Tourism and Trails: Cultural, Ecological and Management Issues 9781845414795

Citation preview

Tourism and Trails

ASPECTS OF TOURISM Series Editors: Chris Cooper, Oxford Brookes University, UK, C. Michael Hall, University of Canterbury, New Zealand and Dallen J. Timothy, Arizona State University, USA Aspects of Tourism is an innovative, multifaceted series, which comprises authoritative reference handbooks on global tourism regions, research volumes, texts and monographs. It is designed to provide readers with the latest thinking on tourism worldwide and push back the frontiers of tourism knowledge. The volumes are authoritative, readable and user-friendly, providing accessible sources for further research. Books in the series are commissioned to probe the relationship between tourism and cognate subject areas such as strategy, development, retailing, sport and environmental studies. Full details of all the books in this series and of all our other publications can be found on http://www.channelviewpublications.com, or by writing to Channel View Publications, St Nicholas House, 31–34 High Street, Bristol BS1 2AW, UK.

ASPECTS OF TOURISM: 64

Tourism and Trails Cultural, Ecological and Management Issues

Dallen J. Timothy and Stephen W. Boyd

CHANNEL VIEW PUBLICATIONS Bristol • Buffalo • Toronto

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Timothy, Dallen J. Tourism and Trails: Cultural, Ecological and Management Issues/Dallen J. Timothy and Stephen W. Boyd. Aspects of Tourism: 64 Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Culture and tourism. 2. Tourism–Environmental aspects. 3. Tourism–Management. 4. Trails. I. Boyd, Stephen W. II. Title. G156.5.H47T564 2015 306.4'819068–dc23 2014025105 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue entry for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN-13: 978-1-84541-478-8 (hbk) ISBN-13: 978-1-84541-477-1 (pbk) Channel View Publications UK: St Nicholas House, 31–34 High Street, Bristol BS1 2AW, UK. USA: UTP, 2250 Military Road, Tonawanda, NY 14150, USA. Canada: UTP, 5201 Dufferin Street, North York, Ontario M3H 5T8, Canada. Website: www.channelviewpublications.com Twitter: Channel_View Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/channelviewpublications Blog: www.channelviewpublications.wordpress.com Copyright © 2015 Dallen J. Timothy and Stephen W. Boyd. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher. The policy of Multilingual Matters/Channel View Publications is to use papers that are natural, renewable and recyclable products, made from wood grown in sustainable forests. In the manufacturing process of our books, and to further support our policy, preference is given to printers that have FSC and PEFC Chain of Custody certification. The FSC and/or PEFC logos will appear on those books where full certification has been granted to the printer concerned. Typeset by Techset Composition India (P) Ltd., Bangalore and Chennai, India. Printed and bound in Great Britain by Short Run Press Ltd.

Contents

Figures Tables Acknowledgements Preface

vii xi xv xvii

1

Introduction Introduction Definitions and Meanings Scope, Scales and Settings of Routes and Trails Conclusion

1 1 3 8 15

2

Cultural Routes and Heritage Trails Introduction Purposes of Cultural Heritage Trails Cultural Heritage Trails as Tourism Resources Conclusion

17 17 18 20 57

3

Nature Trails and Mixed Routes Introduction Nature Trails Mixed Routes Conclusion

60 60 60 77 94

4

Demand for Trails and Routes Introduction General Trends in Demand Characteristics of Trail Users Access and Location Trail Uses Experience, Enjoyment and Satisfaction Barriers to Use Conclusion v

96 96 97 103 107 110 112 121 124

vi

Tour ism and Trail s

5

Tourism, Recreation and Trail Impacts Introduction Type of Trail/Route Impacts Conclusion

126 126 127 162

6

Planning and Developing Trails and Routes Introduction Route Designation and Related Policies Planning and Developing Trails and Routes Trail Design Conclusion

164 164 165 179 196 212

7

Managing Routes and Trails Introduction Supply Versus Demand Techniques Visitor Management Frameworks and Procedures Conclusion

214 214 215 235 245

8

Reflections and Futures Reflections Futures

247 247 255

References Index

258 296

Figures

Figure 1.1

Conceptual model of trails and routes: A nested hierarchy 15

Figure 2.1

Types of cultural heritage trails

21

Figure 2.2 Evolution of trails from original tracks to developed routes

23

Figure 2.3

Route 66: Illinois to California

30

Figure 2.4

Sign marking the Way of St James in France

34

Figure 2.5

Way of St James and secondary routes

35

Figure 2.6

The historic Grand Canyon Railway

38

Figure 2.7

A small-scale navigable canal in the Netherlands

40

Figure 2.8

Paths at the archaeological site of Tulum, Mexico

44

Figure 2.9

A trail on the ancient city walls of Girona, Spain

45

Figure 2.10 One of Portugal’s wine trails

50

Figure 2.11 St Patrick’s grave in Downpatrick, Northern Ireland

55

Figure 2.12 St Patrick’s Trail/Christian heritage route with recognized attraction clusters

56

Figure 2.13 The head of the Gospel Trail in Israel

57

Figure 2.14 Possible trail/route experience scenarios

59

Figure 3.1

64

A greenbelt trail in Scottsdale, Arizona, USA vii

viii

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 3.2

A wilderness hiking trail in Utah, USA

65

Figure 3.3 A geology trail at Craters of the Moon National Park, USA

70

Figure 3.4

A rainforest canopy trail in Ghana

72

Figure 3.5

The Great Walks of New Zealand

75

Figure 3.6 A visitor center on the Appalachian Trail at Harper’s Ferry

76

Figure 3.7

A bicycle path crosses the Dutch-Belgian border at Baarle Hertog/Baarle Nassau

80

Figure 3.8

A scenic byway marker in the US Southwest

83

Figure 3.9

The Causeway Coastal Route

87

Figure 3.10 The Causeway Coast visitor center

88

Figure 3.11 A popular rail-trail in Illinois, USA

91

Figure 3.12 Types of nature trails and mixed routes

95

Figure 4.1

RVs are popular along scenic routes and byways

104

Figure 4.2

England’s coastal path: Developing a new national trail

108

Figure 4.3

A rural footpath on the Isle of Man

109

Figure 4.4

Applying the realms of experience to trail participation

113

Figure 4.5

Factors shaping demand for trails and routes

124

Figure 5.1

The widening effect of off-trail use in the Himalayas of Bhutan

128

Figure 5.2

Mount Robson Provincial Park as part of the Canadian Rocky Mountains World Heritage Site

130

Figure 5.3 A vandalized agave plant along a heritage trail in Mexico Figure 5.4

A squirrel waiting trailside for tourist handouts by the ‘do not feed the squirrels’ sign at the Grand Canyon

135 137

Figures

ix

Figure 5.5

This trail is experiencing significant wear and tear, and its railing is beginning to fail

138

Figure 5.6

The social effects of recreational noise

147

Figure 6.1 The Canadian Heritage Rivers System

168

Figure 6.2 Comprehensive trail development model

180

Figure 6.3 Hiking trail planning framework

182

Figure 6.4

Trail use of utility infrastructure (water works) in Gilbert, Arizona

186

Figure 6.5 Urban heritage trail formalization: Options and development process

193

Figure 6.6 Highway sign designating a long-distance heritage route

203

Figure 6.7 Blazes marking the Pyrenean Way trail along the French-Spanish border

203

Figure 6.8

Boston’s Freedom Trail embedded in the sidewalks to guide tourists along the path

204

Figure 6.9 A warning sign for trail users

205

Figure 6.10 An accessible beach trail in Denmark

209

Figure 7.1

A ‘hardened’ trail creates a more durable and protective trail surface at this Greek archaeological site

220

Figure 7.2

An interpretive panel on Hadrian’s Wall Path, England

225

Figure 7.3

An unstaffed interpretive center on a scenic byway in Australia

226

Figure 7.4

A ‘branded’ National Recreation Trail in Puerto Rico

231

Figure 7.5

The POLAR model

240

Figure 7.6

POLAR stages four, five and six: Units, access and thresholds

241

Figure 7.7

Partnership models for landscapes of different context and scale

245

Tables

Table 2.1 Designated National Historic Trails in the US, 2013

26

Table 2.2 Examples of tourism-oriented heritage railways

37

Table 2.3 Top 15 wine producing countries in the world by volume, 2010 48 Table 3.1 National Water Trails in the US, 2013

69

Table 3.2 Characteristics of the Great Walks, New Zealand (short–medium distance trails)

75

Table 3.3 European cycle routes in the EuroVelo program

81

Table 4.1 Five most popular outdoor activities in the USA by participation rate, 2011

98

Table 4.2 Five most popular outdoor activities in the USA by frequency of participation, 2011

98

Table 4.3 Trends in demand for trail-type water activities, 2006–2011 (in thousands)

99

Table 4.4 Selected activities in England performed in free time by age, 2007–2008

99

Table 4.5 Top 10 active sports by gender in England, 2007–2008

100

Table 4.6 Pilgrims’ mode of transportation on the Way of St James to Santiago de Compostela

101

Table 4.7 Top 15 nationalities completing the Camino de Santiago, 2012

102

xi

xii

Tour ism and Trail s

Table 4.8 Geographic and demographic characteristics of D&L Trail users

105

Table 4.9

106

Trail use characteristics of D&L Trail users

Table 4.10 Economic distinction between goods, services and experiences

112

Table 4.11 Mean importance ratings for factors influencing a route choice

115

Table 4.12 Desirable attributes of a scenic byway

118

Table 4.13 Top 15 reasons people enjoy scenic byways

119

Table 4.14 Motivations and user type of a suburban all-purpose trail

119

Table 4.15 Motives and influential factors for hiking the West Highland Way, Scotland

120

Table 5.1 The amount and severity of types of ecological impact on Berg Lake and Mount Fitzwilliam Trails

132

Table 5.2 Frequency and lineal extent of problem areas for Berg Lake and Mount Fitzwilliam Trails

132

Table 5.3 Mean ratings of trail photos by tourists and residents in and near Lom, Norway

140

Table 5.4 Landowners’ concerns before the Katy Trail pilot sections opened

142

Table 5.5 Changes in landowners’ attitudes

144

Table 5.6

148

Noise impact cases above the 25% threshold

Table 5.7 Observed behavioral events on Jefferson County open space trails

150

Table 5.8 Spending patterns of cyclists on the north-east England section of the North Sea Cycle Route

156

Table 5.9

158

Annual use and expenditure estimates for the D&L Trail

Tables

xiii

Table 5.10 Lodging choice of multi-day users on the D&L Trail

158

Table 5.11 Use of the D&L Trail influenced people’s equipment purchases

159

Table 5.12 Purchases of ‘soft goods’ while using the D&L Trail

159

Table 6.1 European Cultural Routes

167

Table 6.2 Chronological development of the Canadian Heritage Rivers System

170

Table 6.3 Trail objectives and rationale within UK local cultural strategies

178

Table 6.4

Rationale behind the development of the Thornbury Millennium Trail, UK

179

Table 6.5 Business responses to association with the Art Deco Trail, Napier

196

Table 6.6

201

Acadia recreation setting attributes and encounter levels

Table 6.7 Little Moose Island (LMI) and Jordan Pond (JP) respondent preferences regarding management of use and trail hardening measures

202

Table 7.1

215

Visitor management techniques

Table 7.2 State regulation on commercial horseback tours in National Parks, Australia

218

Table 7.3

222

The seven principles of Leave No Trace

Table 7.4 On-site key messages to encourage minimal impact on the Cape Split Trail

223

Table 7.5 Summary of funding preferences of North Carolina paddlers more likely to support funding mechanisms

233

Table 7.6 Summary of funding preferences of North Carolina paddlers less likely to support funding mechanisms

234

Table 7.7 Summary of preferences of North Carolina paddlers who view paddle trails as an economic development tool

234

xiv

Tour ism and Trail s

Table 7.8 Comparison of the opportunity setting classes and management factors for the ROS, TOS and ECOS frameworks

237

Table 7.9 Scottish Great Trails

243

Table 8.1 Researchers’ interest in tourism trails and routes over time

248

Acknowledgements

I express deep gratitude to Stephen for his patience with me and for his youthful energy and sleepless nights in finishing this manuscript. To my many friends and colleagues around the world, thank you for staying with me and for keeping me on the straight and narrow path. I am especially grateful to my four children, who are no longer kids but were when I started this book! I also wish to express gratitude to dear friends Doug and Marsha Jarman, Kent and Linda Barnes, and Glen and Renae Lukens for being patient as I put them firmly on the back burner until the book was finished. There shall be no more of ‘I can’t, I have a book to write!’ Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to Carol, my forever sweetheart, who puts up with much and whose patience is never ending. I’ve been lucky enough to be her husband for 26 years. It has been the greatest honor and privilege of my life. We have journeyed far on life’s path together. I can’t wait to see what adventuresome trails await us in the next 25 years. I’m certain there will be many forks in the road, and as funnyman Yogi Berra once said ‘When you come to a fork in the road, take it.’ Dallen J. Timothy There are a number of people I wish to thank during the time this book was written. First I want to thank Dallen who has been both a friend and a colleague since we met as graduate students at the University of Western Ontario, all those years ago! I have enjoyed the ‘journey’ this book has taken us on. There are a number of other colleagues who I wish to thank who have been there for me at different stages of my academic career with advice and friendship: Dick Butler, Michael Hall, Alan Fyall, Brian Garrod, Richard Sharpley, Tom Hinch and Brian Wheeller. I want to thank my sons and stepsons who often inquired what topic I was now writing on; here’s hoping they will want to pick the book up and read some sections of it! I wish to also express my deepest love and gratitude to my parents, my sister and my brother, who worry too much that these writing projects take up too much of my personal time. I value their opinions and promise to improve my personal life–work balance in the future. Finally, my deepest thanks and love xv

xvi

Tour ism and Trail s

goes to Wendy, my wife, who has never questioned the hours that writing this book has invaded on our personal lives and time; it’s been a journey we have taken together and I am so appreciative of her enduring support for everything I do. This book talks about some amazing trails and routes, here’s hoping we get to explore many of them together in the not too distant future. Stephen W. Boyd We both wish to extend our heartfelt gratitude for the entire team at Channel View Publications, especially for their unwavering patience and enthusiasm for the book, and Ellie’s gentle reminders. The Channel View team is truly composed of pure and honest professionals!

Preface

More than a decade ago we co-wrote a book titled Heritage Tourism (2003) for Pearson’s Themes in Tourism series. Some of our thinking then involved cultural routes, and one of the book’s main case studies highlighted a heritage trail. But the genesis of our interest in trails, routes, byways, footpaths and other linear corridors predates that book back to the time when we were both graduate students in geography at the University of Western Ontario, Canada. At that time, Dallen published an article in the journal Ontario Geography about the Nauvoo Road in the province of Ontario, which linked pioneers from Canada to the broader Mormon Trail in the United States. Stephen was then the student editor of the journal, and the article sparked an interest in routes as part of tourism and heritage landscapes. The publication of Wall’s (1997) simple, but useful, typology of tourism attractions as points, areas and lines started both of us realizing that of all three spatial arrangements, linear tourism forms received the least scholarly attention. In 1999, we co-presented a conceptual paper on linear tourism spaces at a conference in Flagstaff, Arizona, which was followed by a number of works on the topic. In 2002, Stephen applied the idea of tourism corridor development to an urban trail in Mombasa, Kenya. In 2004, he co-presented a paper on urban heritage routes at a conference in Loch Lomond, Scotland, with one of his postgraduate research students from New Zealand. Over the past decade, Stephen has returned to writing about trails as part of invited chapters in edited books and cases in heritage and presenting research on the subject matter at conferences in Jerusalem and Valparaiso, Chile. Dallen, in his writing over the past decade has also devoted considerable space and attention to trails and routes in many of his authored and edited books and journal articles. As such, this book has been a journey for both of us given that our common academic interests and research backgrounds on trails and routes started to coalesce more than 20 years ago. Apart from our stories and interests in trails and routes, a more serious reason emerged for the production of this book. Although a considerable volume of research has been done, particularly within the recreation domain much more so than in tourism, and very much resigned to case studies in xvii

xviii

Tour ism and Trail s

refereed journals, book chapters, or conference presentations, there has been no concerted effort as far as we are aware, until now, to bring all of these ideas together in an accessible book for students, academic researchers and practitioners. Unlike many authored books, which often are part of a series of similar works, this book, in our opinion, is the first to devote a serious, comprehensive and holistic assessment of routes, trails, tourism and leisure. It builds on the recognized need for scholars to focus on narrower and more specialized monographs, including in this case, a particular type of landscape and visitor attraction. We see this as a contribution to learners and teachers who are interested in cultural heritage-based tourism, recreation and leisure studies, landscape and change, human mobility, geography, environmental management, and broader interests in destination planning, development and management. We acknowledge limitations in this volume and perhaps also that linear spaces are not the most exciting topic for everyone, but we also believe that this seminal book on the topic provides a solid foundation for many years of fruitful research on one of the most omnipresent leisure resources on the globe. Dallen J. Timothy Gilbert, Arizona, USA Stephen W. Boyd Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland January 2014

1

Introduction

Introduction Trails and routes have been indispensable to travel and tourism over the centuries, helping to form the basis of mobility patterns of the past and the present. While they have been recognized elements of human landscapes, the contribution they have brought to tourism and recreation has been understated, hence the rationale for this book. Humans throughout history have blazed and utilized trails in their hunting, gathering, herding and trading pursuits, among which were built established routes that would see explorers, traders, migrants, pilgrims and later tourists. In some geographic settings, certain defined trails and routes would become well-trodden and utilized by many subsequent generations, providing a foundation on which a distinct tourism product would emerge (Moore & Shafer, 2001). Many of these original pathways became the foundations for the multitudes of modern recreation and tourist trails of today (Hogan, 1998; Mulvaney, 2003). As well, some of the vast networks of contemporary highway systems are based upon footpaths and trails that were established centuries or millennia ago. Today, it would be hard to identify a region of the world which does not boast of a trail or route that is sold as part of a wider tourism or recreation experience. And yet, the attention given to this type of attraction has been, to date, minimal, except for some tangential mentions in broader studies or focused and descriptive case studies of either supply or demand. In short, there has not been a concerted attempt to bring together what is a rather disparate body of work by scholars on trails and routes; the book’s central aim is to address this lacuna. A useful starting point for the discussion is to examine the role that linear systems (e.g. paths, routes and trails) have played in assisting people to move around, including for purposes of leisure and pleasure. Linear paths have long been an important tool for human mobility, and much of their appeal was associated as much with the pathway as it was with the destination to which it led. Hunting parties and traders were not required to reach a geographical goal. Instead, they often met the purpose 1

2

Tour ism and Trail s

of their departure along the way. During ancient and medieval times, prescribed byways were developed and utilized for transporting goods and people from one place to another. Roads and other corridors were even paved and signposted during the Roman era. Ancient adherents to Buddha’s teachings traveled along pilgrim circuits to visit the places associated with his birth, ministry and death (Singh, 2011). Medieval Christian pilgrimage, the oft-labeled ‘forerunner of modern-day tourism’ (Olsen & Timothy, 2006), was also a heavy user of prescribed trails that not only led to the end goal, the place of miracles, but also functioned to cleanse, humble and test the faith of spiritual sojourners with their arduous topographies and their great distances. The Grand Tour of Europe, from the middle of the 16th century to the early 19th century, popularized a certain ‘route’ or journey through many of the capital cities of antiquity and culture, which remains popular with today’s circuit travelers of Europe. Following the writings of early Grand Tour travelers came pre-ordained routes some would follow, including picturesque tours of England and Scotland (Aitchison et al., 2002; Towner, 1985). Today, linear corridors are still important for travel both as transportation passageways and as attractions and resources for tourists and recreationists. One of the most pervasive types of tourism and recreation attractions today is trails, pathways and scenic routes and corridors. They provide a wide range of cultural and nature-based opportunities, which many communities and regions throughout the world are beginning to capitalize on and promote in their marketing efforts (Fai, 1989; Reader’s Digest, 2005; Yan et al., 2000). In most cases, trails and routes are seen by destinations as a tool for conserving natural and cultural environments, involving community members in decision-making, earning more tax dollars and regional revenue, and improving the quality of life of residents through employment and the development of a resource they too can utilize for their own enjoyment or transportation. Trails have even secured some prominence in popular culture among modern-day travel writers and explorers. Michael Palin, for example, has not only created ‘new’ routes but rather taken the world on journeys from pole to pole, in circumnavigating the Pacific Rim, in crossing the Sahara, and forging pathways through Brazil, thereby opening new possibilities of circular and linear routes, pathways and journeys that today’s traveler may try to emulate to varying degrees. Similarly, the satirical writing of Bill Bryson in his novels Notes from a Small Island, Down Under and The Lost Continent, has allowed modern-day travelers to re-create portions or all of his journeys across Britain and Australia, and through small-town America, respectively, thereby reinvigorating for many the route or journey over the destination. Perhaps the best example of Bryson focusing on an established route or trail is his experience of walking parts of the Appalachian Trail, renowned as the longest footpath in the world, in his work A Walk in the

Introduc t ion

3

Woods. The Appalachian Trail was established as early as 1925 in an era where the rambling movement was gaining prominence. While the authors do not have the intention to entertain the idea of becoming travel writers about routes and trails, they do believe there is a serious ‘academic story’ to tell about routes and trails and the journeys people have taken on them throughout history. This first chapter starts the ‘journey’ by providing an overview of types of linear resources that are important tourist attractions and recreation resources and examines different types of trails, their role in the attractions system and important matters of scale that help define linear routes and trails. It is important at the outset of the book to provide useful definitions and meanings to what can be termed a ‘trail’ and a ‘route’. Following this, a typology of linear spaces is presented on other corridors that are important trails and routes, namely paths, bridleways, greenways and tour circuits. A discussion of the scope, scale and settings of trails and routes is next. Tourism attractions and spaces can be points, areas or lines. This book focuses on lines, or linear resources, with the acknowledgement that point attractions and small areas can also be part of wider linear spaces. With respect to scale, a discussion is then presented on trails and routes that range from what can often be termed mega trails (covering many thousands of kilometers) to very short walking trails. The various settings of routes and trails are introduced, forming the basis of more in-depth discussions in later chapters on heritage, nature and mixed trail corridors in both urban and rural contexts. The chapter concludes by introducing a conceptual model around which the book and its contents are shaped. This model takes into consideration the supply and demand features of routes and their settings, scales, types, managerial structures and their wider macro policy environment.

Definitions and Meanings The aim of this book is to look holistically at all types of human-created or human-delineated linear routes, although the meaning of each of these might differ depending on the location of the trail, its size and scale, and the types of resources being linked and utilized. The purpose of this section is to establish the types of trails that exist within the recreational and tourist attractions realm and to provide an explanation of each of these and their overlapping or divergent meanings.

