes, private foundations, charitable contributions, and trail user fees.

Trail funding has proven to be a wise investment of public money in communities across the country. The investment into a trail system is minimal when compared to the money spent on trail-based recreation. Trail users spend money on recreational equipment, food, and lodging. Trails attract additional visitors to an area. Several studies have shown that residential property along a public trail sells more quickly and for a higher price than similar property without a public trail amenity. A good trail system can also attract new businesses to a community.

Trail efforts around the nation received an important boost in 1991 with enactment of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). This popular legislation provided for a percentage of Federal Highway funds to be dedicated to transportation enhancements (including trails). Both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives recently passed versions of a reauthorization of this Act (called BESTEA, or Building Efficient Surface Transportation and Equity Act). Funding is provided for construction of trails or other enhancements along Federal Highways (the Sterling and Seward Highways). However, money for maintenance of these trails must come from the operating budgets of the DOTPF.

A very significant initiative in the State of Alaska is the Trails and Recreational Access for Alaska (or TRAAK) program. TRAAK is a coordinated effort of the Alaska Governor's Office, DOTPF, DNR, Department of Fish and Game, and Division of Tourism. The goal of the program is to enhance transportation by improving access to trails and adding critical trail links. A major TRAAK effort is the development of an "Alaska Trails System" to identify Alaska's best winter and summer trails and provide funding for maintenance.

The TRAAK Citizens Advisory Board, appointed by the Governor to represent a variety of recreational users, advises DOTPF on the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and the DNR on recreational trails. In addition, the DNR Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation administers the National Recreational Trails Fund Grants, or Symms Grant Program. These grants are for trail development, maintenance, environmental protection or safety education programs relating to trail use. Many trails may be eligible for funding under this program, which has been increased substantially under BESTEA. To receive Federal or State grant funding, trails must be identified in an approved community plan. Other sources of funding include the Alaska Department of Fish and Game Sportfish Access Funds, and Watchable Wildlife Funds.

The National Park Service, Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program is another source of assistance to local governments and trail users. The RTCA provides technical assistance in trail planning, preservation, development, and maintenance. The RTCA is developing a database of additional trail funding sources that may provide funding assistance for local trail efforts.

Private charitable foundations and land trusts can also play an important role, both in funding and assistance with real estate transactions.

Some trail user groups obtain money for trails through membership fees, pull-tabs, user fees, and fundraising events.

Users of both motorized and non-motorized trails have expressed a willingness to support trails through user fees or vehicle registration fees if they were assured those funds would be dedicated for use on trails. The inablilty to earmark state funds for trail use is a serious deterrent to establishing such a funding system.

Policy 8.1.1: Submit grant applications to obtain funding for trail planning, administration, acquisition, development, maintenance, and programming efforts.

Objective: Establish a Trail Coordinator position within the Planning Department to oversee trail development and management, coordinate with user group and individual volunteers, supervise an Adopt-a-Trail program, submit grant applications, administer grants, maintain a trail inventory and trail needs and priorities list, and provide staff support to the Borough Trails Commission.

Policy 8.1.2: Support amendments of State regulations to allow dedicated use of trail user fees, taxes on recreational equipment, or fees for registration of recreational vehicles.

Policy 8.1.3: The Borough will continue to research alternative sources of funding for trails.

Policy 8.2.1: Coordinate with other agencies to maximize effective use of available funding.

Policy 8.2.2: Utilize existing funding mechanisms where available.

Objective 1: Use land management funds to survey and dedicate trails on borough owned and managed land

Objective 2: Rely on acquisition of trail easements through the subdivision process as the lowest cost option for obtaining trail easements

Policy 8.2.3: Pursue the least cost options for easement acquisition.

Trails thrive on a mix of involvement by both public agencies and private partners. Many local residents, community groups and trail user groups in the Kenai Peninsula Borough are already active in volunteer efforts to develop and maintain community trails. Many others are eager to contribute. As the positive economic impacts of trails and recreational development become clear, private developers may be inclined to participate in trail development and maintenance. Volunteer involvement will be a critical component of trail systems in the Kenai Peninsula Borough. Without the help of volunteers in design, construction, and maintenance, a Borough trail system can not succeed.