Routes and trails A trail is essentially a visible linear pathway of many varieties, which is evident on the ground and which may have at its roots an original and

4

Tour ism and Trail s

historical linear transport or travel function. A route, on the other hand, is generally more abstract and often based on a modern-day conceptualization and designation of a circuit or course that links similar natural or cultural features together into a thematic linear corridor. Scenic routes, or scenic roads, have become more important since the 1980s. These are designated roads and highways that pass through picturesque natural and cultural areas that would be of high aesthetic value to passersby (Schill & Schill, 1997). Scenic routes often follow natural features such as mountain ranges or coastlines and can invoke awe or nationalist sentiments as they focus on national symbolisms and national identity (Faggetter, 2001). There is a wide range of definitions of the term ‘trail’, depending on which agency or individual is defining it and for what purpose (Jensen & Guthrie, 2006; Moore & Ross, 1998; Moore & Shafer, 2001). Most outdoor recreation-oriented definitions emphasize corridors in protected areas and other natural or cultural settings meant for foot, bicycle or horse traffic; these definitions often exclude motorized vehicle access and use, although there are many recreational trails that are specifically devoted to motorcycles and other off-road vehicles. The definition of trails used in this book is somewhat broader and includes all natural or human-made linear corridors in rural or urban areas designated as trails, paths or routes for the use of recreationists, tourists or travelers regardless of their mode of transportation. Thus, our description involves multiple scales and goes beyond purely a natural area definition to include cultural areas, cities, the countryside and other forms of transportation besides foot or bicycle. In the United States (US) the National Recreation and Park Association classifies trails as greenway trails, park trails and connector trails, which link parks to work places and schools (Moore & Shafer, 2001: 4). Moore and his colleagues (see Moore & Driver, 2005; Moore & Ross, 1998; Moore & Shafer, 2001) provide a comprehensive overview of several types of linear resources, although their examination focuses overwhelmingly on outdoor nature trails and is not comprehensive from a tourism and cultural heritage perspective. As well, these classifications tend to be quite Americocentric and do not deal directly with issues of scale, resource utilization or the nuances of demand. Nonetheless, theirs is a useful starting point in understanding the wide variety of trails that are used by tourists and recreationists. Their typology, which includes traditional backcountry trails, recreational greenway trails, multi-use trails, water trails, and rail-trails, will be examined in much more detail in later chapters. At first glance the title of this book might appear confusing to some people, depending largely on where they live and their own exposure to linear tourism and recreation resources, such as trails and scenic corridors. The terms trail, path, walkway, corridor and other similar words have different meanings in different locations. A footpath in the United Kingdom (UK), for example, usually refers to small ways in urban or rural areas that are

Introduc t ion

5

relatively accessible and short in length. Such a phenomenon in the US would more commonly be referred to as a trail. Despite some differences, for ease of discussion, this book uses the words trail, corridor, route, path and others interchangeably to encompass all forms of linear, human-designated attractions, even though the authors are cognizant of many subtle and not so subtle differences between different terms. While recognizing this treatment of terms, the following sections set out to define other linear recreation and tourism corridors that are an important part of the global system of routes and trails.

Paths and bridleways Paths, footpaths and tracks usually indicate narrow walkways that have been trodden or beaten by humans, animals, bicycles or other agents. They are a type of trail typically found in wilderness and rural areas, although many footpaths have also been labeled in towns and cities, frequently in parks or along streams and canals. Paths are used for recreational purposes, such as countryside strolling, or for transportation in towns or between villages. Bridleways or bridle trails are similar to pathways, except that they may also be used to ride or lead horses, and some bridleways are devoted solely to horseback riding (Beeton, 1999a; Countryside Panel, 1987). Right of way is a related term more common in the UK and Europe than in North America or other parts of the world that refers to open-access paths that the public has a legal right to use at any time (Natural England, 2012; Wolfe, 1998). Rights of way in England are classified as footpaths for walking; bridleways, where horse riding and cycling are allowed in addition to walking; and byways, which are open to all traffic (Walker, 1996). The Countryside Commission, which was subsumed in 1999 and its responsibilities spread to other nature and rural agencies, had as its original purpose promoting public rights of way to develop ‘networks of well signposted and maintained routes throughout the countryside, giving ready access from towns, linking points of interest in the countryside, and coordinated with accommodation, car parks, publicity and guides’ (Walker, 1996: 28). In addition to rights of way paths, according to the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, the public is permitted to walk freely on mapped rural areas without having to remain on prescribed paths. At their disposal is approximately 865,000 hectares of open-access land (Natural England, 2012), which has opened up considerable debate in the UK and paved the way for more rambling options for day trippers and tourists. There are several different official scales associated with rights of way. In 1989, the Countryside Commission in the UK established parish paths and community paths, local walks and rides, regional routes and national trails. The first type, parish paths and community paths, were marked from roadways and noted on ordinance survey maps. They were to be

6

Tour ism and Trail s

maintained and kept opened, but not promoted or interpreted, for their primary users: local residents wishing to wander about the countryside. These trails link local other trails or local roads to nearby villages, farms or churches (Curry, 1997; Walker, 1996). Local walks and rides were also marked and maintained but promoted for local use near people’s homes or in their holiday destinations. Car parks were provided, and many bestowed a full day’s range of hiking and other activities. Local walks can be found not only in rural areas but also in cities where they often have a cultural or historical bent. Regional routes are longer, themed routes that could require one or more days of travel and could be promoted as important tourist attractions, especially for domestic visitors. Finally, national trails (known as ‘long distance routes’ in Scotland) are long-distance corridors in England and Wales that are truly national in character, can be used on multi-day hikes by foot, horse or bicycle, and can be marketed as international tourist attractions (Curry, 1997; National Trails, 2012; Walker, 1996). Presently there are approximately 4000 km of national trails in England and Wales.

Greenways Greenways are different from trails, although many greenways include recreational or transportation trails within them, and they often connect traditional parks and trails (Bowick, 2003; Moore et al., 1998; Mundet & Coenders, 2010). Little (1990) advocated for a very comprehensive definition of greenways, which included among its various manifestations the trails defined above. According to Little (1990: 1), greenways can be viewed rather broadly to include linear open spaces along natural corridors (e.g. rivers or ridgelines) or human-created features (e.g. railways, scenic roads, canals); natural or landscaped courses for bicycle or pedestrian use; open-space connectors that link nature preserves, parks and historic sites to one another or to populated areas; and linear parks specified as parkways or greenbelts. Little also recognized five specific, albeit overlapping, kinds of greenways based upon their location, their settings and their functions: urban riverside greenways, recreational greenways, ecologically important natural corridors, scenic and historic routes, and comprehensive greenway networks. Other observers have provided similar definitions and classifications, such as Fabos (1995), who defined greenways as linking corridors of various sizes and suggests a threefold typology: recreational greenways, ecologically significant greenways and heritage or cultural greenways. Much work on the subject has emphasized the role of greenways and their functions in urban areas. These include, but are not limited to, recreation, transportation routes, economic development, wildlife habitats, general beautification and storm-water management (Frauman & Cunningham, 2001; Jim & Chen, 2003; Moore & Shafer, 2001; Palau et al., 2012).

Introduc t ion

7

Tour circuits Tour circuits are another type of route that has been largely overlooked in the travel literature. These courses are important in understanding tourism growth, regional dynamics and linkages, as well as traditions of market demand for a region and its products. While these are not designated, or officially recognized, linear routes as the trails and pathways heretofore discussed are, they are still important in that they are circuits that have evolved over the years into preferred networks that are traveled independently or on a coach and tour package. Backpackers and other independent travelers have commonly followed popular routes in different parts of the world. Drifter tourism has mythologized places and generated a ‘mobile subculture of international backpackers [who utilize] an almost entirely separate tourism infrastructure . . . [and] follow distinctive trails of their own’ (Westerhausen & Macbeth, 2003: 71). Many of these ‘Gringo trails’ or ‘Hippy trails’ can be found all over the world, but particularly in developing regions (Hampton, 2013). ‘Drifting’ through Southeast Asia is popular among backpacker tourists on three to six month journeys. Among the most favored backpacker destinations on these travel circuits are Bangkok, Koh Samui, Koh Phi Phi and Chiang Mai (Thailand); Luang Prabang, Vang Vieng and Vientiane (Laos); Hanoi, Dong Ha and Hué (Vietnam); Phnom Penh and Siem Reap/Angkor Wat (Cambodia); and Penang, Pangkor and Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) (Backpacker Guides, 2012). These are all considered ‘must-do’ destinations on the Southeast Asian backpacker circuit and include a mix of culture, nature and beaches. Similarly, a popular drifter/nomad circuit in Australia is known as the Harvest Trail, where backpackers travel around the country along known circuits, harvesting fruit and vegetables when they come in season in exchange for cash, places to sleep and food to eat (Cooper et al., 2004). This is touted as a work-as-you-go method of traveling and seeing Australia. Likewise, the ‘Hummus Trail’ is an informally prescribed network of sites, cities, villages, guesthouses and restaurants that are frequented by Israeli youth traveling through India and where there are many services catering specifically to the Israeli market. This provides a sense of solidarity among Israeli backpackers and in some ways provides the comforts of home in a very different environment (Enoch & Grossman, 2010). The medieval Grand Tour is sometimes said to be the ancient forerunner to today’s backpacker tourism; Grand Tour circuits also included well-trodden tour circuits and must-see destinations in Italy (e.g. Rome, Venice, Florence and Naples) and other parts of Europe (Brodsky-Porges, 1981; Towner, 1985). In addition to backpacker routes, there are also recognized tour circuits used by tour companies and individual travelers on a regular basis and these take on many spatial forms including day trips, route trips, and multi-nodal trips (Zillinger, 2007). Many of these are based on point-to-point networks of capital cities, and in most cases these link together famous sites that are

8

Tour ism and Trail s

known to appeal to mass tourists. Common tour circuits in Western Europe include visits to Amsterdam, Brussels and Paris in conjunction with London and Rhine River cruises. Attendance at the once-a-decade passion play at Oberammergau, Germany, is usually accompanied by visits to the salt mines at Berchtesgaden and nearby Salzburg, Austria. Another emerging trend is Christian pilgrimage cruises that follow the routes of ancient apostles throughout the Mediterranean. Thousands of such unofficial, albeit popular, tour circuits exist all over the world. However, they are not the main focus of this book, although they will be alluded to throughout.

Scope, Scales and Settings of Routes and Trails Tourist attractions are the most important part of the tourism system, for without them people would have no place to go. Attractions include a wide range of resources, both natural and human-created, that draw people away from their home environments to undergo a wide range of potentially overlapping experiences, including pleasure and enjoyment, relaxation, education, cultural edification, religious obligation, spiritual inspiration, health and wellness, nature appreciation or the discovering of one’s roots (Gunn & Var, 2002; Leiper, 1990; Lew, 1987). Several scholars have examined the meanings and forms of tourist attractions, suggesting that attractions are more than simply any object, place or event that draws people. Leiper (1990; see also Hall & Page, 2010) used a systems approach to deconstruct the meaning of attractions and suggested that they are more than simply a specific site that exudes some sort of intrinsic value. Instead, he (and MacCannell, 1976) suggested that tourist attractions comprise the point of attention itself (the nucleus), the tourists who visit them, and markers, or the information provided. Thus, for an object, event or place to become a tourist attraction, it must be valued, desired, preserved and somehow its story interpreted by human beings. In this sense human value is assigned to it, and it becomes an attraction because of the human and informational/marker influences. Another pertinent way of looking at attractions is by their areal or spatial form and function, remembering that tourism takes place not only at tourist attractions but also between them (Fagence, 2011; Zillinger, 2007). Wall (1997) suggested a spatial-form typology of tourist attractions that is useful in understanding a site’s locational elements and possible physical impacts resulting from tourism, as well as being helpful in physical planning and developing commercial enterprises. He outlines three structural forms of attractions, namely points, areas and lines. Point attractions, according to Wall, are those where high numbers of people are concentrated in a small space to view and experience a single resource or a compact collection of connected resources. Some examples of point attractions include museums,

Introduc t ion

9

cemeteries, churches, waterfalls, monuments and archeological sites. The compact nature of points provides more efficient opportunities for the ‘commercial exploitation’ of tourists, and some of the negative impacts associated with tourism can be limited to small areas. Nonetheless, such areas may face the danger of being over-commercialized and overcrowded, which can at peak times diminish the quality of the visitor experience and result in environmental degradation. National parks, small towns and historic cities, resort communities and wilderness zones are common examples of area attractions. This type of attraction might comprise several point attractions, such as scenic overlooks, waterfalls, campgrounds and historic buildings, which together become nodes in a larger attraction system. This resembles closely what Leiper (1990) called ‘clustered nuclei’, where tourists gather in certain areas because of the nucleic clusters of unifying themes. While areas might also attract large numbers of tourists, owing to their larger spatial extent, they can encourage a wider dispersion of visitors, thereby spreading commercial development and tourist expenditures to more locations and diluting the negative impacts of heavy levels of visitation. Nonetheless, they, too, can experience extremely crowded conditions during high season. In many US national parks, such as Yellowstone, Zion, Grand Canyon and Great Smoky Mountains, excessive car traffic can make navigating park roads and car parks very difficult during the summer months (Sims et al., 2005). Wall (1997) suggests that some areas are so large and dispersed that it might be necessary to create concentrations of services that will enable visitors to be monitored, catered to and counted. This often takes place at gateways, interpretive centers and commercial clusters. The final spatial type of attraction noted by Wall is of most concern in this book, although all three categories are important in the context of smalland large-scale routes and trails. Wall (1997: 241) defines linear tourism resources as those with physical linear properties and those which guide visitors along a specific path. These include rivers, lakeshores, coastlines, other rectilinear landforms, trails, highways and scenic routes. In these cases, visitors converge along narrow strips of land or transportation corridors. While users might be concentrated along linear attractions, they are more dispersed than at point attractions. Wall (1997: 241–242) suggests that from a monetary perspective, visitor concentrations may still be ample enough to attract substantial commercial development, which can have negative implications, such as overdeveloped coastlines, polluted rivers and byways cluttered with billboard advertisements. In some cases, scenic corridors are so crowded with buildings, pedestrians and car traffic that it is difficult to catch a glimpse of the natural or cultural landscape that was the primary appeal of the area. Scale is a critical concept for understanding tourist attractions, destinations and tourism planning and development (Shackley, 2003). Different scales or sizes of routes and trails will have different management implications and conservation challenges. This spatial dimension is a crucial element of Lew’s

10

Tour ism and Trail s

(1987) conceptualization of tourist attractions and their physical sizes and layouts. Lew suggested that attractions may range from very small objects, such as a famous piece of jewelry (e.g. the Hope Diamond), to very large areas, such as regions or countries. From the perspective of regions or countries, attractions tend to be multi-nucleic with an area possibly containing many examples of a type of attraction. One example is the common elements of the cultural or physical landscape that makes the Scottish Highlands appealing to many tourists (Leask & Barriere, 2000). Another way of viewing scale is the expanse of an attraction’s reach in relation to visitors’ personal connections to, or interest in, the site or object (Graham et al., 2000; Gunn & Var, 2002; Timothy, 1997). Timothy (1997) suggested a scalar typology of cultural heritage attractions, with global attractions exerting the greatest appeal and impact to the most widespread consumer cohorts. These include famous sites that are recognizable and iconic throughout the world, some of which have been designated World Heritage Sites by the United Nations Economic, Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Examples are the Great Wall of China, the Egyptian Pyramids, the Eiffel Tower and the Roman Coliseum. Just below global heritage sites are national attractions that appeal primarily to domestic travelers, but which may in fact also draw international visitors who are already in the destination. These often include nationalistic monuments and national shrines. Local heritage is one scale lower and appeals primarily to local visitors who may use historical museums, historic schools or monuments erected to local war heroes. At the smallest scale are attractions that appeal to individuals and families because of their personal connections to the place or event being visited. Old homesteads, cemeteries, churches, genealogical libraries, and other such attractions form the individual nuclei within a destination that is closely connected to one’s ancestral past (Timothy, 2008). Although both of the contexts of scale noted above are critical elements of understanding tourist trails and routes, the most obvious scale relationship is size in terms of distance and reach. Equally important are the geographical settings for trails, particularly urban and rural, or wilderness and developed. If size and reach are examined on a continuum of small to large, one of the smallest trails would certainly be the course within a point attraction, such as a museum, garden or archaeological park (MacLeod, 2004). Such attractions are usually edged and crisscrossed with walkways or marked routes that help traffic flow and visitors proceed logically from one point or nucleus to another. These lines are important management tools in that they help interpreters and other site managers control crowds and disseminate interpretive information more effectively. These paths can help visitors build chronological knowledge and increase their expectations as some routes build up to a grand finale or anchor attraction within a garden or museum.

Introduc t ion

11

Further along the continuum are footpaths that lead from one attraction to another or one site to another within larger areas, such as national parks or historic villages. This also includes short nature trails, which visitors can follow into a rainforest, a dune, or short distances from a campground in the mountains. Such trails might be less than one kilometer long to a few kilometers long and are found abundantly all over the world. Usually these are limited to foot and bicycle traffic, although in some areas they might allow horses as well. Larger in scope are extensive urban themed trails or tour circuits that link historic sites, buildings and locations associated with an important period of time, a famous person, an architectural style or a significant event (Goodey, 1975; Timothy, 2014). The ‘Gaudi Trail’, better known as the ‘Modernist Walking Tour’ of Barcelona, Spain, links the modernist architectural achievements of Antoni Gaudi that have helped to make the city one of the most visible cultural centers of Europe (Usón, 2002). The New Amsterdam Trail in downtown Manhattan highlights the original locations of buildings and sites during the 17th-century Dutch colonial period of New York City (US National Park Service, 2009). Many of these trails can be traversed on an individual basis, or guided tours can be purchased or otherwise arranged. The US National Park Service provides an audio tour free to download onto mobile recording devices, while many of Barcelona’s visitors hire a city guide to pilot them through the architectural landscape of the city. Regional and national trails tend to be large in scale, or long in length, but their actual sizes vary from country to country, and depending upon what they commemorate. What they all have in common, however, is significant size in relation to national territory, and they have cultural, historical or natural significance for the region or nation. Many such routes can only truly be followed by car owing to their length. These are common in Australia and North America, where many long-distance national trails parallel major highways, and distances are vast. In Australia, Northern Queensland’s Taste of the Tropics Food Trail and the Southern Heritage Drive are good examples of regional trails that focus on agriculture and culinary heritage (Australian Tropical Foods, n.d.; Cairns City Council, n.d.). Many shorter national trails are footpaths where only hiking and rambling are allowed, despite their lengths. Owing to its large size, the US is home to several important longdistance trails that have been officially designated National Historic Trails, National Scenic Trails or National Recreation Trails (Chavez et al., 1999; Elkinton & Maglienti, 1994). It should be noted, however, that there are several shorter trails in the US that have the same designations owing to their national significance. The California National Historic Trail is the longest in the US trails system (9117 km) and traverses 10 states from The Midwest to the west coast. It is an emigrant trail that commemorates the westward movement of Europeans and the settlement of the west. The Appalachian Trail is one of the world’s longest nature trails (3500 km) and one of the most

12

Tour ism and Trail s

heavily hiked in the US, although relatively few people navigate its entire length, instead joining it somewhere along the way and hiking for a few days at a time (Foresta, 1987; Hill et al., 2009). The National Trails system in the UK includes primarily long-distance footpaths and bridleways. Hadrian’s Wall Path (135 km) is one of the most popular national trails in England and extends from the west coast to the east coast in the north of the country. It follows the old Roman frontier built nearly 2000 years ago. The wall and its parallel path pass through some of the most scenic landscapes of northern England. The path is popular for ramblers and drive tourists, the latter tending to stop at various locations, forts, turrets and interpretive centers along the wall (Coleman, 1994; McGlade, 2014; Usherwood, 1996). Beyond the regional or national scale, there are many binational or multinational routes that have become the focus of tourism promotional efforts (Timothy, 2014; Wanalertsakul et al., 2011). In most cases, these are designated because of their cultural characteristics and the human elements of the past they purport to connect across international boundaries. Sometimes, although these link places in more than one country, they might be of a shorter length than completely domestic trails. One example is the 40 km Cross-border Mining Education Trail (Grenzüberschreitender Bergbaulehrpfad/ Prˇíhraniční naučná hornická stezka), shared by Germany and the Czech Republic to interpret the tin mining heritage of Central Europe. The route connects monuments, mines, ditches and tailings, museums and other attractions into a loop route that can be driven part of the way or walked entirely, crossing the German-Czech border twice (Kowalke, 2004). Short international trails such as this one can be found by the thousands in all parts of the world (e.g. Koščak, 1999; Rennicke, 1997a). There are, however, larger routes that include many different countries. In some cases it is almost impossible to negotiate the entire route because of its sheer scale, the complexity of its connecting sub-trails, or because of political or physical geographical barriers. In several instances, travelers can follow the general direction of the trail or at least one branch of it by airplane, bus, train, private car, or a combination of these. Perhaps the best example is the Silk Road, which passes through the territories of several countries in Asia and Europe (Tang, 1991; World Tourism Organization, 1996). China, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan are among the most active countries seeking to inscribe the route and some of its related sites on UNESCO’s World Heritage List in a truly transnational way. The Silk Road is not one single corridor but rather a wide network of ancient land- and sea-based silk trade routes that crisscross Central Asia, South Asia, the Middle East and the Mediterranean. With the recent opening of a cargo train line from western China to Germany, in theory one of the main corridors of the Silk Road can now be traveled (Mu, 2011). Other large-scale routes have been proposed, including La Ruta Maya to connect the Mayan lands of Mexico and Central America as a cultural swath for preservation and economic development (Ceballos-Lascuráin,

Introduc t ion

13

1990). Aside from the Silk Road, one of the most ambitious proposals has been the development of the Cape to Cairo corridor, originally conceived by Cecil Rhodes to unite Africa by rail from its southernmost tip to its northern edge, from Cape Town to Cairo. In the past decade there have been whisperings of trying to resurrect this idea as a pan-African tourism corridor, although there are many physical, economic and geopolitical constraints standing in the way of its fruition (Frost & Shanka, 2001). Some of these same multinational routes are well suited as walking paths, at least portions of them are. The Way of St James (Camino de Santiago) is one of the most popular pedestrian trails in Europe, especially among Roman Catholics. The main portion of the way begins in France and ends 900 kilometers later at Santiago de Compostela, Spain. In addition to the core trail there are feeder paths from as far away as the Czech Republic, Germany, Austria, Italy, Switzerland, Portugal, and several other European countries (Mariñas Otero, 1990; Santos, 2002). The Camino is a good example of true cross-border cooperation in developing a long-distance cultural/ pilgrimage trail.

Settings As noted throughout the discussion so far, trails are found both in urban and rural settings with many overlapping purposes and resources. Nonetheless, this section examines some of the characteristics of each of these geographical settings. With respect to urban trails, they are often an integral element of the open space of cities and are increasingly frequented by urban residents. As for rural trails, they have become key access routes, often through landscapes of mixed ownership, as well as playing an important role in helping to conserve the countryside and open it up for passive forms of recreation and tourism. Trails and walking paths are one of the most important elements of city tourism and recreation in the developed world, and they are becoming a more vital part of the urban milieu in the developing world. Urban trails provide much-needed open space in large cities and can be a respite from the frenetic pace of metropolitan living. They provide venues for exercise, transportation access between home and work or home and school, and help build an appreciation for the city and its history and nature. The forms and functions of urban trails vary considerably from place to place and can depend on the age and size of the city, as well as the needs of its residents. City parks, gardens and other greenways are one of the most ubiquitous locations of urban paths and trails (Auckland City, 2004; Belan, 2000). They are now a universal part of the urban fabric of most historic cities throughout the world. Heritage trails are often developed to link together thematic cultural sites that are of most importance in the city where they are located (Goodey, 1975; Hayes & MacLeod, 2007, 2008).

14

Tour ism and Trail s

In rural areas, trails, footpaths and other countryside corridors are usually seen as potentially lucrative from a number of perspectives. First, they can be seen as being a salient tool for conserving rural landscapes via policy directions and building awareness and appreciation through interpretation and experience among the general public. In this sense, many public and quasi-public agencies that oversee rural trails view their designation and maintenance as crucial tools for capacity control, preserving the rural idyll and creating an appreciation for the exurban way of life (Gilbert, 1989). Most rural trails can be found in national parks or other protected public lands, although in the UK and other parts of Europe, they are very common on private land as well, with right of access laws allowing the public onto private lands for walking and hiking (Millward, 1993; Scott, 1986; Wolfe, 1998). There is considerable overlap between urban and rural trails, as many of them lead from the countryside into cities or towns and vice versa, especially if they are found within the peri-urban space which is often referred to as the rural–urban fringe.

Networks Another concept in understanding long-distance trails, large-scale travel corridors and international routes is networks. Networks are defined by relationships between entities, or nodes, and the structure of these relationships (Scott et al., 2008: 1). From a tourism perspective, network analysis has traditionally focused on the various service providers and administrators within the tourism system and their inter-organizational relationships. The collaborative affiliations, partnerships and interdependence within the broader tourism system are what constitute the notion of networks (Baggio & Cooper, 2010; Baggio et al., 2010; Timothy, 1998b). Underscoring networks are collaborative principles such as trust, cooperation, working for the greater good, social capital development and social support. While network concepts in tourism studies do not necessarily refer to the spatial notion of nodes and linear linkages as already noted, they certainly can. Networks are especially crucial in understanding scale but also in interpreting the development and operation of purposive cultural routes (see Chapter 2), as well as other types of trails. The development of a trail (linear resource) from a series of individual nodes (point attractions) requires the successful implementation of networks and social capital building. The Ale Trail in Canada, discussed later, is a good example of the importance of building network capital and common trust, and how these efforts sometimes fail. Marketing and governance networks are especially important in the development of multi-nodal destination products (Beaumont & Dredge, 2010; Dredge & Pforr, 2008; Pavlovich, 2003), including purposive trails, owing to the complexities of consensus and trust building, forming interdependence, policy development and maintaining the public image of these tourist routes.

Introduc t ion

15

Conclusion The supply of trails is extremely difficult to measure, as is demand. The number of trails, pathways, scenic routes and other linear resources is impossible to quantify for a whole variety of reasons, such as the ways they are classified, their different sizes, intensity of use, surface quality, ownership and management, locations, or the multi-jurisdictional aspects of many cross-border trails (Moore & Shafer, 2001). The best we can do is categorize them so that they can be studied, evaluated and measured. Many are private, many are public, many are small, many are large, many are nature-based, many are culture-based, many are historical and many are of more recent vintage. Chapters 2 and 3 examine the supply side of tourism and recreation trails. What they all have in common, however, is theming where points along the trail are linked together, either as being representative of a period of time or illustrative of cultural or natural phenomena (Meyer-Cech, 2005). Long-distance routes attract visitors to a set of historically important cultural attractions by creating an attractively linked themed product (Shackley, 2003: 13). Nature trails, or countryside pathways, are themed as connectors or recreation trails that provide access to nature for their users, and they commonly focus on a specific ecosystem. This chapter has not attempted to highlight every size, scale or type of trail, path or tourist corridor but rather to provide an overview of the main types, forms and functions. A useful way to encapsulate trails and routes is through the use of a conceptual model. Conceptual models are abstractions of reality, but they also serve as a useful tool by which one can position any trail or route. The conceptual model shown in Figure 1.1 also acts as a frame Wider macro-policy environment

Nature of Experience

Rural

Mixed

Type: Cultural Heritage

Rural–urban fringe

Seng: Wilderness/peripheral

Nature

Urban

Figure 1.1 Conceptual model of trails and routes: A nested hierarchy

16

Tour ism and Trail s

of reference for the whole book, addressing key aspects which are addressed in separate chapters. The model is shaped around the concepts of type, setting, scale, management structure and the wider policy environment that has shaped tourism development and infrastructure within certain defined geographic settings. The model has a nested hierarchical form, which has at its center the experiential dimension of tourists and recreationists engaging in trails and routes (either in a casual, purposive or accidental form) as part of a leisure experience or its totality, shaped around the necessary supply in terms of types of trails and routes (including paths, bridleways, greenways and tour circuits), their settings in which they occur (wilderness/peripheral, rural, rural–urban fringe and urban), the scale involved (mega, binational or multinational, national, regional and local) and finally their rationale (culture and heritage, nature-based or mixed). These elements of the model are shaped by a range of factors such as the administrative structures imposed on how the trails are managed (single ownership, partnerships, top-down or grass roots) marketed (as part of a wider attraction mix, or exclusively as a primary attraction) and the impacts they face. All of this takes place within the wider macro policy environment for tourism and recreation in which trail/route development is only one element of national, regional and local policies. All of the model’s elements are addressed in detail within the book, starting with types (supply) of trail and routes – the focus of Chapters 2 and 3. These two chapters examine in detail cultural, nature-based and mixed routes and some of the contemporary critical issues surrounding them. On the flipside, demand for trails and routes is addressed in depth in Chapter 4, emphasizing the uses of trails, market characteristics and behavioral aspects. The ecological, social and economic impacts arising from cultural and natural corridor usage are the focus of Chapter 5, including positive and negative outcomes of trails from both community members’ and tourists’ perspectives. Chapter 6 highlights the planning and development of routes and trails, looking particularly at the macro policy arena in terms of designation policies, legislation, planning and design. The seventh chapter examines the management of trails once they have been established, addressing issues such as maintenance, visitor management and monitoring. Chapter 8 provides reflections on the main ideas brought out in the book and provides direction for future academic discourse on trails and routes.

2

Cultural Routes and Heritage Trails

Introduction This chapter commences an examination of the component parts of the conceptual model introduced in Chapter 1. The focus of the chapter is the supply side of routes and trails, and in this case cultural routes and heritage trails, probably the most popular type of tourist trail. In short, these are organized ways for cycling, walking, driving or riding that draw on the cultural heritage of a region and provide learning experiences and visitor enjoyment. They are marked on the ground with signs or other interpretive media and on maps that help guide visitors along their course (MacLeod, 2004). Heritage routes and trails tend to be most prevalent in areas with already high levels of tourism and, while there are many heritage trails in the less-developed parts of Africa, Latin America and Asia (e.g. the Slave Route, the Inca Trail and the Silk Road), their preponderance tends to be in the developed parts of the world, particularly in North America, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Japan. As a result, and given the availability of information and data, the majority of trails mentioned in this chapter are from the developed world. Where available, information is also presented about examples from less-developed regions. This emphasis on more affluent countries does not imply that these types of routes and trails do not exist elsewhere, or that other places are less important. It simply reflects a greater abundance of information and empirical examples. There are literally thousands of cultural heritage-based routes in all parts of the world. Some are more famous and well-trodden than others, and they exist on many different scales. While this chapter cannot possibly examine all of them, or even mention them by name, it does highlight a multitude of major trends from the supply perspective and elucidates a number of heritage trails in considerable detail. Although both culture and nature trails are 17

18

Tour ism and Trail s

important tourism resources, there are several different characteristics that separate them. The next chapter will examine nature trails in greater detail. This chapter is structured as follows. First is a discussion on the purposes of cultural heritage trails, including enjoyment, preservation, image enhancement of place, economic development and as instruments of power and persuasion. Second, a typology and model of cultural heritage trails is introduced, which categorizes trails into two defined types: organically evolved and purposive routes. Organically evolved routes include trade routes, explorersettler-migration routes, religious routes/pilgrim trails, and intentionally built linear resources such as historic railways, canals and relict boundaries. In contrast, purposive cultural trails are composed of short trails at historic sites or gardens, maritime routes, urban heritage ways, literary, film and music trails, industrial trails, agricultural trails, food and wine routes, and inorganic religious trails that are products of collaborative networks developed between individual nodes.

Purposes of Cultural Heritage Trails Cultural resource-based routes provide considerable public enjoyment and recreation, both for residents and tourists. In addition, they serve a variety of important social, economic and political purposes. One of the leading roles of heritage trails is the preservation of historic values and conservation of cultural resources and historic routeways, including migration routes, explorer trails, railways and logging paths (Hayes & MacLeod, 2007; Ramsay & Truscott, 2003; Snowball & Courtney, 2010; Timothy, 2014). In common with cultural heritage-based tourism in general, these routes provide information about, and commemorate, past historical events, places and peoples. They are interpreted with a variety of tools, including signs, plaques, audio guides, maps and leaflets, or human guides. Interpretation is a well-recognized method of increasing public awareness and education, and according to interpretation specialists, knowledge begets respect, which has a tendency to translate into increased public appreciation for resources and boosted efforts to conserve (O’Brien & Curtis, 1979; Tilden, 1977; Timothy & Boyd, 2003). Part of the Council of Europe’s rationale for initiating the Cultural Routes Programme was to help protect Europe’s cultural heritage (Moulin & Boniface, 2001). Likewise, the 1968 National Trails System Act was implemented to protect cultural and natural resources in the United States (US). In Belize, the Punta Gorda Trail was set up for tourists in large part to help protect traditional Garifuna and Maya cultures, including houses, agriculture, food and language (Boucher, 1990). A second purpose of cultural routes is image enhancement and boosting a sense of place. There are many examples of cities that have utilized urban

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

19

trails as a way of improving their images. Mayfield, New South Wales, Australia, developed a heritage walk to convert its persistent negative stereotype of an old, industrial suburb into a more visitor-friendly destination. This was enacted at the local level to achieve a more positive image and cultivate a sense of community pride (Markwell et al., 2004: 462). Such efforts have an ability to empower communities socially, psychologically and politically so that they are better able to determine their own future development options, including tourism (Timothy, 2007). Trail development also contributes to a deeper sense of place (Hayes & MacLeod, 2007) as important local events and cultures are highlighted for outside consumption. This leads to the third purpose of cultural trails: economic development (Garcés Feliú, 2011). In addition to strengthening a sense of place and enhancing a regional image, trails can also serve in place promotional efforts. They often feature in tourism marketing campaigns and can be prominently showcased on destination websites and in books and brochures. In addition to their conservation ethos, heritage routes were recognized by the Council of Europe as being important in encouraging the growth of European heritage tourism (Hitrec, 1996; Moulin & Boniface, 2001). Much of the rationale for establishing trails is their economic potential for bringing income to the destination, providing jobs for locals and creating tax revenues. As stimulators of local economies, people are hired not only to manage the trails themselves, but participating organizations, retailers, attractions and other service providers along the trails see important economic outcomes as well. This appears to be especially true in the case of purposive cultural trails, which are often linked assemblages of individual businesses and heritage sites along a planned corridor, such as wineries, vineyards or viticulture museums along a wine route. Finally, like other cultural heritage attractions, trails are sometimes bred to become political pawns or other instruments to exercise power and persuasion (Timothy & Boyd, 2003, 2006). Their very role of conserving and interpreting elements of the human past renders them political by default, for the people or organizations that establish a given route are the ones who dictate the content of the events it aims to commemorate. They emphasize the dominant culture or people in power and are selective in what they portray to users. In the words of Shaw and MacLeod (2000: 173), visitors are ‘set on a prescribed route designed to convey a particular story or place image’. According to Teather and Chow (2003), the Sun Yat-sen Heritage Trail in Hong Kong makes a loud political statement in commemorating the relinquishment of colonial power in the former British colony. It intentionally ignores most references to the colonial past and connects sites in Hong Kong that were critical to the Sun Yat-sen revolution. Several trails focus on telling a more holistic truth about heritage by emphasizing the peoples, places and events that have been, through the generations, written out of official history. For instance, the Clerkenwell Historic

20

Tour ism and Trail s

Trail in London emphasizes the heritages that have been largely ignored or written out of the official narrative of the city. In this case, the Clerkenwell Trail stresses the marginal places and peoples of immigrants who helped build the city (Shaw & MacLeod, 2000). A related trend has occurred in the southeastern US. In recent years several black history, Civil War and civil rights trails have appeared on the map to re-interpret a more balanced view of slavery, the African American plight in the southern US and the essential role of African Americans in the development of the American nation (Ebony, 1990; Geiger & Werner, 2009; Kammen, 1993; Mahoney, 1999; Sevigny, 1992). Another political use of trails is to help create a sense of regional, national or supranational identity. The European Cultural Routes Programme aims to further the cause of a united Europe, pan-European dialogue and the ‘European ideal’ (Moulin & Boniface, 2001: 237). The program was initiated, in part at least, to embolden the common European identity through a network of cultural routes (Hitrec, 1996; Moulin & Boniface, 2001).

Cultural Heritage Trails as Tourism Resources The ‘evolved’, ‘designed’ and ‘associative’ cultural landscapes in the World Heritage Convention’s Cultural Landscapes Operational Guidelines were adapted by Ramsay and Truscott (2003: 32–35) to classify trails as linear cultural landscapes. According to their assessment, evolved trails are tracks that began in ancient days as linear access routes for native peoples. From there, they morphed into migratory and resource extraction tracks, and eventually into motor vehicle routes. Designed tracks, according to Ramsay and Truscott, are purpose-built courses, including railways, bridges, timber industry lines and fire management trails that have had important social development implications. Associative tracks are historic in nature and still highly valued by native peoples for their religious or heritage values, and by others for their recreational potential. The associative value also connects people with folklore, spirituality, romanticized images of place and past ways of life. Similar to Ramsay and Truscott’s (2003) typology, the development of heritage trails is observed in this book from two broad perspectives (Figure 2.1). The first of these is ‘organically-evolved cultural routes’, which today follow the original tracks of a true historic trail of some sort, or a more recent intentional corridor, many of which were based upon traditional indigenous hunting and migration routes. Some of these also follow linear-shaped natural resources, such as rivers, escarpments or coastlines (Schutt, 1997; Timothy, 2009) but are, nonetheless, cultural in origin. The key element of note here in the conceptual diagram is the movement from ‘original’ track to ‘developed’ track, where many of the original areas of tracks have been converted from ones of interest to ones of use, represented in Figure 2.1 as nodes of

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s (i)

21

Organically-evolved Routes Phase 1 Original areas of interest Original track/route

Phase 2 Start

Intervening Opportunity

Finish Developed track/route

(ii)

Purposive Routes Phase 1 Zone of thematic interest Thematic nodes within a defined geographic area

Phase 2 Start

Developed Thematic Nodes

Finish Designed track/route

Figure 2.1 Types of cultural heritage trails

intervening opportunity. In terms of real-world application, organic tourist trails can be reduced into several subtypes: long-distance routes that were part of an original trade route (e.g. the Silk Road); explorer, settler or migration routes (e.g. the Cabot Trail); ancient pilgrimage routes (e.g. Camino de Santiago); and human-created linear courses that were not developed specifically to be a tourist trail but function as one anyway. This last category includes railway lines, highways, international borders, canals and other such features. As noted in the introductory chapter, many original hunting, trading and migratory paths have evolved into the highways and motorways of today; many remain in rural or wilderness areas and function as recreational footpaths. Some long-distance tourist routes were once part of an original trade or migration route (Goodey, 1975; MacLeod, 2004). There are numerous

22

Tour ism and Trail s

examples of cultural trails that follow natural features and may have originally been used for other migratory purposes. As well, a number of highways have been officially designated scenic routes/byways for tourism, and heritage railways are important linear cultural resources for tourism. Examples of each of these will be examined in this chapter. An evolutionary model presented by Murray and Graham (1997) helps illustrate the phenomenon of organically developed heritage corridors, as they evolved from being original tracks to developed routes (Figure 2.2). They used the Camino de Santiago pilgrimage trail in Europe to illustrate how an original cultural route, in this case one developed over several centuries by Roman Catholic pilgrims, can evolve spatially, temporally and purposefully from its original function into a more generalized touristic role. According to Murray and Graham (1997: 522), the original medieval route resembled a zone of movement wherein people circulated along a general route from end to end, between the origin and the destination. During stage two, support infrastructure began to appear, such as marked paths, bridges, hostels, inns and other sojourner services. The end-to-end goal of the path became less important as travelers adapted to the incursion of new intermediate points and attractions along the way. During stage three, the spatial format changes to a multi-entry configuration; voyagers are able to access the trail from different locations and participate in the experience in different forms, depending on time constraints and accessibility options. During this phase, the ancient emphasis on the origin and destination is superseded by multiple entry points, increased mobility, a greater diversity of trail users, and more varied uses of the corridor, although trail use still stresses a unidirectional movement toward the destination. The number of intermediate nodes increases. Historic cities and towns begin to dominate stops and entry points along the way, and more services are offered to trail users, including lodging, dining and tourist information. User numbers increase and the less attractive portions of the route are bypassed in favor of more interesting locales. During Murray and Graham’s stages four and five, for many visitors, the places along the way become more important than the end destination. The route has become multi-use in nature and its original purpose becomes secondary to its touristic use. During the fourth phase, the trail not only becomes peppered with multiple entry points, it is also characterized by multiple directions to and from the origin and destination, as well as between trail nodes. Loops and multi-directional use are now commonplace, as are multiple transportation modes, including walking, horseback riding, bicycles and motor vehicles. The amenity servicescapes now extend far beyond the physical trail, even though they are developed in relative proximity because their raison d’être is the trail. The final stage in the evolution is typified by product diversification through new products and market expansion efforts. The route becomes a ‘spine of information’ and

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

23

Stage 1: Original route

Origin

Destination

Stage 2: Original route modified

Origin

Destination

Stage 3: Formalized routes (walking & touring) with stops

Origin

Destination

Stage 4: Formalized routes with recognized links between stops

Origin

Destination

Stage 5: Mini routes within formalized routes developed and promoted

Origin

Destination

Stage 6: Developments take place beyond the recognized route

Origin

Destination

Figure 2.2 Evolution of trails from original tracks to developed routes Source: Adapted from Murray and Graham (1997)

a corridor for tourism services, but the spatial scope of tourism extends quite far beyond the original trail. The second type of cultural heritage track presented in this chapter is referred to here as ‘purposive cultural routes’, referring to heritage trails that were not necessarily original paths or travel routes but have been intentionally

24

Tour ism and Trail s

developed and assembled for modern recreational and touristic use. These routes are shown as schema (ii) in Figure 2.1. Conceptually, the position taken is that a designed tourist track/route was developed from a defined geographic area that had nodes of common thematic interest contained within. Purposive routes are typically delineated not by their historic association with a set route but rather by thematic content to link sites, establishments and communities together that have similar pasts and similar products which appeal to comparable demand cohorts. Of this sort of trail, Logan (2002: 23) noted that they must ‘possess a set of values whose whole is greater than the sum of the parts’ and that points along the route must be understood holistically as an entire thematic collection, not the parts individually. Derrett and St Vincent Welch (2008) illustrated this notion in their examination of farm shed clusters in Australia’s Outback that could be catalogued and connected by a drivable scenic route to preserve the rural landscape and highlight a nostalgic network of farm buildings that illustrate the ‘spirit of the Australian Outback’. Likewise, Smith et al. (1986) examined the potential for this sort of route to join small, rural communities in northern California under the theme of ‘Highway 89: California’s scenic mountain route’. Each community lacked the financial resources to promote themselves individually; the route was proposed as a way of promoting the villages together for the common good as a regional destination. The lines between these two types of heritage trails are often blurry and ill-defined. However, there is little mistaking that nearly all, if not all, cultural tourism routes fit within the parameters of either organic or purposive heritage trails.

Organic cultural routes As stated earlier, there are a few different varieties of organic cultural routes that are commonly used and promoted as tourism and recreation trails today. This section presents a number of examples of heritage trails that include a mix of indigenous, trade, migration, engineering trails of the modern world, and cultural paths that follow linear natural features.