Volunteers can assist in a variety of ways, including tasks associated with obtaining trail easements, construction, maintenance, monitoring, signing, and user education. Providing an organized and on-going program to support volunteer efforts, and a method to recognize volunteers for their contributions will help establish and maintain a strong trail system.

"Adopt-a-Trail" programs have been successful in other areas in Alaska and throughout the nation. Under these programs, trail user groups or community organizations take responsibility for the construction and long-term maintenance of a trail. In return, the sponsoring group receives recognition, may have priority use of the trails for group events, and may collect user fees or hold fund-raising events to help recover the cost of maintaining the trails. There are several trail groups in the Borough willing to formalize their commitment to developing and maintaining trails or trail systems in their communities. In addition to organized groups, individual trail users are willing to volunteer their time and effort.

While these are very efficient and cost-effective programs, they cannot succeed without coordination, supervision, and administrative support. Many agencies have experienced more public interest in participating in such programs than land managers have time to organize, coordinate, or supervise.

Policy 9.1.1: Provide a variety of options for volunteer participation in a Borough Trail Program

Objective 1: Establish an "adopt-a-trail" program for user groups and other volunteer organizations to assist in or be responsible for maintaining designated trails.

Objective 2: Establish a program for individuals to participate in construction, maintenance, and/or marking of specific trails

Objective 3: Coordinate volunteer events at which individuals may contribute to the development or maintenance of borough trails.

Policy 9.1.3: Make it easier for individuals or user-groups to volunteer.

Objective 1: Provide clear, concise information on how to participate as a volunteer.

Objective 2: Create a streamlined and simple permitting process for activities on borough trails.

Objective 3: Provide guidelines for safety in trail work.

Objective 4: Require volunteers to sign disclaimers for personal injury.

Objective 5: Indemnify trail user groups who to sign maintenance agreements with the Borough.

Policy: Encourage local residents and groups to undertake local trail planning and implementation.

Objective: Prepare a step-by-step guide on how to establish a dedicated community trail.

Policy recommendations requested by the KPB Assembly are contained in this document. Adoption of this Trail Plan and the policies contained in it is the first step toward tangible results for Kenai Peninsula Borough trails. Following is a suggested path from trail planning to tangible trail action:

Step 1: Inventory Issues, Needs, and Trails –This step involves identifying existing trails, identifying issues and needs common to all Borough communities, identifying potential solutions, obtaining agreement among citizens and governing bodies on direction for action. Step one is accomplished through adoption of the Comprehensive Trail Plan, and continuing to inventory existing trails and trail needs.

Step 2: Define Specific Borough Needs and Priorities – This step involves identifying priority improvements within communities, developing and agreeing upon a list of community and borough-wide priorities. It is proposed that this step be undertaken by the Borough Trails Commission following the completion of step one.

Step 3: Select a Strategy to Improve a Particular Trail or Solve a Problem – This step may be performed by any interested group, individual or official body. It includes identifying and analyzing alternative routes or potential solutions to one particular problem, gathering public opinion, further evaluating of the preferred alternative, and gaining the approval of necessary authorities.

The KPB Trails Commission has begun a trail inventory and assessment that is designed to identify trails and needed actions on trails. A series of 226 maps, showing both physical features and land ownership were prepared to aid in identifying existing trails in the Borough. Using trails identified by the State Department of Natural Resources in its 1993 Kenai Easement Atlas as a starting point, the public was asked to identify important existing or needed trail routes on these maps. The inventory is intended to identify trail corridors used by borough residents, whether there is legal public assess or not. An inventory of trails on the 10 million acres of land within the Kenai Peninsula Borough is a major undertaking and will be an ongoing project.

Efforts have been focused toward identification of trails of community wide importance. In some instances, people are reluctant to identify these trails for fear they will become more heavily used. Unfortunately, trail routes that are not identified have little chance of becoming legal public trails, and are likely to be lost to public use. Others are reluctant to identify community trails out of concern that eminent domain will be used to acquire trails on private land for public use. The Kenai Peninsula Borough has no intention of employing "eminent domain" powers for the establishment of public use trails. If an important community trail route cannot be dedicated to public use through cooperative means or during land subdivision, alternative public access solutions need to be determined. As people become more familiar and comfortable with the goals and intentions of trail planning in the Borough, and the advantages of identifying and supporting local trails, we expect additional trails to be identified.