Trade routes For millennia, humans have traveled away from home for commerce. Buying and selling agricultural produce, manufactured items or the products of hunting and fishing, people have long traveled great distances by foot, horse, carriage and watercraft for trade. Many trade routes became famous and provided the fodder of great literary works and worldwide legends. Some ancient channels of commerce functioned for centuries until modern transportation methods replaced traditional corridors, while some still function today. Several historic and well-known market routes have garnered the attention of supranational alliances. These organizations (e.g. the World

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

25

Tourism Organization or UNESCO) aim to establish long-distance cultural routes based upon the commercial activities that once defined them. Perhaps one of the longest and most complicated trade routes (gold, ivory, silk and bronze) to have existed in recorded history was the Silk Road, which operated between 300 BC and the 14th century AD. Spanning nearly 7000 km from China in the east to southern Europe in the west, the Silk Road comprised many interconnected branches and sub-routes (Misra, 2011; Tang, 1991). The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) (1996) and UNESCO (Shackley, 2003) have since the early 1990s had an interest in developing the Silk Road as a viable tourism product through Asia and the Middle East to afford modern travelers the opportunity to walk in the footsteps of Marco Polo and the trade routes that connected Asia and Europe in the past. The Silk Road has been a longstanding project of the UNWTO since 1994, today involving 24 countries all linked by a special promotional logo. There have been three circles of involvement as to how the project has been promoted and developed over time. The first circle of involvement focused on encouraging the Central Asian countries to open their borders to tourism. The UNWTO has been able to help these countries prepare for tourism through the development of action plans, assisting with tourism workforce training, as well as working with government bodies to write legislation that affords ease of movement across borders. The second circle involved working with countries that have relatively open borders with respect to tourism, including in particular China, Pakistan and to some extent Iran. The focus here on sections of the Silk Road that traverse these countries is to strengthen tourism development. The last circle of involvement focused on countries at the start and end of the ‘road’, namely Japan, the Koreas and Southeast Asian countries at one end, and the Arab and European countries at the other. Here the UNWTO has focused on creating greater awareness of the Silk Road in the main and emerging tourism-generating markets. Efforts have been made by the UNWTO to market various sections of the route, particularly through China and the countries of Central Asia, using package tours, flight connections, train services and automobile travel on major roadways. China and Uzbekistan are the two countries most dependent on Silk Road-based tourism (Shackley, 2003; Tang, 1991). The Frankincense Route is a similar long-distance trade route with ancient origins (Blair, 2003). Frankincense is a balm generated by certain trees that grow in arid regions of the Middle East and Africa. Owing to its aromatic features, in the ancient world it was one of the most valuable trade commodities. Many merchants and traders set out to harvest, purchase and deliver frankincense to their customers in the Mediterranean region and Asia. Ancient records show the development of frankincense trade routes, many of which were still in use in medieval times (Shackley, 2003: 12). In the last 20 years or so, primarily before the onset of large-scale terrorist activities, a handful of countries on the Arabian Peninsula (e.g. Yemen

4800 km 4150 km 650 km 3780 km

1880 km 4300 km

1992

2006

2004

2000

1978

1990 1978

1978

1986

2002

California NHT

Captain John Smith Chesapeake NHT El Camino Real de los Tejas NHT El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro NHT Iditarod NHT

Juan Bautista de Anza NHT Lewis and Clark NHT

Mormon Pioneer NHT

Nez Perce (Nee-Me-Poo) NHT Old Spanish NHT

2100 km

1900 km 6000 km

9117 km

287 km

2000

Ala Kahakai NHT*

Length

Date established

Trail name

Table 2.1 Designated National Historic Trails in the US, 2013

Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah

Arizona, California Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah, Wyoming Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Wyoming

Alaska

New Mexico, Texas

California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Wyoming Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia Louisiana, Texas

Hawaii

Location

Settler trail/trade route

Settler trail/forced migration

Settler trail/forced migration

Settler trail/transport corridor Explorer and settler trail Explorer trail

Explorer and settler trail

Explorer and settler trail

Explorer and settler trail

Preserves and interprets native Hawaiian culture Settler trail

Primary historic significance

26 Tour ism and Trail s

1980

1992

1987

1996

2008

1987

2009

Overmountain Victory NHT

Pony Express NHT

Santa Fe NHT

Selma to Montgomery NHT

Star-Spangled Banner NHT

Trail of Tears NHT

Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route NHT

970 km

3500 km

470 km

87 km

1936 km

3164 km

443 km

3490 km

District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia

Idaho, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oregon, Wyoming North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia California, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma Alabama

Note: *This is a purposive cultural route, assembled to link Hawaiian cultural areas. Source: US National Park Service (2013a).

1978

Oregon NHT

Military route

Settler trail/forced migration

Transport corridor/ communications route Settler trail/trade route/ military route Civil rights trail/political march Military route

Revolutionary war trail

Settler trail

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s 27

28

Tour ism and Trail s

and Oman) began developing frankincense-themed cultural attractions that link sites (e.g. frankincense trees, remnants of caravan oases and ship ports) together with routes that are believed to have been part of the original frankincense commerce trails (Shackley, 2003: 12). While there is considerable interest in the world of tourism, for these frankincense trails to gain more widespread appreciation, political instability and religious conflict will need to be resolved before tourist routes can successfully be developed through the region.

Explorer, settler and migration routes The original paths taken by early frontier settlers, the routes in Africa used by slave traders in the 17th through 19th centuries and migratory routes, whether forced or voluntary, have become important linear resources which, owing to their scale, nearly always have to be traveled by motorized vehicle. Explorer routes crisscrossed North America from the 1500s to the 1800s, as the Spanish, French and British ‘discovered’ the Americas and began exploring for land, wealth and trade passages to Asia. Many of these tracks were critical to the development of American and Canadian society and the settlement of the western frontier (Kaplan, 1997; La Pierre, 1998; Laugesen, 2000; Nickens, 1995; Parfit, 1993; Phillips, 1991; Ross, 1989; Seher, 1991; Staski, 2004; Webster & Webster, 2003; Willingham, 1994). In 1978 in the US, the National Parks and Recreation Act authorized the establishment of National Historic Trails as part of the National Trails System. Today there are 19 National Historic Trails, most administered by the US National Park Service or the Bureau of Land Management in collaboration with the US Forest Service and a number of local non-profit associations (Table 2.1). Nearly all of these are based upon original explorer, settler or migration routes. The Mormon Trail In 1844, after the assassination of Mormon Church leader Joseph Smith, most members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints left Nauvoo, Illinois, on a westward trek to the Valley of the Great Salt Lake, which was at that time a part of Mexico. For the Latter-day Saints (Mormons), leaving US territory would provide the freedom to practice their religion without mob persecution or government interference. The first group of settlers arrived in July 1847. The next year, the territory was ceded by Mexico to the US following the Mexican-American War. The 2092 km track was used as an important migration route for approximately 70,000 Mormons and other westbound settlers until the transcontinental railroad was completed in 1869 (Hill, 1996; Wahlquist, 1994). In 1978, the Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trail was established under the auspices of the US National Park Service. While most of the original trail had deteriorated or was covered by roads, buildings and farmland, researchers were able to identify 1150 km of trail segments and nearly 100 significant historic sites along the way. Today, 64% of the land along the trail

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

29

is privately owned. Some 20% is owned by the federal government, and 16% is owned by state and local governments. Management of the trail is shared between federal agencies (Bureau of Land Management and US National Park Service), local and state offices, private landholders and trail associations (Threlkeld, 1997). Like most long-distance trails, many people use sections of it for day hikes or weekend trips, although traveling its entire length by car is a very popular holiday option among Latter-day Saints and others today (Hudman & Jackson, 1992; Kimball, 1988; Olsen, 2006). The auto tour route is marked with official National Historic Trail logos and extends 2665 km from Nauvoo, Illinois, to Salt Lake City, Utah (Threlkeld, 1997: 42). The Chilkoot Trail In 1896, gold was discovered in the Klondike region of Canada. Between 1896 and 1899, some 100,000 gold prospectors made their way via different routes to mine and pan for gold in Canada’s Yukon Territory. One of the primary routes was over the Chilkoot Pass, traveling from the nowabandoned village of Dyea, Alaska, to Bennett, British Columbia, also now abandoned, on their way to Dawson City, Yukon – the center of the gold trade (Rennicke, 1997a). While this popular migration route led many miners to the gold fields, it only lasted three years, but it has lived long in North American folklore in books and movies related to the Klondike Gold Rush. Today, this 53 km cross-border hiking trail is part of the Klondike Gold Rush International Historic Park, which connects the Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park (USA) and the Dawson Historical Complex National Historic Site (Canada). On the Canadian side of the border, the Chilkoot Trail is a National Historic Site and is administered by Parks Canada. On the US side, it is a National Historic Landmark and protected by the US National Park Service (Jackson et al., 2003; Masson, 2001).

Case Study: Historic Route 66 Route 66 (nicknamed the Main Street of America and The Mother Road) was one of the original long-distance highways in the US. It was created in 1926 and extended 3940 km through eight states from Chicago, Illinois, to Santa Monica, California (Figure 2.3). Route 66 became one of the most famous and infamous thoroughfares in the nation, and was popularized in fiction writing, music, television and motion pictures. Even today, Route 66 invokes feelings of adventure, nostalgia and the rural American idyll (Caton & Santos, 2007; Wallis, 1992). With increasing numbers of households owning automobiles after the 1920s, the highway became a popular holiday route in the 1920s and 1930s. During World War II it was an important route for soldiers (Continued)

30

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Historic Route 66 (Continued)

1 2 3

7 6 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

5

4

Chicago St. Louis Tulsa Amarillo Albuquerque Flagstaff Los Angeles

Figure 2.3 Route 66: Illinois to California

heading westward for deployment from California. Perhaps its most famous role, however, was as a migratory route for people escaping the Great Depression, exacerbated by the Dust Bowl of the Midwest, which caused the failure of many farm operations. Approximately 200,000 people left their farms in Oklahoma, Arkansas, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, Texas, Colorado and New Mexico to find work in California. Route 66 is most closely associated with this natural disaster and the displacement of thousands of Americans seeking survival. With the advent of the Interstate Highway System in 1956, the importance of Route 66 diminished rapidly as many of the settlements and towns along 66 were bypassed entirely by new motorways. Some parts of the old road are covered by interstate highways; many additional pieces have been abandoned or covered over, while some parts are still used as side roads. Today, The Mother Road is experiencing a unique reincarnation. Its iconic status in US history and the burgeoning ‘nostalgia industry’ have brought about the resurgence of Route 66 as a focal point of tourism development (Carden, 2006). Some parts of the road have been designated National Scenic Byways, and many of the towns along its length have begun to brand themselves with the Route 66 trademark. Businesses, historic landmarks and other attractions have also begun

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

31

reinventing themselves to serve the increasing number of heritage trail tourists who are retracing the way of Route 66 (DuVal, 2001; Wallis, 1992). Owing to Route 66’s historic importance for the country, several organizations have been established to help in its preservation. In 1999 US Congress enacted a bill to establish the Route 66 Corridor Preservation Program to help protect the deteriorating road and its associated landscape features. It provides logistical support and small grants to help renovate and protect historic properties along the road. The program is administered by the National Park Service and based in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Similarly, the Route 66 Alliance is a non-profit organization that aims to preserve, protect and promote the historic auto corridor. It assists the eight states and communities to develop historic thoroughfare-based tourism and economic development.

Dark migration trails While most of the migration trails already noted have a dark historical element to them, there are a number of forced migration routes that have also come to commemorate dark heritage specifically. Dark tourism has become a common buzzword in academic writing and in the tourism industry in recent years (cf. Ashworth & Hartmann, 2005a; Hartmann, 2014; Lennon & Foley, 2000; Seaton, 1996; Sharpley & Stone, 2009; White & Frew, 2013). Dark tourism rallies around sites and events of human suffering, and the related notion of thanatourism fixates on death-related tourism. While there are murder tour circuits, haunted hikes and ghost routes in Europe, the United Kingdom (UK) and North America (Ashworth & Hartmann, 2005b), which would qualify as dark tourism trails, they are more or less purposive and recently designed tour circuits that aim to guide crime or supernatural enthusiasts between places associated with a specific murder or other tragedy. This section, however, describes more organic dark tourism trails that commemorate events associated with human suffering and other dark histories. Foremost among these are several forced migration routes that denote a dark heritage. Deracination, or forced migration, occurs when groups of people are violently coerced to leave their homelands and migrate to new areas. Perhaps the most pervasive and best-known of these is the African slave trade. While African slavery has existed for more than two millennia, the most extensive and pervasive phase occurred during the 400 years leading up to the 20th century and led from West Africa to European colonies in Asia and the Americas. Others include the coerced relocation of Native Americans by the US government in the 1800s. Several of these types of long-distance migratory routes of darkness are now significant heritage trails. The Slave Route was established by UNESCO in 1994 to document, commemorate and bring to light the sorrowful events of the trans-Atlantic slave

32

Tour ism and Trail s

trade. Beginning in villages, slave forts and monuments in West Africa (Teye & Timothy, 2004; Timothy & Teye, 2004; Yankholmes & Boakye, 2010), the Slave Route connects countries, locations and organizations into various itineraries (Shackley, 2003), some of which can be traced by vehicle or foot, although much of it is trans-oceanic and therefore figurative and inaccessible directly to individual travelers. In addition to locations in Africa, North America and the Caribbean, some parts of the route emphasize sites in the metropolitan countries of Europe (e.g. the UK and France) that colonized the Americas (Casbeard et al., 2010). The Slave Route Project aims to fight racism and other intolerances and build international understanding about the malevolence of slavery. As noted by UNESCO (2012), the threefold purpose of the Slave Route is: • • •

To encourage a better understanding of the causes, forms of operation, issues and consequences of slavery, especially in Africa, Europe, the Americas, the Caribbean, Asia and the Middle East; To shed light on the global transformations and cultural relationships that have resulted from the history of slavery; and Contribute to a ‘culture of peace’ by commemorating cultural pluralism, intercultural dialogue and the promotion of new identities.

In 1830, to make way for increased European settlement in the eastern US, the government passed the Indian Removal Act. This law resulted in the forced removal of thousands of Chickasaw, Cherokee, Seminole, Muscogee and Choctaw Indians from their native lands in the southeastern US to the newly created Indian Territory (most of today’s state of Oklahoma) (Gaines & Krakow, 1996; Simms, 1992). Members of each tribe were removed in successive waves from 1831 until 1838. Numerous of these American natives perished from disease, starvation and exposure during their coerced foot journey westward. Today, a series of original routes used by the US government to relocate Native Americans in the 1830s was combined to commemorate the involuntary exodus and the thousands of deaths that occurred on the trail into the Trail of Tears National Historic Trail. It comprises roads, highways, rivers and walking trails in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma and Tennessee (Gaines & Krakow, 1996; Stewart-Spears, 1993).

Religious routes/pilgrim trails One of the oldest types of organic cultural trails is pilgrimage routes. These have existed for centuries, millennia in some cases, and are popular tourist tracks in Asia, Europe and the Americas (Cerutti & Dioli, 2013; Digance, 2006; Kušen, 2010; Rizzello & Trono, 2013). In India there are customary trails along which Hindu pilgrims make their journeys to the

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

33

Ganga or to participate in the Kumbh Mela (Singh, 2006). The pilgrimage circuit between Lumbini, Nepal, and Bodh Gaya, Sarnath and Kushinagar, India, is an important religious route still popular among Buddhists but also among other cultural tourists. As well, in Saudi Arabia there are prescribed paths and routes that Muslim pilgrims must negotiate as part of their pilgrimage rituals in Mecca, although these are not usable by general tourists (Timothy & Iverson, 2006). The Via Dolorosa is a street in the Old City of Jerusalem thought to be the passageway Jesus walked with his cross on the way to Galgotha to be crucified. This short route (approximately 600 meters) became the focus of pilgrims’ attention during the Byzantine era and roughly followed the current route from the Mount of Olives to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Today, there are 14 Stations of the Cross, or artistic depictions, along the route that commemorate various occurrences during the last hours of Jesus’ life (Bowman, 2000). Via Dolorosa and the stations are an important pilgrimage route for many Christian sects especially during Lent, on Good Friday and Easter. While the Mormon Trail was discussed earlier in this chapter, it is worth mentioning again in the context of religious trails. Although Mormons do not practice any form of official pilgrimage, they are avid travelers to ancient Biblical sites in the Holy Land and to church history sites associated with the establishment of the church in the 1800s in the US and the pioneers’ westward migration to Utah (Olsen, 2006). Part of their passion for faith heritage includes the Mormon Trail, together with its folklore and stories of faith and human tragedy. Since 1997, the Mormon Trail has seen a surge of pioneer trek re-enactments – where thousands of participants dress in period (19th century) clothing, push handcarts and drive wagons along parts of the trail where managing land agencies will allow these activities (Langelo, 2006). The sesquicentennial anniversary of the first wagon train arrival in the Salt Lake Valley was celebrated in 1997 by approximately 10,000 re-enactors (Mormons and non-Mormons), who took part in all or a portion of the 1640 km trek from Omaha, Nebraska, to Salt Lake City (Hill, 1998). Some 43 covered wagons and 400 people traveled the entire distance (Underwood, 1997). For most of the re-enactors, retracing the very paths their forebears created was a highly spiritual experience that built faith and congealed their religious and personal identities (Hill, 1998; Hinckley, 1997). Not all who follow the trail by foot seek a religious experience, although its existence is most certainly a result of religious history and an important part of one Christian denomination’s heritage. Although hundreds, if not thousands, of pilgrimage paths-cum-tourist trails exist throughout the world, some are very noteworthy and have been widely researched in academic writing. Certainly one of the most famous of these is the Camino de Santiago, or Way of St James. According to ancient tradition, St James (Santiago), an apostle of Jesus, was buried in Spain. The case study below provides more details.

34

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: The Way of St James (Camino De Santiago De Compostela) The remains of St James were purportedly found in 819 AD in northwestern Spain in what is today Santiago de Compostela, and a church was built over the tomb. During medieval times, the roads that led to the shrine were enhanced, and the shrine became accessible to larger masses of pilgrims who came to venerate the location. During the Middle Ages, Santiago was the third most visited pilgrimage destination in the world for Roman Catholics, following Rome and Jerusalem. By the 12th century, pilgrims had begun traveling on set routes through France and Spain from all over Europe. The main line and most popular path of the Way of St James (Camino de Santiago) starts in France (Figure 2.4), although there are many secondary routes in Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Portugal, England, and a handful of other countries in Europe (Murray & Graham, 1997; Przybylska & Sołjan, 2010). The French Way is several hundred kilometers in length and requires at least a month to complete (Figure 2.5). It crosses the Pyrenees Mountains into Spain and through the cities of Pamplona, Longroña, Burgos and León. Most people follow the trail on foot, although it is possible to bicycle or ride a horse. Humble lodging is available along the way in pilgrim rest houses, or hostels. Less adventuresome travelers can choose hotel options in villages or towns along the way. Approximately 2.5 million people visit the holy site of Santiago de Compostela each year, but only about 190,000 approach the destination along the more

Figure 2.4 Sign marking the Way of St James in France

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

35

Figure 2.5 Way of St James and secondary routes

traditional route. A credential or ‘pilgrim passport’ is given to pilgrims who walk at least 100 km or cycle at least 200 km (Gonzáles & Medina, 2003). After getting it stamped at key locations along the way and after arriving at the destination, an official certificate of completion (compostela) is given, thus confirming the pilgrim status of a trail user (Murray & Graham, 1997). Statistically, these are the ones counted by the pilgrimage office at Santiago de Compostela. The Camino is seen as an important economic driver for the Galicia region of Spain and for all of the communities along its course. As well, the establishment of the route was seen as an important tool for urban renewal in the villages, towns and cities it passes through (Gonzáles & Medina, 2003). Despite the route’s popularity in the Middle Ages, by the 1980s, only a few hundred people walked the trail each year (eturbo News, 2008). However, the Holy Year of 1993 was seen in Spain as a critical time for promoting the trail and using it as an economic engine through tourism. Additional pilgrim hostels were erected, cultural events were planned and delivered, and cities and towns were regenerated (Gonzáles & Medina, 2003). Promotional initiatives by the Spanish government and the Galician regional government, as well as the route’s 1993 inscription as a UNESCO World Heritage Site and a Council of Europe Cultural Route have increased trail use dramatically (eturbo News, 2008; Gonzáles, 2006). It is today much more than a pilgrimage (Continued)

36

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: The Way of St James (Camino De Santiago De Compostela) (Continued) route; it is also a significant heritage trail for cultural tourists who traverse it for its scenery, its rural landscapes and the villages and towns through which it passes (Santos, 2002). A number of private organizations have been working to help preserve and promote the Camino, with the most salient of these being the Friends of the Way Associations, numbering more than 150 throughout the world. Their goal is to foster networks of inexpensive or free hostels, food and information services, volunteers and research (Gonzáles, 2006).

Intentionally-built linear resources As noted at the outset of this chapter, human-made linear innovations have been created throughout history. Fortifications and political borders are one ancient example. In the contemporary world, railways, highways and canals developed as transportation corridors. Given the interesting heritages associated with all of these linear features, many of them have become important tourist trails. Historic railways Railway travel is a popular option in many parts of the world, including Asia and Europe. However, in geographically large countries, such as Canada, US and Australia, trains are much less popular as a long-distance transportation option. Rather, they have become important modes of travel where they are in themselves a significant attraction (Loverseed, 1994). Transcontinental train trips are for many passengers the ultimate holiday experience. Heritage railways are another prevalent route-based tourist attraction. The examples illustrated in Table 2.2 reveal the extent of their global appeal. Historically, these have gained considerable popularity since the 1970s, after many railways fell into disuse and dereliction. With this trend, conservation groups, railway hobby enthusiasts and volunteer organizations began to protect existing lines and restore others that had fallen into disrepair (Conlin & Bird, 2014; Prideaux, 1999). Historic railways were not originally linear heritage attractions. They were constructed for the transportation of raw materials from mines and forests to processing plants, manufactured products from factories to markets, or human passengers to their destinations. The attractiveness of historic railways derives from the uniqueness of the old-fashioned machinery, the reputation of well-known rail routes, and the natural and cultural landscapes through which they meander (Henderson, 2011; Orbaşli & Woodward, 2008; Rhoden et al., 2009; Timothy, 2011a). Certain long-distance rail routes that served as crucial transport corridors in the past have become very nostalgic heritage ways for pleasure or adventure travelers today (Loverseed, 1994).

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

37

Table 2.2 Examples of tourism-oriented heritage railways Heritage Railway

Location

Alishan Forest Railway Verde Canyon Railroad Pilatus Railway Bieszczadzka Forest Railway End of the World Train Urskog–Høland Line Sagano Scenic Railway Steamtrain Hoorn Medemblik Cˇierny Hron Railway Gulbene-Alu¯ksne Railway Whangaparaoa Narrow Gauge Railway Cepu Forest Railway Le Petit Train Jaune/Ligne de Cerdagne Šargan Eight Kalka-Shimla Railway Mecklenburgische Bäderbahn Molli Jokioinen Museum Railway White Pass and Yukon Route Peak Tram Victorian Goldfields Railway

Taiwan USA Switzerland Poland Argentina Norway Japan Netherlands Slovakia Latvia New Zealand Indonesia France Serbia India Germany Finland Canada/USA Hong Kong Australia

The Trans-Siberian Railway, the Orient Express and the Qinghai-Tibet Railway are three prominent examples (Hall, 2005; Qin & Zheng, 2010; Shackley, 2006). Medium-distance train lines are also popular attractions. The Grand Canyon Railway (Figure 2.6) and the Verde Canyon Railroad, both in the US state of Arizona, are two good examples (Loverseed, 1994). The Verde Canyon Railroad was originally opened in 1912 to transport raw copper from Jerome to a smelter in Clarkdale, and then to link them both to the Santa Fe Railway. The track is now a 33 km heritage rail corridor that runs between Clarkdale and Perkinsville, Arizona. In 1990, the railway, under new ownership, began to run as a four-hour tourist attraction, which passes through interesting natural landscapes, bypasses historic areas where famous western movies were filmed, and ends up in an old mining ghost town before returning to its departure point at Clarkdale (Verde Canyon Railroad, 2013). Short-distance rail lines are a novelty attraction in many places. They range from only a few hundred meters to several kilometers. The Alderney Railway on Alderney, one of the Channel Islands, was built in the 1840s to haul stones from a quarry on the east end of the island to center-island construction sites in St Anne and Braye. Today the railway runs 3 km and functions as a tourist attraction on the island during summer months and

38

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 2.6 The historic Grand Canyon Railway

holidays (Alderney Railway, 2013). The tiny 400-meter Great Laxey Mine Railway on the Isle of Man was abandoned in 1929 with the closure of the Great Laxey lead mine, but it was re-opened in 2004 to carry visitors along a restored train line in replica train cars (British Heritage Railways, 2013). Canals and towpaths Canals were developed in North America during the 18th and 19th centuries to provide water-based access between lakes and oceans, and around nonnavigable waterways, for the shipment of goods and people. In Europe, canal networks have existed much longer, providing irrigation water to villages and their fields, as well as to afford adequate drainage for lowlands, such as in Holland and parts of Belgium. Included in the world’s canal systems were towpaths, which paralleled the water channel itself. Horses, mules, oxen or humans used these towpaths to pull barges and help rafts along the canals. While many of these historic waterways are still used for cargo-carrying barges, many of them now serve a dual purpose, including tourism/recreation. One fairly recent trend is the designation of historic canals as important heritage routes (Means, 1999). Similarly, many original towpaths have become recreational canal trails in North America and Europe (Banister et al., 1992). Canada’s Welland and Rideau Canals are heritage waterways that originated as transportation corridors to bypass shallow river waters and waterfalls. The 26 km Welland Canal links Lake Ontario with Lake Erie in Canada. Its lock system allows ships to ascend and descend the Niagara Escarpment by bypassing Niagara Falls. It was extremely instrumental in the development of industrial North American cities such a Detroit, Montreal, Cleveland, Toronto and Windsor during the 19th and 20th centuries, and rendered the

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

39

Great Lakes navigable from west to east, and toward the Atlantic Ocean. Although the canal itself has not been an important transport corridor for tourists, its heritage value has emerged during the past half century, and efforts have been devoted to utilizing it as a corridor for parks and trails. It has become an important linear heritage attraction in the Niagara region of Southern Ontario (Shipley & Beaudet, 1996). Since the 1830s, the Rideau Canal has connected Kingston, Ontario (Canada), with Ottawa, Canada’s capital city, by bypassing elevation differences and waterfalls on the Rideau and Ottawa Rivers. Although it was built nearly two centuries ago as a precaution against war with the US limiting access to parts of Canada, the waterway today is managed by Parks Canada and is used only for recreational boating (including canal cruises), skating during winter and as a venue for major festivals (Ballinger, 1994; Donohoe, 2012). The Rideau Canal is one of Ontario’s most significant heritage tourist attractions and the oldest operating canal system in North America, winning it a coveted inscription on UNESCO’s World Heritage List in 2007. In addition to its salience for winter activities, summertime boating and megaevents, the Rideau Waterway is also considered an important greenway with walking trails and parks along its length. Similar conditions exist in the US along the Erie Canal and other humanbuilt waterways of the New York Canal System that have evolved from commercial shipping passageways to tourist destinations (Tang & Jang, 2010). In 2000, the US government designated the Erie Canal a National Heritage Corridor to commemorate the role of the waterway in settling the midwestern and western US and its importance as one of the earliest feats of civil engineering. Various sections have been designated heritage sites by various counties and municipalities in the state of New York, while newer sections that have not collapsed or been infilled are still used for tourist cruises. As well, many of the original towpaths of the Erie Canal are now utilized as multi-use trails, including the longest: the Erie Canalway Trail. One of the most impressive human-made waterways in Europe is the Saimaa Canal, which begins in Finland at Lake Saimaa and exits into the Gulf of Finland near Vyborg, Russia (Pitkänen & Vepsäläinen, 2006). The waterway was opened in 1856, at which time it was completely in Finland. During World War II, however, Finland lost a great deal of its southeastern territory to the Soviet Union, so that today, the canal traverses Finland and Russia. It was built to connect Finland’s densest lake area with the Baltic Sea and is 43 km in length, and between 34 and 55 meters wide. At Lake Nuijamaa, the Saimaa Canal enters Russia. While the entire canal is Russian territory on the Russian side of the border, Finland leases the canal and a narrow strip of land along its length, which is largely treated like Finnish territory. While Russian visas are unnecessary for passing through the canal, passports are required and recorded at the border crossing (Finnish Transport Agency, 2013). For Finns, the Saimaa Canal has special historical meaning as an

40

Tour ism and Trail s

engineering achievement, but more importantly because it passes through Russian territory that was until 1940 a part of Finland. Another European example is the vast canal system of the Netherlands and Belgium. Holland’s waterways have long exuded much intrigue among tourists and contributed to the overall urban appeal of Amsterdam and the rural idyll of the Dutch countryside (Bakkal & Scaperlanda, 1991) (Figure 2.7). The canals are an important part of the stereotyped Dutch cultural landscape and in essence have become intentional and unintentional projected images of the Netherlands (Dahles, 1998; van Gorp & Béneker, 2007). According to Waterman et al. (1998), there are more than 2400 km of passable inland waterways in the Netherlands, which form an intricate network of aqua-trails that can be navigated by recreational boats and small cruise ships. Hundreds of these canals are paralleled by bicycle and walking trails, forming a unique and interdependent relationship between canal towpaths and the waterways themselves (de Vink, 1989). Like the Netherlands, Belgium is home to many navigable canals. One of the most popular destinations in Belgium is Bruges – a city admired for its medieval canals which, like the case of Venice, double as urban ‘streets’ and byways. Bruges’ canal network not only provides a means of transportation for residents, it also is one of the city’s most visited tourist attractions (Vanhove, 2002). Political borders There are many trails crisscrossing international and subnational political borders. There are also a number that use international boundaries and their demarcations as the basis for their trailmarkings. The Haute Randonnée Pyrénéenne, a long-distance footpath in the Pyrenees, parallels

Figure 2.7 A small-scale navigable canal in the Netherlands

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

41

the Spanish–French border from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic and takes 45 days on average to complete. While much of this experience involves weaving to and fro across the border and appreciating the border landscapes, it is as much a nature-based trail as it is a cultural trail. There are, however, other border-based trails where the borderline itself is the main attraction. There are several different types of political borders, but their discussion is beyond the scope of this book. One type, however, is necessary to mention in the present discussion: relict boundaries. These are former borders that no longer function as political divides, but their imprint on the earth is still visible in the cultural landscape. There are a number of relict boundaries that function as heritage attractions in Europe, Asia and Africa (Timothy, 2001). Many of these relict boundaries and their remnants have become prized resources for heritage routes today. Among the most perceptible are Hadrian’s Wall, the Berlin Wall and the Great Wall of China. Hadrian’s Wall was erected between 122 and 127 AD as a barrier between the Romans and the ‘barbarians’ to the north. It functioned as a fortification and political border to mark the northern limits of Rome in Great Britain. Some historians believe it functioned then much as international borders function today, as lines separating states, as filters for people and products coming through, as a defensive rampart, and as a point to levy customs duties on imports into the Empire (Everitt, 2009). Today, the wall is for the most part well preserved and one of England’s most popular heritage attractions. It meanders across the width of northern England from Bowness-onSolway to Wallsend. Its ruins comprise stone walls, tower footings, fortress remnants, berms and turrets. Much of the wall is owned and managed in a collaborative effort between the National Trust and English Heritage. Hadrian’s Wall is one of the UK’s most important cultural corridors (Coleman, 1994; McGlade, 2014; Usherwood, 1996), and in the 1990s, the Heritage Lottery Fund provided a sizable grant to the Countryside Commission (England) to develop a 140 km pathway along the wall as a tourist attraction and venue for leisure walkers (Leisure Management, 1997). Hadrian’s Wall was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List in 1987, and Hadrian’s Wall Path National Trail was subsequently opened in 2003. Since that time, the trail has become one of England’s most popular long-distance footpaths. On average, walking the entire route takes seven days. Following the 1989–1990 dismantling of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent reunification of the two Germanies, several pieces of the wall and many of the fortifications associated with it were preserved as tourist attractions and political memorials to the divided heritage of Germany. Beyond Berlin, some parts of the former border between East and West Germany have also been preserved, and several border museums (Grenzmuseum) have been developed to remember and interpret the 41-year division of Germany. There have been several movements since the 1990s to promote the former Iron Curtain as a tourist trail, beginning in the far north where Finland

42

Tour ism and Trail s

borders Russia, and along the former East–West split in Europe to the Black Sea (Arizona Republic, 2005). While a comprehensive trail has yet to be established, owing to a variety of reasons, some segments of it have emerged. The Berlin Wall Trail (Berliner Mauerweg) was started in 2002 and completed in 2006. It traces the course of the former boundary that enclosed West Berlin from the surrounding German Democratic Republic (East Germany) (Tölle, 2010). In total the trail is 160 km in length and is designed for pedestrians and bicycles. Most of the trail follows the former West or East German border patrol roads, but in the most built-up portions of the city, the trail is marked with red bricks and brass placards embedded in the pavement (Cramer, 2013). The Mauerweg is divided into 14 different sections of between seven and 21 km that are accessible by public transportation. The trail features preserved sections of the anterior wall, multilingual interpretive displays, guard towers, former customs offices, fence remnants and signs that mark locations where people were killed by East German guards for trying to escape. Museums, maps and informational displays also help create memorable experiences on this geopolitical heritage trail (Senate Chancellery, 2013). Google Earth 3D technology and global positioning system (GPS) applications for mobile phones are readily available to help tourists navigate the course of the former border and explain its meaning and individual sites on their own hand-held devices. Although China has not established walking routes or cycling trails along the Great Wall the way trails are conceptualized in the West, the wall is frequently used by adventurers as a long-distance hiking route. Built between the 3rd century BC and the 17th century AD (although some early portions were built as early as the 8th century BC), the Great Wall of China is actually a series of walls, trenches, fortifications and other barricades that total more than 21,000 km of length. The wall and fortifications were built as defensive barriers against northern invaders, and eventually much of it served as a political border for the emerging Chinese state (Slavicek, 2009). The Great Wall is one of China’s most visited tourist attractions and stands out as an iconic image of China (Su & Wall, 2012; Timothy & Boyd, 2003). It was added to the World Heritage List in 1987. Beijing residents frequently use the wall for recreational walking, to get out of the city on weekends. Tourists by the thousands visit the wall on a daily basis at various access points, usually near large cities such as Beijing. Select points along the wall are accessible by public transportation, and large numbers of outfitters provide guided hikes on, or alongside, the Great Wall in various sections (Hessler, 2007). These treks typically go beyond the worn touristy zones into areas of the wall that few tourists see. The hiking treks last from a single day to multiday walking tours and have become quite popular among adventure travelers who desire to experience the built heritage of China, its geopolitical history and the cultural landscapes through which the wall traverses.

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

43

Purposive cultural routes Early examples of purposive routes can be found throughout the world. One forerunner to these was the medieval Grand Tour, where young British and French elites followed somewhat prescribed routes on their journeys through Italy, France and other countries to learn high culture from the masters and via visits to the art cities of Rome, Venice, Florence and others. Likewise, some of the earliest picturesque tours of the British Isles during the 1700s led cultured travelers on prescribed walking and buggy routes through regions of high literary and artistic value (Hayes & MacLeod, 2007: 48). An interesting and useful trend to note here is that some types of purposive heritage trails come and go. While there are presently thousands of these trails in all parts of the world, and some of them have existed for decades, many will certainly dissipate in the years to come. As well, additional trails will assuredly appear on the tourism map. Purposive trails fizzle out for several reasons, but the most common cause is a lack of will to cooperate for the greater good of the connected region or community. A common feature among failed routes is that some businesses or locations fail to do their part in espousing the goals and purposes of the trail, thereby allowing the developed network to collapse (Scott et al., 2008). A few villages or individual firms end up carrying a heavier marketing or management load than others, creating conflict within the circuit. Other partners forsake trail programs because they feel they are not receiving the promised rewards outlined at the trail’s inception. Regardless of the ephemeral nature of some planned routes, they are an important tourism resource. Unlike organic trails, which demonstrate some common characteristics and for which certain types can be identified based on their historical contexts, purposive routes can don any form and be concocted along any cultural heritage theme. As a result, there are as many purposive heritage trail types as there are types of heritage resources! The rest of this chapter aims to describe some of the more prominent ones found in the literature and in regional promotional campaigns.

Short trails at historic sites and gardens As the first chapter made clear, scale is an important principle in the realm of cultural paths. At the smallest scale, perhaps, are the thousands of heritage trails that exist within archaeological sites, historical parks, outdoor museums and heritage gardens (Benfield, 2013; MacLeod, 2004) (Figure 2.8). Nearly all outdoor heritage sites have some sort of planned tracks that lead visitors from one location to the next. These are important heritage management instruments, as they provide excellent venues for interpretive programs (they are sometimes referred to as interpretive trails), they can help guide visitors away from the most sensitive areas of an archaeological site, facilitate

44

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 2.8 Paths at the archaeological site of Tulum, Mexico

access for people with physical disabilities and provide vistas and photo opportunities at various points on the property (Timothy & Boyd, 2003).

Maritime routes Some maritime routes can only be traversed by sea or air, if at all, and are by definition widespread and distant. These more commonly represent the organic trails discussed earlier in the chapter, such as the proposed Route of the Bounty and the South Pacific Whaling Route (Rice, 2001), because they represent original hunting or migratory courses. More common are planned land-based maritime trails that follow coastal areas and encompass locations, sites and activities of a nautical heritage nature. The Maine Maritime Heritage Trail is one example of a marine way that connects oceanic trade and commerce, archaeological sites, forts, islands, fisheries, lighthouses, naval yards, historic homes, museums, ports and shipbuilding yards (Paine, 2001). This road follows the north-eastern coast of the US in the state of Maine and provides trail followers a unique glimpse into the seafaring heritage of North America.

Urban heritage trails Cities and towns throughout the world are home to a wide range of heritage-focused walking trails. Many of them may also involve driving or public transportation when they include points at considerable distances from one another. Cultural trails are a very important consideration in urban recreation and spatial planning. Not only do they have the ability to help in place-making exercises (Markwell et al., 2004), they also have significant implications for transportation and traffic flow, infrastructure development,

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

45

economic development and conservation (Javaheri, 2011; Orbaşli, 2000; Wang & Hji-Avgoustis, 2011). Several types of urban heritage trails can be identified, but the most common type is self-directed interpretive walking tours that thematically link together places of historical or cultural significance. Brochures, maps and audio recordings are central to helping visitors navigate the physicality of places as they play a crucial role in providing information, interpretation and promotion (Markwell et al., 2004; O’Brien & Curtis, 1979). These trails are typically marked with signs, plaques and walkways. In some historic cities, ancient walls form the basis of heritage walks, resembling some of the characteristics noted earlier in the discussion of organic routes (Ashworth & Bruce, 2009). The ancient walls of Girona, Spain, and Rothenburg ob der Tauber, Germany, are two prominent European examples (Donaire & Galí, 2008) (Figure 2.9). There are as many different types of urban trails as there are urban issues. Some provide overviews of distinct architectural styles, or highlight historic spots associated with a famous resident’s life. Other popular themes include ethnic neighborhoods, nationalistic heritage, early settlers, public art and sculptures, film locations, and various political themes (Hayes & MacLeod, 2007; Hull, 1996). In their case study from Okinawa, Japan, Miyakuni and Vander Stoep (2005, 2006) showed how important historic sites in the city of Shuri are connected by physical, informational, visual, transportation, interpretation, economic and promotional linkages. The Gaudi Trail, a walking tour in Barcelona, Spain, leads tourists to the modernist architectural achievements of Antoni Gaudi, including La Cassa Batlló, La Pedrera, Park Güell and the cathedral of La Sagrada Familia (Usón, 2002). The 11 km Diana Princess of

Figure 2.9 A trail on the ancient city walls of Girona, Spain

46

Tour ism and Trail s

Wales Memorial Walk in London is dedicated to the memory of the late princess. It is marked on the ground with heraldic roses and goes through several parks and greenbelts, and passes by important sites associated with her life (Clarence House, St James’ Palace, Buckingham Palace, Spencer House and Kensington Palace). Boston’s 4 km, red brick Freedom Trail memorializes the colonial and revolutionary heritage of the US by linking 17 sites in the old city where important events occurred in America’s 18thcentury independence crusade (Ioannides & Timothy, 2010). It is one of Boston’s most popular tourist attractions and is a substantial part of the Boston National Historical Park. Singapore is home to several urban heritage trails that highlight many elements of the city state’s varied past, including its ethnic heritages, its colonial and administrative past, World War II, nature and industrial development. Eight urban walking trails are currently promoted by the Singapore Tourism Board as the best way to explore the city: Little India Heritage Trail, Fort Canning Trail, Chinatown Trail, Bukit Timah Trail, Peranakan Trail, Kampong Glam Trail and the Civic District Trail (Henderson, 2011; Singapore Tourism Board, 2012).

Literary, film and music trails Literary tourism involves visiting places associated with the actual lives of literary figures, as well as the places and sites mentioned in poetry, novels and other writings (Herbert, 2001; Puczkó & Rátz, 2007; Timothy & Boyd, 2003). It can also be extended to include the arts, music and movies, and the people associated with them. Some literary trails focus on the life stories of the authors themselves, from their birthplaces to their burial plots, including the places that influenced their writings in between. As well, novels can create literary trails based on their descriptions of places, even imaginary places, which fans will want to explore and experience what Johnson (2004: 91) refers to as ‘the urban geographies of everyday life’. When enough places exist within a region that associates with a specific fictional figure or the author himself/herself, literature itineraries are fairly easy to develop. Fans can follow these trails, whether marked and organized or on their own, to understand periods of time in the author’s life or events in a book (Yiannakis & Davies, 2012). Several literary figures have been the focus of the development of literary routes. The Catherine Cookson Trail, the Cromwell Trail and the Robert Burns Trail are popular paths that join elements of the lives of famous authors and poets (MacLeod, 2004). Fans of the Little House on the Prairie books can travel by car through the upper Midwest in the US to discover a mix of locations mentioned in Laura Ingalls Wilder’s series, which were based upon the places she actually lived in Wisconsin, Minnesota and South Dakota. Various Lord of the Rings trails have been developed by a handful of tour operators in New Zealand to provide itineraries that link fans with movie locations and Middle Earth. The Beatles Trail guides visitors to 18 sites

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

47

in and around Liverpool that were instrumental in the development of the group’s success and each group member’s life (Fremaux & Fremaux, 2013), and Germany’s Fairy Tale Route links places and fairy tales in the Grimm collection (Hemme, 2005).

Industrial trails Industrial archaeology is one of the most salient tourism resources today. There is an abiding interest among travelers to visit the industrial past to be able to appreciate the engineering feats and industrial wonders of today (Timothy, 2011a; Timothy & Boyd, 2003). This includes growing numbers of visits to factories, ports and docks, railway museums, dams and power stations, historic canals, mines, timber camps, and other such remnants of past industrial stories. As a result of the increased value of such places and artifacts, industrial trails have been initiated since the 1990s (Kerstetter et al., 1998), including the Route of the Clockmakers in Franche-Comté, France, and the Pyrenean Iron Route in Spain, Andorra and France. Most industrial trails are long-distance routes that are best traversed with cars or public transportation, although some can be traveled by foot in certain sections. The Iron Road in Central Europe was inaugurated in 2007 as a Cultural Route of the Council of Europe. Its aim is to trace the ironworks heritage of Europe from prehistoric times until today and involves geology, technology, artistry, folklore and social elements of extraction, transportation, production and trade. It links together individual iron routes in eight Central European countries, namely Austria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Slovenia and Germany (European Institute of Cultural Routes, 2013). Mine trails have become a unique product in areas that are famous for their mining heritage, such as Australia, New Zealand, Canada and many places in Europe (Conlin & Jolliffe, 2011; Drew, 1998; Lemky & Jolliffe, 2011; Timcak et al., 2011). Most of these are drive routes (or horseback trails between some locations) because of the considerable distances between associated sites. In 2000, the Otago Goldfields Heritage Trail was designed as a tourist attraction in the Otago region of New Zealand and is promoted by regional tourism officials. The interpreted circuit commemorates the Otago Gold Rushes of the 1860s and links together more than 20 different goldfield-related sites and field artifacts (Frost, 2005). The Colliery Route in Nova Scotia, Canada, is a well-marked drive route that tracks an interesting circuit of museums, mining town architecture and coal mining monuments (Lemky & Jolliffe, 2011). Most of Australia has a strong mining heritage that has been utilized for tourism purpose for many years, including mines, rail lines, museums and ghost towns (Frost, 2011; Prideaux & Timothy, 2011). Several self-guided drive trails were established in South Australia to link historic copper mining towns together into a single product. The drives emphasize mines, schools, housing, churches, pubs and other artifacts that are important parts of the state’s mining heritage. As well, there are a

48

Tour ism and Trail s

number of mining-focused walking trails in national parks and heritage areas (Drew, 1998).

Agriculture trails Pellegrini (1999) discussed the viability of developing agritourism routes in Italy and the role of national and international associations in helping to develop a network of farming paths. The main focus is agritourism, and the development of agri-trails could help grow larger scale agritourism in many parts of Europe. Food trails and wine routes, which are discussed below, are closely related to agri-trails. Farm walks are a smaller-scale version of agricultural routes. Farm walks help communicate farming approaches and practices to all audiences, particularly those from urban centers where less is known about farming. There is really a lack of understanding among the general public about what food production entails, so these farm walks are crucial in educating them, especially children (Stansfield, 1985: 32).

Food and wine routes Of all types of tourist trails, wine routes are probably the most often discussed in the tourism literature. Plentiful case studies and descriptions of various wine routes throughout the world abound. A great deal of academic attention has been directed toward wine tourism in recent years, suggesting its growing economic importance, regional patterns and images, tourist activities and satisfaction, and many other variables that define wine tourism. Table 2.3 Table 2.3 Top 15 wine producing countries in the world by volume, 2010 Country

Volume (liters)

France Italy Spain United States Argentina Australia Germany South Africa Chile Portugal Russia Romania China Moldova Greece

4,626,900 4,580,000 3,609,700 2,653,187 1,625,000 1,073,000 932,000 922,000 884,000 587,200 540,000 495,740 425,000 410,000 336,560

Source: Compiled from Wine Institute (2013).