In addition to identifying trails used by the public, there is a need to inventory available public access routes, such as section line easements, that are not currently used, but may provide public access in the future or a needed link for rerouting of a trail. Neither the state nor the borough have an inventory of valid section line easements within the borough. Researching the status of section lines is time-consuming, requiring parcel by parcel historical survey research. The Borough recently obtained grant funding for an inventory of public access routes (including section line easements) to the Kenai River. That study will begin this year, and will lead to development of an interagency management plan for public access to the Kenai River. While continuing this type of research in other areas with public access concern (e.g. coastlines) is desirable, it is dependent on funding.

At present, the best source of information on public trail routes in the Kenai Peninsula Borough is the Kenai Easement Atlas, prepared by the State Department of Natural Resources. This Atlas shows the major dedicated public use trails in the Borough.

The Trails Commission has sought to identify trail routes used by the public, regardless of the legal status of the trail. Publishing an inventory or map of existing local trail routes without regard to the legal status of the trails could imply Borough endorsement of public use of these trails, and could easily exacerbate conflicts between land owners and trail users. Several steps need to be taken before an inventory of community trails can be made public.

1. Trail locations must be verified. If no public trail easement currently exists on a trail, we need to know where the trail is in relation to property lines. If there is a legal trail easement or ROW, we need to determine if the trail is in fact located within the designated easement. In most instances, sufficiently accurate trail locations can be determined using differential global positioning system (DGPS) surveys. The RTCA offers technical assistance to local governments in conduction DGPS surveys of local trails.
2. The legal status of trails must be researched. Thoroughly researching a specific trail or area requires review of State Status Plats, Federal Master Title Plats, 17(b) easement maps and documentation, subdivision plats and recorded instruments.
3. Legal access must be obtained. If a trail does not have continuous dedicated public access along the length of the trail, legal access will need to be obtained, or the route will need to be relocated to provide legal public access.

Only when the trail has continuous legal pubic access can it be included on a trail map for public distribution.

The current Borough trail maps, developed during preparation of this plan are a valuable planning tool and will continue to be developed and refined.

Resources for dedication and improvement of trails are limited, and competition for available funding is intense. To obtain the greatest public benefit from limited funding, community trail improvements need to be prioritized.

In this plan, the Trails Commission has concentrated its efforts on identifying issues and needs common to all borough communities. The Commission intends to now focus on identifying specific trail actions that are priorities for Borough communities. Many communities and individuals have already commented regarding their priority improvements, and a preliminary trail needs list has been developed (see Appendix B). The Commission will continue to solicit public input on specific trail needs from communities, user groups, and individuals. Trail proposals will need to be evaluated and ranked based on criteria such as:

• community use, need, and commitment

• safety

• connections to other trails
• connection to "traffic generators"
• road development
• population to be served
• ability to serve a spectrum of users or to provide an needed facility for a separated use
• environmental concerns
• cost and cost-effectiveness

Community needs and opportunities change. Therefore, the Trail Needs and Priorities list will be developed as a stand alone document and will be appended to the Trail Plan. The Trail Needs and Priorities list will be updated annually. Final approval of the annual trails needs and priorities list will rest with the Assembly.

ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act.

ADL easement: An easement granted by the Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Land. Uses allowed on an ADL easement are those established by law and specified in the grant of easement (i.e., right-of-way permit).

ANCSA 17(b) public easement: A public access easement established under section 17(b) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.

ATV: All Terrain Vehicle: three, four or six wheeled vehicle with a wheel base of less than 40 inches.

BLM: U. S. Bureau of Land Management

BLM easement: An easement reserved by the federal Bureau of Land Management. Uses allowed on a BLM easement are those established by law and specified in conveyance documents.

DOTFP: Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities

DNR: Alaska Department of Natural Resources.