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

49

lists the top producing wine countries, where many of the established old world regions have competition from emergent new world regions. With respect to the former, many old time wine-producing regions have long been wellestablished wine destinations (e.g. France, California and Spain). However, the latter part of the 20th century saw the emergence of many older wine regions as tourist destinations, and even more recently, we have seen many nontraditional wine areas develop and enter the marketplace specifically for tourism (e.g. Arizona, USA). Along with the growth of wine tourism, wine routes have also flourished. Shortly after the collapse of eastern European communism, Hungary put together its first wine route, and Moldova is currently in the process of assembling wine routes to attract international tourists (Sharples, 2002: 46). Other non-traditional wine tourism destinations have joined the bandwagon to promote wine routes as important tourist attractions to increase visitation and keep visitors longer. Prior to discussing a number of examples of wine and later food routes/ trails in the world, it is important first to address the issue of scale when the synergy of food, wine and tourism are involved. Wine and food trails are themed to sell a product; in some situations a singular product such as malt whisky (Scotland) can be strong enough to develop distinctive facilities (supply) around a number of distilleries and the activities these offer for tourists (Martin & McBoyle, 2006). In contrast, food and wine trails exist in other parts of the world (e.g. Australia) where they usually do not have the same advantage, as they more often consist of micro-businesses that do not see themselves as part of tourism supply and have limited capital to invest in specific tourism programs, attractions and activities (Mason & O’Mahony, 2007). Large-scale wine routes have been established in South America, for example, Chile and Uruguay (Alonso, 2013; Sharples, 2002). South Africa’s wine regions have also set up wine roads (Bruwer, 2003; Nowers et al., 2002). In Canada, most notably Ontario and British Columbia (Hashimoto & Telfer, 2003; Telfer, 2000), vini-trails are flourishing, as they are beginning to do in New Zealand (Hall & Macionis, 1998), Israel (Jaffe & Pasternak, 2004) and various parts of Spain and Portugal (López-Guzmán & Sánchez Cañizares, 2008; López-Guzmán et al., 2009; Medina & Tresserras, 2008; Simões, 2008) (Figure 2.10). A common definition of a wine route is ‘a sign-posted itinerary, through a well-defined area . . . whose aim is the “discovery” of the wine products in the region and the activities associated with it’ (Brunori & Rossi, 2000: 410; Gallenti & Galli, 2002: 157). Wine routes developed as important purposive trails that adjoin producers and consumers through visits to wineries, vineyards, cellars, retail shops, restaurants, museums, cheese producers, food vendors, visitor information offices and wine festivals. The entire rural landscape is an important part of the experience in areas where wine helps define the heritage and sense of place. As early as the 1920s, wine roads had been

50

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 2.10 One of Portugal’s wine trails

established in Germany; by the 1970s, each of Germany’s viticulture regions already had its own wine route (Hall & Macionis, 1998; Sharples, 2002). The first wine route in South Africa appeared in 1971 (Bruwer, 2003). Today, most of these have been set up by wine councils, local government councils/ agencies or other viniculture organizations as a way of promoting wine consumption at a regional level. Being part of a wine trail is said to bring benefits to participating producers and providers in a number of social and economic ways. In common with other types of food and drink trails, one of the advantages of joining a wine route is joint marketing through strength in numbers and common participation in special events (Correia et al., 2004; Telfer, 2001a, 2001b), creating clusters of wineries and a brand identity for the region (Correia et al., 2004; Hashimoto & Telfer, 2003). According to Brunori and Rossi (2000: 411), The creation of a tourist experience around a wine route is not simply the sum of the outputs from individual farms. The integration of farmers’ efforts creates a structured coherence of symbolic and material elements, which adds value to the single products whether it is wine, gastronomic products or accommodation. Farmers make their individual contribution to the . . . experience . . . However, the organization of the overall variety will depend on collective action. For small or medium enterprises, collective action on a wine route increases their ability to compete on the world stage. These collaborative efforts may enable more wine to be sold through the cellar door and enable producers to decrease their costs and increase revenue at a much lower cost than by acting alone (Brunori & Rossi, 2000; Bruwer, 2003).

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

51

Gallenti and Galli (2002: 162) argue that wine trails can increase land values, attract and retain a more highly qualified labor force, diversify regional food supplies and create more employment opportunities. As well, wine routes can help stimulate a healthy and competitive business environment with increased direct sales rather than through wholesalers. Entrepreneurialism might also be stimulated as new products are encouraged and diversification is almost synonymous with trail development. Wine routes can augment a destination’s image and create a brand awareness by adding a new tourism product and diversifying the tourist offer (Gallenti & Galli, 2002; Telfer, 2001b). Part of the Niagara region’s purpose in developing wine routes was to get visitors to see beyond Niagara Falls, namely that this part of Ontario had more to offer than only the falls (Hashimoto & Telfer, 2003). Efforts in Israel are hinting at such a change. In Israel there is a clear link between Biblical heritage and wine, and the country is beginning to capitalize on this by forming wine routes for Christian pilgrims that take them beyond the routine places of most itineraries (Jaffe & Pasternak, 2004; Ron & Timothy, 2013). Wine routes also have several spin-off effects on other types of tourism. Most of them include attractions other than those directly related to wine. For instance, many take in ancillary activities such as hiking, heritage site visits, shopping, arts and crafts, and golf (Correia et al., 2004; Crnjanski, 1998; Gallenti & Galli, 2002). They also stimulate increased interest in festivals and events tourism. Telfer (2001b: 24) described several important events that brought increased visibility to the Niagara Wine Route. These included star gazing, cheese celebrations, gardening, wine seminars, comedy weekends, barbecues, helicopter and hot air balloon tours of vineyards, vineyard hikes, horseback riding, music festivals, and the like. These were integral parts of the wine route experience, but the wine route itself also stimulated increased numbers of events. An interesting case that illustrates several issues is the Bairrada Wine Route (BWR) in Portugal. The BRW was established with the objectives of increasing wine sales and improving the regional image (Brás et al., 2010). A study undertaken by Correia et al. (2004: 20) soon after the establishment of the route highlights the reasons various wineries joined the trail and their expectations from their membership. The majority (42%) of wineries surveyed joined the BWR to enhance the reputation of the region’s wines; the primary purpose of 35% was to increase wine sales. Other important reasons include partnering with other companies and creating a core group of producers to protect the region’s wines. Nearly three quarters (71%) of participating wineries had to make major financial investments, such as upgrading facilities (shops, display rooms, museums) in anticipation of increased tourism. Despite these investments, few new employees were hired. Instead, most operators transferred existing employees from production to dealing with tourists. In the 2004 study, only 29% of route members

52

Tour ism and Trail s

felt they had achieved some of the objectives established in the beginning. The limited success was believed to result from several constraints, including funding problems, lack of focus and unwillingness on the part of some partners to participate fully. Only 79% of the service providers demonstrated some satisfaction with the program. These were very preliminary results, but according to several Portuguese tourism websites, the BWR is still functioning well and acts as an important tourist attraction in Portugal. Beer and whiskey trails Wine is not the only beverage of interest to pathfinders. One of the best documented beer trails was the Ale Trail in Ontario, Canada. This circuit was located in southern Ontario and was a self-guided tour of six craft breweries in Waterloo, Guelph and Elora, an area well known for its German immigrant population and beer production. The Ale Trail was open only on selected weekends between April and October, and its planning committee consisted of a chairperson, a general manager, brewery representatives and representatives from the province’s tourism ministry and human resources department. This route provided opportunities to taste different beer types, chat with brew masters, tour brewery facilities and learn about different kinds of beer. During its first year, the trail saw 10,000 visitors (Plummer et al., 2005: 452). Despite its admitted success, the trail was disbanded only three years after its inception for a variety of reasons associated with perceived economic costs and a lack of collaboration between breweries (Plummer et al., 2006). This will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5 which discusses the impacts of trails. Since the demise of the Ale Trail, others have taken the initiative further and created the Ontario Craft Beer Route, which spans a larger geographic area and includes 29 microbreweries in five craft brewing regions of the province, including the Kitchener-Waterloo region of the original Ale Trail (Post-Trib.com, 2009). Likewise, the city of Stratford, Ontario, also recently picked up where the Waterloo region’s Ale Trail left off and is now offering the Bacon & Ale Trail, combining the region’s pork and beer heritage. Visitors purchase tickets and meander between 10 pubs and pork shops to taste local products. According to the Stratford Tourism Alliance (2012: 1), Bacon and ale – two of life’s greatest creations. Stratford – home to the Ontario Pork Congress for close to 40 years with an amazing array of celebrated pork producers as well as a brewing history that first began in the 1870s – makes the perfect location to launch a trail dedicated to these two tastes . . . Take a hike on the Bacon & Ale Trail on a self-guided tour of food shops and pubs. From Beer BBQ sauce, to pork terrine wrapped in smoked bacon, to bacon-flavoured toothpaste, you’ll gain a whole new appreciation for your favourite obsessions.

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

53

Beer trails have developed in other famous brewing regions, such as France and Germany (Moulin & Boniface, 2001). Aside from wine, beer is a popular drink and cooking ingredient in the Lorraine region of France. Lorraine’s Beer Route directs drivers along a mapped course between breweries, shops, pubs and the well-known European Beer Museum (Musée Européen de la Bière) in Stenay. The Brewery Trail in Bamberg, Germany, similarly encourages tourists to sample famous Bavarian brews from the nine producers within the town itself and 90 additional breweries in the surrounding vicinity. The Bavarian tourism promotion office encourages visitors to create their own beer trails by visiting all, or many, of the 640 breweries (and other attractions) within the state by bicycle (Bavarian Tourismus Marketing, 2013). There are other trail types based upon the production and consumption of alcoholic beverages. Part of Scotland’s iconic image is Scotch whiskey. To play into this image, Scotland’s Malt Whiskey Trail was developed as an important tourist resource to link together the country’s several distilleries (MacLeod, 2004; Martin & McBoyle, 2006). According to the Scottish Tourist Board (2004: 2), Speyside is the home of malt whiskey, and more than half of Scotland’s distilleries are located there, making it ‘the best Scotland has to offer’. Likewise, Mexico’s Ruta de Tequila (Tequila Trail) and its associated Taquila Express, a tourist train that runs passengers through tequila country, were established to increase tourism in Tequila and neighboring communities. That the heritage of tequila production and the industrial landscape it created were inscribed on the World Heritage List in 2006 has helped congeal the international importance of the beverage that has made this central Mexican region famous. Visitors view the agave landscape, visit distilleries, eat meals and participate in tequila making (Gonzáles-Ávila, 2011; Gonzalez Huezo, 2008). Food trails Like wine routes, food trails have become popular among culinary tourists as important illustrations of gastronomic heritage (Boyne et al., 2002; Che, 2009; Corigliano, 2002; Croce & Perri, 2010; Hjalager & Richards, 2002; Meyer-Cech, 2003; Timothy & Ron, 2013). Food routes, or taste trails as they are sometimes known, usually integrate rural and urban locations (Beer et al., 2002) and link a variety of resources that have something to do with regional cuisine or a single food staple (e.g. fruit). The experience frequently includes visits to farms, plantations, orchards or ranches to learn about agricultural production and the process of planting, harvesting and consumption. Food festivals are an important part of taste trails, and restaurants or other food providers that prepare regional specialties are highlighted (Canadian Heritage, 2008). These specialized itineraries are important marketing mechanisms whereby new restaurants can be featured and older ones renewed. In most cases, taste trails call attention to traditional heritage cuisines, although in recent years, nouvelle cuisines and

54

Tour ism and Trail s

other contemporary trends (e.g. slow food) have become the content of many food routes (Telfer & Hashimoto, 2003). The Charlevoix Flavour Trail in Quebec, Canada, is a 143 km linear network that brings together more than 40 farmers and restaurateurs in the Charlevoix region. This agritourism circuit’s focus is local produce (e.g. pâtés, cheeses, chocolates, fruit, vegetables, beers, meats and ciders) and traditional preparation methods that deliver ‘the perfect occasion to discover the Charlevoix’s tantalizing fine cuisine’ (Charlevoix Tourism, 2013). Australia has developed several successful taste trails too, including the Bellarine Taste Trail (Victoria) and the Taste of the Tropics Trail (Queensland) (Australian Tropical Foods, n.d.). The Bellarine route comprises a number of lodging facilities, restaurants, wineries, breweries, cafes, cheese and vegetable producers, fruit farmers, seafood providers, weekend markets and food festivals (Bellarine Tourism, 2013).

Religious trails (inorganic) The first part of this chapter examined pilgrim routes that have become tourist trails in a more organic fashion. There is also a growing interest in developing purposive trails with a religious theme. In most cases, these are used to connect places associated with a religious figure and that person’s ministry. They are not necessarily a set route undertaken by the spiritual leader, but are pieced together by various organizations to highlight the person’s life and influence on others. St Patrick’s Trail in Northern Ireland is a good example of this type of path (Simone-Charteris & Boyd, 2010). The trail was formulated as a tourism product to unite locales in Northern Ireland related to St Patrick, the Patron Saint of Ireland, from Bangor to Armagh, with several essential stops between. The 148 km drive connects 15 key Christian sites and includes a modern visitor center in Downpatrick near the saint’s burial place at Down Cathedral (Figure 2.11). St Patrick’s Trail is one of Northern Ireland’s most prominent heritage attractions (Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB), 2013). The trail was designed as a literal and metaphorical series of journeys through landscape and culture, myth and reality that allow the visitor to follow in the footsteps of Patrick’s personal journey from ordinary man to saint (Boyd, 2013). The development of the route was primarily based on the urban centers of Armagh and Downpatrick, with Bangor as a secondary cluster (see Figure 2.12). A three-year action plan was launched by the NITB in 2005, developed around six priority themes: working in partnership; developing a St Patrick’s Trail; creating a memorable experience; developing a coordinated events and festivals program; strong marketing and branding; and developing cross-border activities. The trail is a result of various public bodies, private tourist organizations and community groups working in partnership. Of the 15 stops along the trail, 11 sites have a strong link to St Patrick’s life, legacy and landscape. The

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

55

Figure 2.11 St Patrick’s grave in Downpatrick, Northern Ireland

remaining four sites located around the settlement of Bangor are associated with another Saint, St Columbanus, who was educated in Bangor, born in around AD543 and left to set up monasteries in France, Italy and Switzerland. As such, the trail is connected to wider Christian heritage associated with the region. The trail, as shown in Figure 2.12, was designed as a touring route, by car or bus, with key designated stops within the three cluster regions. There are only two stops that deviate from the route itself. These include Saul Church, the site where St Patrick did his first preaching in AD432, and Slieve Patrick, a hill that is a genuine pilgrimage site, climbed once a year on the third Sunday of June, on top of which is erected the largest statue of St Patrick looking out on Carlingford Lough, the place where it is believed he first set foot in Ireland. There are two trails in northern Israel that focus on the life and ministry of Jesus, and there is talk of a ‘Pilgrim Route’ to be developed in the south (Rosenblum, 2008). Founded in 2007, the Jesus Trail is a 65 km walking path in the Galilee area that unites focal points of the life of Jesus, in addition to other historical and religious sites (Ynetnews, 2008). ‘The Jesus Trail offers an alternative for travelers . . . to experience the steps of Jesus in a way that is authentic, adventurous and educational by hiking through the rugged and beautiful landscape of the Galilee in Israel’ (Jesus Trail, 2013). The Jesus Trail organization’s goal is to provide a world-class educational, authentic and significant trek that provides an understanding of the life of Jesus for all nationalities, cultures and religions. It operates on the principles of building understanding, grass-roots ecotourism and positive economic growth for the trail’s communities, and a trek that connects hikers with the natural and cultural world of the Galilee. The second related path is the Gospel Trail

56

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 2.12 St Patrick’s Trail/Christian heritage route with recognized attraction clusters Notes: Key to attraction clusters: • Downpatrick: six key attractions: Down Cathedral and St Patrick’s Grave, St Patrick Centre, Down County Museum, Inch Abbey and outlying attractions of Saul Church and Struell Wells. • Armagh: five key attractions: Armagh Cathedral (Church of Ireland), Armagh Cathedral (Roman Catholic), Armagh County Museum, Armagh Public Library and St Patrick’s Trian. • Bangor: Bangor Abbey, North Down Heritage Centre and outlying attractions of Holywood Priory and Movilla Abbey. Source: Boyd (2013).

(Figure 2.13), which was inaugurated by the Israeli Ministry of Tourism in 2011, also to highlight the ministry of Jesus in the Galilee (Tourism Review, 2011). It has less of an environmental ethos than that of the Jesus Trail and is focused on economic development through tourism. The two trails parallel each other in a few locations and overlap in several places. However, they

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

57

Figure 2.13 The head of the Gospel Trail in Israel

begin at different spots in Nazareth and traverse different villages and rural areas for the most part, and tell a slightly different story. The existence of two somewhat parallel trails with similar objectives is confusing to tourists, and there has been considerable criticism levied against the Ministry of Tourism for establishing a second route focusing on the life of Jesus when one already existed in the same region (Mansfeld, 2012), although apparently the Gospel Trail was conceptualized earlier. Nonetheless, both continue to function, offering different tours, hiking and camping experiences along the way.

Conclusion This chapter has set out part of the supply side of trails and routes. While the focus has been on describing myriad cultural heritage trail types in their respective settings, the conceptual model presented in the chapter provides a basis for simplifying this complexity into two distinct trail types: those that have organically evolved and those that have been deliberately designed as tourism opportunities and part of a region’s attraction base. The authors have attempted to balance the discussion of both groups, remaining cognizant that even with the sub-categorization for each group it still does not cover the whole gamut of trails that exist. Instead, the focus has been to give treatment to the major subtypes within both categories. In terms of supply what has emerged from this discussion is that any major tourism region can lay claim to having an existing trail that was deliberately developed around key nodes of attraction or that local and regional policies have included the

58

Tour ism and Trail s

purposive designing of thematic trails around key features, persons and attractions that provide them with a competitive advantage over others. The way people experience trails and routes is often the result of the way they traverse them, and the extent of the trail they physically cover. With respect to the former, technological developments, in particular GPSs are rewriting how the tourist can experience the trail, where the use of mobile applications on smart phone technology allows them to experience pathways without the use of conventional trail maps. On saying that, Crang (1994) noted that maps have always been an important part of any trail system as they help travelers organize their memories of the route experience. Mobile apps replacing maps may appeal more to a marketplace where technology plays a greater role in people’s travel experiences, but as for organizing memories they will have to be coupled with other web 2-type participatory technology, such as blogs, where people can report their experiences. As for the latter, namely the extent of the trail that travelers frequent, this can often be constrained by a number of factors such as time available, individual interest and curiosity, where they can enter and leave the route, and the scale of trail involved. At the heart of the conceptual model in Chapter 1 was the tourist experience of trails and routes. A number of possible scenarios of experience can and may exist for cultural heritage trails and routes. In developing a conceptual model of trail/route experience, Boyd (2013) suggested the following categorization (Figure 2.14). Scenario A exists where the traveler chooses to experience the entire route, including the intervening attraction nodes within (i.e. individual tourist attractions). This is often the case where small-scale trails are involved, either as walking or touring trails. Scenario B is where only certain nodes (visitor attractions) are visited along the route, while not taking the route itself. Here the scale of trail is important, often involving longer distance trails where certain nodes are used both as entry or egress points. A third scenario (C) occurs when a section of the route is visited, including any intervening nodes along that chosen section. This type of scenario is possible for long-distance trails that are transnational in character and where trail experience is often confined to that part of the trail within a particular jurisdiction. The final scenario (D), meanwhile, is where visitors use the route as a spine from which to deviate and visit other places connected to existing nodes along sections of the route. It is important to recognize that all four scenarios take place within an operating environment of policy, planning, management, as well as institutional arrangements and stakeholders as alluded to in the first chapter. There is a case to be made that individual trails and routes may encapsulate the experience of all the above scenarios, and that experience is not conditioned by factors such as scale. The Camino de Santiago pilgrimage route is one such example (Graham & Murray, 1997). Scenario A is represented by those who choose to experience the whole trail. In this case, the traditions and history become the attraction to travelers, who view traveling

Cultural Routes and Her it age Trail s

59

Scenario A: Entire route Small-scale and or long-distance walking trails Scenario B: Certain nodes visited

Scenario C: Section and nodes visited

Scenario D: Nodes connecting other attractions

Transnational trails

Individual attractions over the trail/route

Figure 2.14 Possible trail/route experience scenarios Source: Modified after Boyd (2013).

the route as undertaking a pilgrimage. Scenario B is represented by those visitors interested in the history and heritage of the various tourist-historic cities (the nodes) along the route, such as Leon and Santiago de Compostela. Scenario C would relate to those travelers interested in experiencing only the eastern side of the route (from Pamplona to Burgos). Finally, Scenario D exists when travelers choose to deviate off the route from one of the principal nodes to visit other heritage attractions, such as the monastery of Santo Domingo de Silos. The next chapter continues the discussion of the supply side of trails and routes, where the focus is on nature and mixed trails.

3

Nature Trails and Mixed Routes

Introduction This chapter continues the discussion of route and trail types and resources. The focus here is nature trails (also referred to in this book as ecotrails and environmental trails) and mixed natural and cultural routes. A number of sub-typologies are established to help explore the vast phenomenon of nature trails, including how they are traversed, their settings, as well as their typological characteristics. Attention is given to the formal establishment of trails, recognizing that nature trails have existed for millennia. A deep description of all types of nature trails is not possible, so the focus here is geared toward wilderness tracks, winter tracks (snowmobile and ski), water trails, geology trails and forest canopy walks, and where time involved is taken into consideration, long-distance, multi-day nature trails. The second section of the chapter addresses routes that can be classed as a mix of cultural and natural, for their resources, contexts and uses overlap both realms equally. The argument that all landscapes are cultural has been well debated in the literature (see Frost & Hall, 2009), and that nature has been modified by human interaction over time. Mixed routes are taken here to describe a trail typology where the lines between natural and cultural heritage are somewhat indistinct, including bicycle trails (within both built and wilderness settings), borderland greenways and greenbelts, scenic byways, coastal drives and rails-to-trails lines. The taxonomies presented for both nature trails and mixed routes, are matched against the models that were presented in Chapter 2 – both the conceptual model (Figure 2.1) and the experience scenario model (Figure 2.14) to see the extent of their generalizability for all sorts of trails and routes.

Nature Trails Nature trails have existed for millennia and are one of the most important resources for recreation and tourism in outdoor areas today. Parks, 60

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

61

forests and other conservation areas are among the most ubiquitous venues for nature trails, although they also exist in areas that have not been set aside for conservation. Nature trails can be understood in a variety of ways. Some trails are described, sought after and managed depending on the type of transportation used on them. For instance, bridleways (horseback trails), footpaths, bicycle trails and off-road vehicle tracks provide satisfying and unique outdoor experiences. Nature trails might also be understood by the type of environment they traverse, their geographical location or the main type of attraction they feature. National park trails, desert tracks, wilderness trails and rain forest walks are examples of ways of classifying them. In addition, many trails include both natural and cultural elements as equal parts of the pathway product and experience. A single bicycle track may take in relatively undisturbed natural areas, as well as urban environments and heritage areas, thus making it a mixed natural and cultural trail. True nature paths without human environment incursion are few and far between. Only in the remotest wilderness areas can tracks truly be seen with the least of human influences. Even then, however, trodden pathways are still signs of human existence or cultural values being placed upon the natural environment. Some nature trails are enhanced with interpretive signs and visitor centers to help users understand the environment they are passing through (Ormsby, 1996). Regardless of the essential inseparability of culture and nature in the trails context, this section of the chapter aims to examine linear corridors that are considered overall to be nature trails. Different types of trails offer different natural and social encounters, and different hikers may choose to have different experiences, even on the same paths. Hadrian’s Wall Path in England, for instance, is both a cultural route and nature trail. For some hikers, it is more about nature and the panoramic vistas they encounter. For others on the same trail, the experience is most gratifying as a heritage hike that causes them to appreciate better the Roman patrimony of England. Researchers have identified physical characteristics of nature trails that influence users’ experiences and their level of enjoyment. For people who seek a genuine ecological experience, natural vegetation without signs of human intervention are the most influential. Wiberg-Carlson and Schroeder’s (1992: 4) study found that leafy vegetation and forest canopy correlated positively with trail preferences, while signs of human activity, such as roads, signs, fences, buildings and manicured lawns influenced participants’ outdoor experiences negatively. Similarly, other research shows that nature enthusiasts prefer restricted access to nature trails. In Costa Rica, foreign tourists strongly preferred restricted access to rain forest trails, while domestic visitors showed no preferences either way (Hearne & Salinas, 2002; Timothy & Martens, 2012). The influences of human encounters and other social elements are examined in more detail later on in the book when demand and impacts are addressed.

62

Tour ism and Trail s

The nature trails movement Although trails in natural areas, hiking trails and other outdoor paths have existed for centuries, only during the past half century has there been a systematic movement toward establishing outdoor nature trails for distinctive purposes (Walker, 1996). Like the cultural heritage trails discussed in the last chapter, nature trails exist for a multitude of reasons, some of which overlap with the purposes of cultural routes and trails. Ecotrails have an important role to play in protecting the natural environment. Interpretive trails are commonly designed in interesting and important environments where visitors are taught about the value of protecting the environment. The principle of use-induced appreciation for nature is alive and well on the Bruce Trail in Ontario, Canada. The 725 km trail is Canada’s oldest and longest footpath, and provides access to the Niagara Escarpment, which was designated a UNESCO World Biosphere Reserve in 1990 (Bowick, 2003; Bruce Trail Conservancy, 2013; Schutt, 1997). The Niagara Escarpment is a massive linear geological feature in Canada and the United States (US) that is home to Niagara Falls and many other rivers, falls, animal species and old growth forests. The Bruce Trail was established by the Bruce Trail Conservancy in 1960. It is well marked and interpreted with the aim of providing a ‘conservation corridor’, a footpath along the escarpment to protect the natural ecosystems and to promote environmentally responsible public access (Bruce Trail Conservancy, 2013). Tilden’s (1977) principles of interpretation hold very true to nature trails. Interpretation, according to Tilden and other interpretation specialists, educates visitors, who in turn learn to appreciate better the natural environment and are therefore more willing to protect it and behave in a more stewardship-oriented manner (Fletcher, 1995; Hall et al., 1993; Lemberg, 2004; Ormsby, 1996). Ecotrails can be crucial in accomplishing the goals of both formal education and informal education, the way many other heritage and natural sites have done (Light, 1995; Prentice, 1995). Trail use in formal education refers to utilizing nature routes as part of official instructive programs, such as school field trips or site visits for hands-on learning (Feinsinger et al., 1997). Getting children to use nature trails early in their lives instills within them a sense of respect and care for the environment. This early intervention ethos is what leads many schools and summer youth programs to include nature trails in their official curricula (Woyke, 2004: 83). Informal education refers to the types of learning that go on at natural and cultural sites via the visitors’ experiences and their encounters with various interpretive instruments (Timothy & Boyd, 2003). Much ‘informal learning’ can take place in natural surroundings that will help people appreciate nature and work harder for its protection (Ballantyne & Packer, 2005; Blanco, 2002; Orams, 1996). Feinsinger et al. (1997: 115) noted that ‘an ecologically literate public may be the “last best hope” for a sustainable biosphere’.

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

63

Trails are also instrumental in helping to protect the environment by providing alternative means of transportation. As subsequent chapters will emphasize, nature trails in suburban and exurban areas are often used as transportation routes for work and school commutes. They provide inexpensive and ecologically friendly alternatives to road-based transportation, and many users note that this is a large part of why they commute using bicycle or pedestrian trails (Lesens, 1990; Shafer et al., 2000; Weston & Mota, 2012). Health is another reason for nature trails and their growing popularity (Bowick, 2003; VanBlarcom & Janmaat, 2013). Some outdoor trails are designed and implemented specifically with health and wellness as their main objective. ‘Barefoot trails’ have developed in the past 20 years as healthy, natural venues for exercise and sensual stimulation. These are increasingly popular in Europe for their ostensible ability to stimulate the senses and manipulate pedal pressure points for health and wellness. These and other fitness trails are often located in cities, largely in greenways and other park-like environments, but many are located in nature surroundings that contribute to the fitness ambience. The US Department of Health and Human Services originated the Trails for Health program, which encourages Americans to become more physically active and appreciate the walking trails in their communities and nearby rural areas (Dolesh, 2004a). According to a study by Wang et al. (2004a, 2004b), trail use can reduce health care costs considerably for states and cities by improving overall health conditions of their populations. Their study showed that for each dollar spent on trails for physical activity, approximately three dollars were saved in health care. There are other non-health-related economic benefits, but these will be examined later in the book. Ecotrails and other outdoor paths are a critical recreation resource and point of community pride. They provide opportunities for family and friends to spend quality time together in natural surroundings. As well, they commemorate an area’s natural heritage and in so doing they become important tools for developing community solidarity and sense of place.

Types of nature trails In common with cultural routes, there are numerous types and manifestations of environmental trails. In the strictest sense of the word ‘nature’, few nature trails exist. Many nature trails are found in urban greenbelts or through suburban estates. Many are located in city or national parks, and even the remotest hiking paths are somehow influenced by human intervention. Thus, all trails have a human/cultural element to them. Moore and Shafer (2001) and Moore and Driver (2005) provide an overview of several types of recreation trails that focus primarily on natural resources, although some have a cultural element as well. Moore and Driver’s (2005: 265) first type is the traditional backcountry trail, which is more

64

Tour ism and Trail s

remote than many other kinds. They are located primarily on the outer perimeters or deep inside recreation areas and parklands and are much less accessible by wheeled traffic than other forms. They typically have natural surfaces and are sometimes known as ‘single-track’ trails. The second type is recreational greenway trails, or ‘natural corridors of open space that contain a trail’ (Moore & Driver, 2005: 265) (Figure 3.1). The term sometimes refers to a trail within a greenbelt, and sometimes it refers to the greenway itself. The most essential characteristic of this form is its location near or within urban or suburban areas. The precise terms, however, are recreational greenway, to refer to the natural corridor where the trail is located, and greenway trail, to refer to the trail within the greenway. Third are multiple-use trails. These are typically wider than other trails and surfaced with hardened tread to withstand a wider range of activities and a higher intensity of use. These multi-use trails can be found in many different locations but are most common in recreational greenways. Water trails are Moore and Driver’s (2005) fourth classification of natural pathways and can be based upon any coastal or fluvial water body (e.g. lakes, oceans, rivers) that allow users to row, paddle or motor along a defined water corridor. Many such routes cover long distances and are utilized for multi-day experiences with campgrounds located along the waterway. The final type of trail examined by Moore and Driver is rail-trails – one of the most popular outdoor resources in North America today. These trails are aligned with, and typically built over, the former courses of disused railway lines and are officially designated recreation and transportation passageways. Most rail-trails include elements of nature and culture, as they pass through towns, villages and cities and bypass old factories, farms and train stations.

Figure 3.1 A greenbelt trail in Scottsdale, Arizona, USA

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

65

Each of these types and others will be examined in more detail below. The descriptions that follow aim to provide an understanding of various trails, routes and tracks that occur in natural surroundings and whose primary purposes are promoting outdoor activity, appreciating the natural environment and providing isolated experiences away from population centers. As the last chapter pointed out, there are overlaps between several of these trail types. The purpose of providing nature trail categories is to delineate the wide range of environmental routes that exist in various contexts, not to attempt to develop a succinct and comprehensive typology.

Wilderness tracks Of all the natural trails considered in this chapter, perhaps wilderness paths/tracks are the most remote and most natural. Wilderness paths are a common type of trail used by hikers or horseback riders and are characterized by their isolation, natural surroundings and separation from overtly human-modified landscapes (Figure 3.2). In rough mountain terrain or on steep grades, sometimes the only acceptable human interventions are cables, pitons, rungs and ladders to assure better safety (Beunard & Berger-Sabattel, 1998), although as noted earlier, even some of the most basic human touches in the hiking environment can detract from the experience of ecological purists (Wiberg-Carlson & Schroeder, 1992). Much of the appeal of wilderness tracks, besides scenic beauty, lies in their isolated and ‘untouched’ features. Nature and ecology are inseparably connected to spirituality in general and numerous religious traditions (Timothy, 2013). Wilderness settings provide spiritual venues for increasing numbers of people, both religious and non-religious users, often depending on one’s personal story, motives,

Figure 3.2 A wilderness hiking trail in Utah, USA

66

Tour ism and Trail s

attitudes and spiritual traditions, as well as the locale’s siting and solitude (Heintzman, 2009). Many people view wilderness trail use as a spiritual experience (Hughes & Morrison-Saunders, 2003), as an opportunity to connect with nature or to appreciate the creative hand of their deity (Biers-Ariel et al., 2000). One specialized type of wilderness track is the ecotourism trail. Most traditional ecotourism activities take place in relatively undisturbed natural areas, with remoteness and isolation being part of their appeal (Hall & Boyd, 2005; Timothy & Martens, 2012; Timothy & White, 1999). While there seems to be a tendency for people to associate ecotourism with tropical areas owing to their more ‘exotic’ public appeal, many ecotrails and ecotourism venues have developed in other remote environments such as taiga forests, arctic and subarctic regions (Boyd & Butler, 1999), coastal zones and deserts. Boyd and Butler (1999) referred to these ecotourism settings as ‘tertiary ecotourism spaces’ that often had within them a heavy resource-based extractive industry in which existing routeways, often forest and logging routes as well as animal migratory tracks, could be used by the ‘serious ecotourist’ where ecotourism was their primary motive.

Snowmobile and ski trails Another unique type of linear resource is snowmobile and ski trails (Bowick, 2003). The Canadian province of Ontario is believed to have the largest connected snowmobile trail system in the world with some 34,262 km of designated trails that link communities, recreational sites, tourist attractions, events and other services (Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Clubs, 2013). Dupuis and Müller (2005: 100) identified four route types for crosscountry skiing. First, tour and retour routes are used for short strolls and are the most common type of trail used by skiers who are less interested in appreciating the natural landscape. Instead, they enjoy skiing, and their main purpose is simply to get out of the house. Second, circular routes are used by strollers, who start and finish at the same point, typically at a car park or near a trailhead. These skiers are more interested in nature and landscape, and access to a particular site is very important. Designated circular routes often link sites together along the trail. The third type is traverse routes, wherein hikers leave from one point and arrive somewhere else. Typically they use public transportation to get back to their starting point or arrange to have someone pick them up. Finally, randomized routes comprise several day-trips in different directions. Some users spend one or more nights in nature, while others ‘promenade’ on day trips. Snowmobile and ski trails in most locations are seasonal and strongly dependent upon snowfall levels during the coldest months. Official winter trails may be marked with flags and signs, while unofficial trails may simply be created in an ad hoc manner wherever users decide to create them. Races are common on these trails in the Nordic countries of Europe, Canada and

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

67

Alaska. Although activities take place above the ground, overuse of snow trails and packed snow can result in acute soil compaction, retarded vegetation growth and springtime erosion (Meyer, 1993). These issues are discussed in more detail in Chapter 5.

Water trails A type of nature-based route that is growing in popularity is water trails, which are also sometimes referred to as blueways or paddling paths (Pollock et al., 2012). Interest in water trails is driven by a rising popularity in sea kayaking and canoeing since the 1980s (Lengfelder & Timothy, 2000). Research from the late 1990s found that at that time, some 25 million people spent time paddling by raft, kayak or canoe each year, and Settina and Kauffman (2001) have predicted that between 2000 and 2050, recreational kayaking and canoeing will experience a 73% growth in participation. Sea kayaking became particularly popular in the 1990s. Recent trends show recreational kayaking and canoeing increasing dramatically since 2010, making paddleways a more salient part of the recreational landscape. In 2011, there were an estimated 9.8 million canoe users in the US, 8.2 million recreational kayakers and 2.02 million sea kayakers (Outdoor Foundation, 2012). According to the US National Park Service (2013b), water trails are ‘recreational routes on waterways with a network of public access points supported by broad-based community partnerships’. Their dual purpose is to provide recreational opportunities and further conservation efforts, and many places are beginning to see their value as a tourism resource (Settina & Kauffman, 2001). In some of the remotest regions, water trails are used to access natural regions (e.g. forests and jungles) where roads and land-based trails are unavailable (Boyd & Butler, 1999). Blueways range from multi-day paddling journeys to moderate routes in community parks and greenways (Settina & Kauffman, 2001). There are generally two types of water-based trails. The first comprises corridors that traverse water bodies and require users to boat or swim in the water. The importance of these waterways as important recreational routes has been recognized by many public and private agencies. In Michigan (USA), the Michigan Heritage Water Trail Program (MHWT) was developed as a partnership to facilitate research, plan, implement, monitor and market the state’s waterway trails. In particular, the program aims to do the following: • • •

research and develop approaches to plan, design, implement and monitor heritage water trails in Michigan; develop an educational and interactive website that allows users to find water trails based on trail characteristics, distance, or accessibility; research the economic and ecological impacts of the recreational use of water trails;

68

Tour ism and Trail s

•

encourage local governments (e.g. municipal and county) to participate in programs that complement the MHWT Program; and guarantee that private property rights along MHWT routes are not infringed or disrupted. (Lemberg, 2004)

•

The American Canoe Association actively encourages the use of water trails in the US and provides one of the most comprehensive waterway databases in North America. In recognition of the importance of water trails and in an effort to ‘promote healthy and accessible rivers’, in February 2012, the US Department of the Interior established the National Water Trails System, which at the time of writing included nine national water trails (see Table 3.1). Each inscribed water trail is managed by a local entity or collaborative unit, although the entire program is overseen by the National Park Service. The 2012 National Water Trails System (NWTS) aims to link existing and new water trails into a national network of blueways. ‘The National Water Trails System is a network of water trails the public can explore and enjoy, as well as a community of water resource managers that can benefit from information sharing and collaboration’ (US National Park Service, 2013b). The goals of the NWTS are to: • • • • •

protect and restore America’s rivers, shorelines, and waterways and conserve natural areas along waterways; increase access to outdoor recreation on shorelines and waterways; establish a national system of exemplary water trails; become a catalyst for protecting and restoring the health of waterways and surrounding lands; and build a community that mentors and promotes the development of water trails and shares best management practices. (US National Park Service, 2013b)

While there are designated water trails in several countries, including canal trails in the Netherlands, river-based water tourism routes in Lithuania (Macerinskiene, 2010) and other European countries, and wilderness water trails in Canada (Boyd & Butler, 1999), the water trails movement has been most notable in the US. More and more states are designating water trails as the concept continues to become popular for conservation, education and recreational purposes. Quite naturally, they are more popular and plentiful in north-western, north-eastern and upper midwestern states. The second type of water-based route is waterfront trails, which typically do not require recreationists to paddle or float directly on the water, but they sometimes include bridges or raised trails over water bodies to add variety and interest to an otherwise land-based trail. While they often focus on more than water resources, shorelines are the common element that makes them attractive and provides the rationale for their existence. The Lake

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

69

Table 3.1 National Water Trails in the US, 2013 Water trail name

Location

Length (km)

Chattahoochee River National Water Trail

Georgia

Mississippi National River and Recreation Area Water Trail

Minnesota

Alabama Scenic River Trail

Alabama

1035

Okefenokee Wilderness Canoe Trails

Georgia

197

US Fish and Wildlife Service/Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge

Mississippi River Water Trail Great River Water Trail

Missouri

198

US Army Corp of Engineers/ Mississippi Water Trail Association

Bronx River Blueway

New York

13

Hudson River Greenway Water Trail

New York

420

Hudson River Valley Greenway

Kansas River Trail

Kansas

284

Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism

Willamette River Water Trail

Oregon

356

Willamette Riverkeeper

79

125

Managing agency Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area (NPS) Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (NPS)/Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Alabama Scenic River Trail

City of New York Parks & Recreation/Bronx River Alliance

Source: US National Park Service (2013b).

Ontario Waterfront Trail, which includes the Toronto Waterfront and Niagara Falls, is a popular nature trail in Canada. Likewise, the Alexander MacKenzie Voyageur Route, which parallels the waterways that opened up western Canada to trade in the 18th century, is another popular Canadian waterfront trail (Bowick, 2003). The Mississippi River provides several scenic waterfront trails that highlight wetlands, wildlife and cultural sites along this famous river (Timothy, 2009).

70

Tour ism and Trail s

Geology trails Geotrails are not a recent phenomenon. They have long existed among nature enthusiasts, but their labeling as a distinctive trail type is quite recent. Since the 1990s, increasing numbers of geology trails have been labeled as such, primarily for educational purposes (Hose, 2006) as users learn about geodiversity in a wide range of contexts. These include coastal zones, mountains, caves, forests and even urban areas where the relationships between geology and the built environment are interpreted (Newsome & Dowling, 2010). Geology trails are based upon features of the geological, geomorphological or paleontological environment. Small-scale trails, such as the walking paths at Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona (USA), and Craters of the Moon National Monument, Idaho (USA) (Figure 3.3), or the hot springs and geysers areas of Iceland and New Zealand, immerse pedestrian visitors in the fossilization and geomorphological processes that have shaped the earth. Longer-distance drive trails may also focus on geology as their primary resource and require the use of vehicles to travel from one visitor center to another or from one geological site to another (Newsome & Dowling, 2010). Creaser (2010: 28) describes several geotrails in Queensland, Australia, that spotlight the state’s dinosaur and opal heritage. There are ongoing discussions about connecting Queensland’s Dinosaur Trail with other existing and potential paths along Lightening Ridge, linking them to the Australian Fossil Mammal Sites World Heritage Site in Naracoorte and Riversleigh. Underground cave trails are another manifestation of geotrails. The Blue Creek Cave system in Belize is promoted as a long-distance corridor that can take one or two days to walk (Boucher, 1990). Most karst caves that serve as attractions have walking trails within them so that visitors can view

Figure 3.3 A geology trail at Craters of the Moon National Park, USA

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

71

different formations and microclimates, although these tend to be highly sensitive to tourist impacts (Pulido-Bosch et al., 1997). In the 1990s, the Ice and Fire Trail in New Zealand connected the geological features of the country (Hall et al., 1993). A similar trail, the Fire and Ice Trail, is located in the US state of Washington and focuses on the volcanoes and glaciers of that state. The main emphasis of the Grand Canyon’s hiking trails is geology and the fluvial systems that formed the canyon. There are now hundreds of important geotrails located throughout the world in places where local geology has become of significant tourist interest (Newsome et al., 2012; Wrede & Mügge-Bartolović, 2012).

Forest canopy walks One of the most popular activities undertaken by tourists in rainforest ecosystems is canopy walks, or skywalks. These wood, rope and/or metal suspended trails dangle from, or are affixed to, tree trunks, branches or poles, at varying heights, allowing users to experience nature from different vantage points. Understory walks allow people to view the ground and its various flora and fauna from above and from a position within the lower reaches of the jungle cover. Canopy, or emergent-layer, walkways allow visitors to experience plant and animal life higher in the treetops and may provide extensive views over large swaths of rainforest. At Blue Creek Nature Reserve, Belize, wood and aluminum walkways cling to the forest canopy between 25 and 40 meters above the ground (Hubbell, 1997). This vantage point allows visitors to view various tree and plant species, as well as animal life. Built originally by biologists and other researchers, this airborne path has become an important attraction for tourists (Timothy & White, 1999). This type of track seems to be gaining popularity throughout the world wherever rainforests are the focus of tourist attention and can be found in Africa, Latin America and parts of Asia and the Caribbean (Lowman, 2009; Seibel, 2013) (Figure 3.4). In a series of suspended bridges connected by trails, the Sky Walk in Monteverde, Costa Rica, provides opportunities for tourists, even guests with physical disabilities, to experience the biodiversity of the cloud rainforests of Costa Rica. It consists of seven suspended bridges between 80 and 300 meters long and a maximum elevation of 46 meters. The higher Sky Trek (4.5 km in length) requires more endurance ability and includes cross-canyon cables and a series of trails and hanging bridges (Báez, 2002: 129). Several interesting issues have emerged in recent years pertaining specifically to this type of nature trail. First, perhaps more than in any other kind of trail system, forest canopy walks have become the focus of security concerns among policymakers and tourism industry representatives. Some site managers have begun requiring the use of hardhats and safety harnesses (Hubbell, 1997), and most sites have now begun using building materials that reduce slipping and falling. There have also been instances of parts of

72

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 3.4 A rainforest canopy trail in Ghana

walkways collapsing with people on them. In addition to safety, hanging trails are noted for their educational potential, as they allow students, teachers and scientists to study various living organisms and various physical processes associated with rainforests. Third, Báez (2002) notes their potential role in conservation as they help contribute to forest regeneration and the reforestation of pastureland, as they generate low-impact tourism that might provide employment and income for people who were formerly involved in deforestation and ranching enterprises. As part of this, they can be seen as a way of developing community-based tourism in areas where indigenous people may have few other livelihood options beyond consuming jungle resources.