Easement: An interest in land owned by another that entitles its holder to a specific limited use or enjoyment. Easements are reserved for specific purposes, typically trails, roads, campsites and airstrips. Easements are restricted in physical size and the use(s) allowed. The season and duration of use may also be restricted. Easements cannot be used for other purposes.

EIN easement: An easement established under section 17(b) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. Uses allowed on an EIN easement are those specified in the act and in conveyance documents.

Eminent domain: A governmental right to acquire private property for private use by condemnation, and the payment of just compensation.

Equestrian: horseback riding.

FP easement: An easement dedicated by a plat filed with the State Recorder's office. Uses allowed on an FP easement are those established by law and specified on the plat.

Four-Wheel Drive Vehicle: vehicle with wheel base greater than 40 inches, engine power transferred to all four wheels. May or may not be street legal.

Goal: a statement of what the program hopes to accomplish or what the community wants in the long term. Goals state the preferred situation, and may or may not be attainable.

Granted public right-of-way: A public access easement for which a permit has been issued by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Land.

Greenway: Uninterrupted corridor of vegetation which may or may not include public access for recreation.

ISTEA: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991; Federal transportation bill which includes funding passed through to state departments of transportation.

KNWR: Kenai National Wildlife Refuge.

KPB: Kenai Peninsula Borough

KRSMA: Kenai River Special Management Area.

Legal public access: The right of passage, established by law, over another's property. Legal public access is created by an easement dedicated or reserved for public access. Legal public access exists on: 1) public land, 2) public waters, 3) navigable waters, 4) granted or dedicated (platted) public rightsof-way, 5) section line easements, 6) OMNIBUS roads, 7) ANCSA 17(b) public easements, and 8) R.S. 2477 rights-of-way,

LSH easement: An easement granted to the State of Alaska by a private property owner. Uses allowed on an LSH easement are those established by law and specified in the grant of easement.

LWCF: Land and Water Conservation Fund: federal matching assistance program which provides grants for 50 percent of the cost for the acquisition and/or development of outdoor recreation sites and facilities.

Multiple Use Trail: a trail that accommodates more than one trail use. Trail uses could include, but not necessarily limited to: walking, hiking, backpacking, bicycling, mountain bicycling, horseback riding, inline skating, off-highway vehicle riding, all terrain vehicle riding, motorcycling, snowmobiling, jogging, running, etc.

Multiple Use Trail Network: a series of trails that interconnect to form a system that, as a whole, allows for more than one use. The individual trails may be single use or multiple use.

NPS: National Park Service.

Objective: specific actions implementing a policy

OHV: Off-highway vehicle: a motorized street-legal vehicle, with limited off-road capabilities used off-pavement, and with a wheel base greater than 40 inches.

Omnibus Road: A road that was conveyed to the State of Alaska by the quit claim deed dated June 3,1959, executed under the authority of the Alaska Omnibus Act. Uses allowed on an Omnibus Road are those established by law for state highways.

Ordinary high water mark: The mark along the bank or shore of a waterbody where the presence and action of water is so common and usual, and so long continues in all ordinary years, as to leave a natural line impressed on the bank or shore. That line may be indicated by erosion, shelving and changes in soil character, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, or other distinctive physical characteristics.

ORM: Off-road motorcycle: motorcycle, not street legal, designed to be driven cross country off of roads.

ORV: Off-road vehicle: motor driven vehicles capable of cross country travel, without benefit of a road or trail, on or immediately over land, water, snow, ice, marsh, swampland, or other terrain. Includes all terrain vehicles, off-road motorcycles, off-highway vehicles.

Policy: specific guidance or means to achieve a goal

Private land: Land owned by a corporation or individual.

Public land: Vacant, unappropriated federal, state, or municipal land.

Right-of-Way (ROW): A corridor of land owned by a public or private entity for a specific purpose, usually related to transportation or access.

RTCA: National Park Service's Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program

SCORP: Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan.

TEA : Transportation Enhancement Activities: activities that enhance transportation facilities and are eligible for funding through the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991.

Trail: Corridor, on land or in water, which has public access for recreation or transportation, and is protected from development.

USDA: United States Department of Agriculture.