Long-distance, multi-day nature trails There are thousands of long-distance trails that focus primarily on nature, although as noted earlier in the chapter, few of them are solely about nature, as there is almost always some element of culture being conserved and appreciated as well. Famous multi-day nature trails can be found throughout Europe, North America, Asia, Australia and New Zealand (e.g. the Great Walks). While there are many local nature trails extending from a few hundred meters to several kilometers, longer-distance footpaths are a different product entirely. Owing to their distance, and often their difficult terrain, these see fewer full completions. Unlike short-distance nature trails or some famous long-distance trails (e.g. the Appalachian Trail) where people can enter at one of many entry points, mountainous nature trails typically have beginning and ending points with few access gateways in between. Thus, hikers completing the most rigorous trails tend to reflect the

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

73

characteristics of what Stebbins (2007) refers to as ‘serious’ recreationists – in this case die-hard enthusiasts, who are resolutely attached to their leisure hiking pursuits. Below, two cases are presented on nature trails of differing scales: Great Walks, New Zealand, and the Appalachian Trail, USA.

Case Study: Great Walks, New Zealand The Great Walks are found within the National Parks, Forest Parks and other Conservation Areas in New Zealand that are managed by the Department of Conservation (DOC). According the Department’s website (www.doc.nz/parks-and-trecreation/tracks-and-walks/greatwalks/ ), these are ‘premier tracks that pass through diverse and spectacular scenery, including native forests, lakes and rivers to rugged mountain peaks, deep gorges and vast valleys’. There are nine of them, and they are an essential part of New Zealand’s backcountry and are used for outdoor recreation. Some of the Great Walks have a long history associated with them; the Milford Track opened in 1890 and over the 1890s the Whanganui River was known to visitors as the Rhine of New Zealand, explored by some of New Zealand’s elite early international visitors. By the 1990s, with New Zealand established as an international visitor destination, the DOC set out its visitor strategy, which according to Kearsley and Coughlan (1999) attempted to find a balance between the growth of tourism, the natural resources available to them and the level of facilities that could be maintained on a permanent basis. They identified the following seven visitor groups: • • • • • • •

Short stop travelers (SST). Day visitors (DV). Overnighters (ON). Backcountry Comfort Seekers (BCC). Backcountry Adventurers (BCA). Remote Seekers (RS). Thrill Seekers (TS).

With respect to visitors in New Zealand’s backcountry, the BCC, BCA and to a certain extent the RS groups apply. With respect to the Great Walks, these are predominantly the choice of BCC as these trails have a number of well-serviced huts along the routes. In its 1996 Strategy, the DOC noted that BCC visitors have little or only moderate experience of a backcountry and the priority is on ensuring they have safe facilities, a good track surface and a degree of comfort in camping and (Continued)

74

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Great Walks, New Zealand (Continued) hut structures. The DOC put in place a booking system, with seasonal hut and campsite fees that were highest during the peak summer months. The key characteristics associated with BCCs were noted as: • • •

• •

•

Setting and accessibility: natural setting (backcountry walk-in) with generally the only modification being the facilities provided. Largely foot access. Nature of visit and activities undertaken: the major activity undertaken is trampling on the major tracks, with most trips taking two to five days. Experience sought/degree of risk: seeking an outdoor experience in a backcountry environment that has low risk due to the provision of safe, comfortable facilities (use of guided or concessionaire operations) as for many this may be their first introduction to the New Zealand backcountry. Facilities/services sought: seeking a low risk comfortable experience in the backcountry; facilitated by the provision of good constructed tracks, bridges and huts. Make-up of visitors and visitor numbers: an equal proportion of New Zealanders and international visitors on the major tracks. New Zealanders in this group are relatively inexperienced with a wide age range. The majority of international visitors are aged between 20 and 40. Projected use: this group is projected to experience a large increase in international visitors, with domestic visitors remaining static or even declining, based on ‘tramper flight’ to lower use areas to avoid increasing numbers. (Department of Conservation, 1996)

In its 2003 strategy, the DOC noted that by the end of the 1990s there was a need to remove some visitor facilities from the backcountry. While criticized by a wide range of New Zealanders, this strategy of removal was necessary to maintain the country’s wild places, as the Great Walks attracted ever increasing numbers of international visitors. Table 3.2 outlines the key characteristics of the Great Walks, and their overriding appeal to international visitors in that they are, with one exception, classed as easy tramping tracks with duration times (number of days) that can fit easily into their schedule of planned activities. Figure 3.5 illustrates that many of the Great Walks are located within New Zealand’s national park system, where most of the walks are found on the South Island. For backcountry adventurers there are over 11,000 km of tramping tracks with basic huts of category 3 (tramping tracks) and 4 (route

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

75

Table 3.2 Characteristics of the Great Walks, New Zealand (short–medium distance trails) Name

Degree of difficulty

Distance

Duration

Lake Waikaremoana Tongariro Northern Circuit Whanganui Journey (canoe/kayak) Abel Tasman Coast Track Heaphy Track

Easier tramping track Easier tramping track

46 km 43.1 km

3–4 days 3–4 days

Easier tramping track

145 km

5 days

Easier tramping track

54.4 km

3–5 days

Easier tramping track Advanced/expert if mountain biking Easier tramping track Easier tramping track Easier tramping track Easier tramping track

78.4 km

4–6 days

53.5 km 60 km 32 km 39 km

4 days 3–4 days loop track 2–4 days 3 days

Milford Track Kepler Track Routeburn Track Rakiura Track

Source: Compiled from Department of Conservation (2013).

Figure 3.5 The Great Walks of New Zealand

(Continued)

76

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Great Walks, New Zealand (Continued) standard tracks), bridges at key river crossings, pit toilets and signs that are designed primarily for safety. At the other end of the scale, as part of the Nature of New Zealand Programme, there are a number of longdistance, multi-day drive trails that focus on various aspects of New Zealand’s natural environment. Some of them can take up to 14 days to complete, focusing on the country’s marine science, flora, fauna, geology and natural landscape (Hall et al., 1993).

Case Study: The Appalachian Trail (Long Distance) At a length of some 3500 km, the Appalachian Trail (AT) (officially the Appalachian National Scenic Trail) is one of the longest contiguous wilderness hiking trails in the world. Together with the Pacific Crest Trail and the Continental Divide Trail, the three are sometimes described as the ‘triple crown’ of long-distance trekking in the USA. Although it runs through villages and towns, passes over a number of highways and railroad bridges, and embraces several cultural sites, its primary focus is nature, and it is treated in this book as a wilderness trail. The AT is a marked and signposted hiking footpath in the eastern US, running through Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine with the midpoint at Harper’s Ferry, West Virginia (Figure 3.6).

Figure 3.6 A visitor center on the Appalachian Trail at Harper‘s Ferry

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

77

The trail is managed by the US National Park Service and the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, although a large number of clubs, nonprofit organizations and other partners help maintain and protect it. The idea for the trail was conceived in 1921 by Benton MacKaye, who foresaw it as ‘a footpath through the wilderness that stretched like an unbroken chain along the crest of the Appalachians’ (Foresta, 1987: 77). The first section was designed in 1923, and the trail was completed in 1937. In 1968, under the National Trails System Act, it was named a protected National Scenic Trail (Bristow, 1998; Bryson, 1998; Foresta, 1987; Nisbett & Hinton, 2005). AT has a significant following of people who have hiked, or plan to hike all or parts of it. Hikers who complete the entire length in one season are known as ‘thru-hikers’, while individuals who complete the trail on a number of separate trips are referred to as ‘section hikers’. Thru-hikers, according to MacLennan and Moore (2011), can be further divided into ‘purists’, ‘blue blazers’ and ‘yellow blazers’. Following the official white blazes, purists are known to stay on the formally designated AT path, although they might take side trips for shelter or to buy supplies. Blue blazers deviate on side trails marked with blue blazes, which shortens the journey substantially. Yellow blazers, a somewhat derogatory term, are hikers who ‘cheat’ by following roads and highways, and hitchhiking to speed the pace. There are also other hikers who use the trail for day trips or other short-term uses, including weekend backpacking (Nisbett & Hinton, 2005). Between 1936 and 2011, there have been some 13,589 completions of the entire 3500 km. In 2012, there were 803 thru trips recorded, and between 2–3 million people use at least part of the trail each year from all over the world (Appalachian Trail Conservancy, 2013).

Mixed Routes The previous chapter highlighted cultural trails; this chapter has so far emphasized nature trails. Both chapters, however, have argued that the lines between ecological and heritage trails are indistinct, with even the most remote nature-oriented tracks having some human element or intervention. This section focuses on routes and paths that are an obvious intersection of nature and culture and present themselves as such. ‘Discovery walks’ are fairly common in city spaces. They are self-guided walks with signs, brochures, maps and other aids to help users link parks, gardens, green spaces and historic sites (Belan, 2000). In the 1980s, a 6.5 km route was developed to surround the town of Punta Gorda, Belize. It provided opportunities for tourists to see not only the tropical rainforest and

78

Tour ism and Trail s

Caribbean coastline, but also indigenous farming and hunting methods. Users were able stop by a traditional Maya home and replica Garifuna village where they learned about Maya and Garifuna cultures and traditions (Boucher, 1990). Many trails around Lake Michigan (USA) traverse sand dunes, glacial landscapes and cedar swamps, while at the same time focusing on mining heritage, the Black Hawk War and ancient fossils buried nearby (Schwartz, 1996). In Australia, horseback riding on Outback trails nearly always involves natural and cultural heritage elements, where riders experience the harshness of the Australian wilderness while appreciating folklore, stories and billy tea boiled over an open fire (Hemmings, 1993).

Bicycle trails While there are off-road and wilderness bicycle trails, most cycling routes comprise a mix of cultural and natural assets. Thousands of trails have been designated specifically for the use of cyclists in urban and national parks, as well as in wilderness settings. Bicycle trails are now a commonplace feature of city green space master plans and rural development strategies (Rennicke, 1997b; Watkins, 1984). As well, the popularity of cycling in many European and North American cities has resulted in special bicycle lanes on streets and urban roadways that facilitate easier traffic navigation for cyclists and help provide a safer urban environment for them. Many countries see cycling trails not only for local recreation and transportation but they also see them as potential tourism products, where people come from abroad to view the country by bicycle. Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium and several other countries have been especially aggressive in promoting cycle tourism for many years, utilizing local trails for tourists to enjoy attractive small towns and beautiful landscapes as part of those countries’ tourism product (Burgener, 1987; Cox, 2012; Lamont, 2009; Meschik, 2012). Switzerland has planned and continues to plan themed medium-distance cycling routes that link tourist destinations together with rest stops and points of interest (Studer, 1994). At a different scale, the North Sea Cycle Route was established in 1998 to provide a continuous, signed route through Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (UK) as a cross-border cycle tourism network linked by the theme of the North Sea (Lumsdon et al., 2004: 13). In the UK, the National Cycle Network (NCN) (10,400 km) was initiated in 1995 by Sustrans and funded by the National Lottery (Cope et al., 2003). According to Cope et al. (1998: 211), eventually half the network will be on car-free routes shared by pedestrians, cyclists and wheelchair users. The first recreational section of the NCN was the 220 km Coast to Coast (C2C) cycle route in 1996, which crosses northern England from the Cumbrian Coast to the eastern seaboard near Sunderland. Between these two end points, the C2C passes through the Lake District National Park, the

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

79

Vale of Eden and the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and is an important part of the tourism product of all three areas (Cope et al., 2003; Cope et al., 1998). Few countries can match the comprehensive cycle network of the Netherlands, where approximately one-third of the population uses bicycles for their main mode of transportation (European Commission, 2011). Bicycle use in the Netherlands is followed by Hungary, Denmark and Sweden in importance. This has resulted in a widespread network of cycling routes in urban and rural settings throughout Europe. The Dutch Cyclists’ Union (Fietsersbond) works toward assuring smooth and direct cycling routes, better parking facilities for bicycles, safer riding conditions and fewer bicycle thefts (Fietsersbond, 2013). Together with many other national cycling associations in Europe, the Dutch Union is part of the European Cyclists’ Federation (ECF), which since 1983 has attempted to ensure that cycling achieves its fullest potential as a healthy and sustainable recreational activity and mode of transportation throughout Europe. Its primary aims are to: • • • • • • •

elevate the status of cycling and raise awareness of its health and social benefits; include the needs of cyclists in transport planning, including health, safety and environmental issues; support member groups on national and international issues related to the aims of the ECF; promote and support research on cycling, transportation, safety and environment; augment information and advice for member groups to assist in their national and international activities; encourage the exchange of information and expertise between members; and disseminate information that helps raise awareness of politicians, international institutions, planners, trade associations, tourism authorities and environmental groups in relation to biking and its needs. (European Cyclists’ Federation, 2013b)

Some of the trail-specific efforts of ECF have resulted in the establishment of EuroVelo, the European Cycle Route Network. Its purpose is to form and operate a network of cycling routes that crosses and unites all of Europe (Figure 3.7). In particular, EuroVelo aspires to accomplish the following goals: •

to ensure the implementation of high-quality cycle routes in all countries of Europe, enacting best practices across borders and harmonizing standards throughout the continent;

80

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 3.7 A bicycle path crosses the Dutch-Belgian border at Baarle Hertog/Baarle Nassau

• •

to bring the designated cycling routes to the attention of policymakers and users, promote their use and provide information about cycling in Europe; and to urge Europeans to use biking routes for daily recreational trips and participate in bicycle tourism.

Presently EuroVelo comprises 14 long-distance, cross-border routes, stretching more than 70,000 km (planned), with 45,000 km already in place. Almost every country in Europe is represented on at least one of the EuroVelo bike routes (Table 3.3). The only exclusions are Andorra, Iceland, Kosovo, Liechtenstein, Moldova and the Caucasian states (i.e. Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan). The routes are developed, planned and operated by national, regional and local governing bodies, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and public agencies (European Cyclists’ Federation, 2013b).

Borderland greenways and greenbelts As noted in Chapter 1, greenways are an important venue for outdoor trails, primarily in urban and suburban areas. Because they usually comprise complex networks of trails, linear parks, golf courses, water drainages and other green spaces, they are a mixed type of trail situation, comprising both natural and human-made elements of open space. They often link together parks, natural areas or cultural resources. There are two related examples of mixed cultural and natural greenbelts that have received a lot of public attention in recent years in relation to trails development. The first of these is known as the German Greenbelt and relates

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

81

Table 3.3 European cycle routes in the EuroVelo program Route

Countries included

Atlantic Coastal Route

Norway, UK, Ireland, France, Spain, Portugal Ireland, UK, Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Belarus, Russia Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Belgium, France, Spain France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Czech Republic, Poland, Ukraine UK, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Italy France, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Czech Republic, Austria, Italy, Vatican City, Malta Spain, France, Monaco, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Albania, Greece, Cyprus Poland, Czech Republic, Austria, Slovenia, Croatia Poland, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Serbia, Macedonia, Greece Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, UK Norway, Finland, Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Czech Republic, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece, Turkey Switzerland, France, Germany, Netherlands

Capitals Route Pilgrims Route Central Europe Route

Via Romea Francigena Atlantic-Black Sea Route

Sun Route

Mediterranean Route

Baltic-Adriatic Route Baltic Sea Cycle Route

East Europe Route

North Sea Cycle Route Iron Curtain Trail

Rhine Route

Source: Compiled from European Cyclists’ Federation (2013a).

Distance (km) 8186 5500 5122 4000

3900 4448

7409

5888

1930 7980

5984

5932 10,400

1320

82

Tour ism and Trail s

closely to the political border trails discussed in the last chapter. The former East-West divide between the two Germanies came down in 1989–1990 with the dissolution of European communism and the reunification of Germany. The inner-German border, which was heavily fortified and represented the meeting point of communism and capitalism, now has considerable potential for nature conservation as a linear greenbelt. The border zone, which was 5 km wide in some places, was seen for many years as a militarized ‘no-man’s land’, although it was completely within the borders of the German Democratic Republic. With the exception of East German soldiers and the frontier-related infrastructure, the 1400 km extent of the divide remained almost untouched for near 50 years. As such, the inner-German border provided suitable conditions for plant and animal life to flourish. Today, much of the former border is still visible in the cultural landscape of Germany, often appearing as a green strip of trees, shrubs and tall natural grasses. To maintain the former border as a greenbelt, the German Green Belt Project was established immediately following the border’s demise, to turn the 1400 km German portion of the former Iron Curtain into a biosphere reserve (Paulick, 2005). One of the country’s largest environmental groups spearheaded the project in 1989. Hundreds of acres of land have been acquired for the Green Belt Project to provide a home for many endangered species that have settled there over the years. A similar situation exists at the border of North and South Korea. Much like the German border, the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) is a 4 km space separating the two states. North and South patrols exist only at certain locations in the DMZ, so most of it has remained untouched since the Korean War ceasefire was signed in 1953. The 98,000 hectare area has overgrown with vegetation and is now home to hundreds of mammal and bird species (Westing, 2001). Several observers have suggested that when the two Koreas eventually reunite, the DMZ will become a significant ecotourism zone and game preserve with important political heritage implications as well (Brady, 2008; Timothy et al., 2004).

Self-drive scenic byways Drive tourism has long been an important part of traveler mobility for several generations (de Kok, 1989; Prideaux & Carson, 2003a). With the advent of the automobile at the close of the 19th century and the popularization of car ownership early in the 20th century, drive tourism became firmly embedded in the global travel arena as day trips and longer vacation experiences (Getz, 1999; Ioannides & Timothy, 2010; Prideaux & Carson, 2011; Taplin & Qiu, 1997). Road trips are a well-recognized part of the tourism scene in nearly every corner of the globe (Prideaux & Carson, 2011). The widespread use of automobiles during the 1920s, the emergence of national parks in the west in the

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

83

late 1800s and early 1900s, the increase in national roads in the 1930s–1940s, and the rise of the interstate highway system in the mid-1950s were the main impetuses of car-based travel in the US (Ioannides & Timothy, 2011; Timothy, 2011b; Zierer, 1952). By the 1960s, road trips were already a central part of domestic US tourism and favored particularly by the growing middle class. This historic trend was accented by the initiation of the National Scenic Byways Programme (NSBP). The NSBP was established in 1991 under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act and reauthorized in 1998 with the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Draper & Petty, 2001). Under this program, which is administered by the Federal Highway Administration, the US Secretary of Transportation identifies selected roads and highways as National Scenic Byways or All-American Roads, based on their archaeological, cultural, historic, natural, scenic and recreational characteristics (Draper & Petty, 2001; Kent, 1993; Lew, 1991). National Scenic Byways must exemplify one of these characteristics, but to be designated an All-American Road, a corridor must demonstrate at least two of these criteria that underscore a region’s archaeological evidence, expressions of customs and traditions, legacies of the past connected to physical landscapes, relatively undisturbed visual environments, available outdoor recreational activities, or landscapes that provide heightened visual experiences (Eby & Molnar, 2002: 96). Currently there are 151 appointed Scenic Byways and All-American Roads in 46 states within the NSBP (US Department of Transportation, 2013) (Figure 3.8). Other agencies have established scenic byways programs parallel to that of the NSBP. Some states do not participate in the national system, but instead have their own byways programs (e.g. Hawaii and Texas). As well, the US Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the

Figure 3.8 A scenic byway marker in the US Southwest

84

Tour ism and Trail s

American Automobile Association and the National Geographic Society have designated their own branded scenic byways, which do not necessarily correspond to those of the Federal Highway Administration (Eby & Molnar, 2002; Lew, 1991; Timothy, 2011b). Lew (1991: 25) charted several benefits of scenic byway programs and why so many public agencies have supported the inscription of certain drive corridors as scenic highways or byways: • • • • • • • • • •

drive tourism is one of the most prevalent recreational pastimes in the United States; increased free time and car ownership are generating added demand for leisure driving; rapid urbanization has created the need for rural and open space recreation opportunities; car-based sightseeing can generate significant economic benefits to scenic corridor communities; appropriate planning and design of byways can enhance regional aesthetics and recreational opportunities; scenic roads offer enjoyable access to destinations; scenic byways themselves are tourist attractions; scenic road networks can disperse the concentrations of tourists and recreationists, minimizing some potential negative ecological and social implications of high season; attractive byroads can stimulate solidarity and pride in the cultural and natural heritage of a region; and appropriate management can help reduce roadside blight.

Outside the US there are many similar self-drive scenic routes, some of which are officially designated by national or regional bodies and others that are more informal but popular motor trails. Little’s (1990) examination of greenways in America included coastal highways as part of what was being referred to as the drawing of linear open spaces. Examples included US 101 coastal drive, Big Sur’s coastal highway, Cascade Loop in Washington State. Kent (1993) later assigned the label of ‘scenic roads’ to such types of driving spaces which were designated for both their natural and cultural features. In terms of designating scenic roads, Kent’s study respondents considered their visual characteristics more important than the effects of the designation process, viewing the natural attributes of the roads to be more important than the cultural elements. There remained a paucity of research on self-drive tourism until a special issue of the Journal of Vacation Marketing in 2003 focused on the topic. Several strands of thinking emerged from the theme issue. First was the strong relationship between self-drive tourism and the domestic short-haul ‘visiting friends and relatives’ (VFR) market within destinations (Pennington-Gray,

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

85

2003). Second was the emergence of ‘themed driving routes’ and associated programs (Olsen, 2003; Sivijs, 2003), and third was the development of a set of factors necessary for the development of iconic self-drive touring routes (Hardy, 2003). Hardy suggested that self-drive trails had the capacity to link regional communities together, and encourage tourism development along traveled routes that had high traffic volumes. Factors for success in the development of an iconic self-drive route included the involvement of communities along the way, an understanding of the drive tourist, as well as the development of attractions, effective interpretation, signage and infrastructure. To understand the self-drive tourism market better, Prideaux and Carson (2003a) developed a useful framework wherein attention should be paid to factors including location, visitor characteristics, access, nature of visitor flows, expenditure patterns, attractions, accommodation, promotion, cooperation between stakeholders, level of public sector involvement and economic impacts of innovation. Recently, Denstadli and Jacobsen (2011) noted the relationship between motivation for driving scenic routes and the level of satisfaction visitors derived and their loyalty toward scenic roads. The following case study of the Causeway Coastal Route (CCR) is used to illustrate many of the above findings in the extant literature on self-drive tourism and scenic byways.

Case Study: Causeway Coastal Route (CCR), Northern Ireland The CCR is an apt example for threading together a number of the key points previously addressed – the importance of the VFR market to drive tourism, as well as the factors needed to develop a successful scenic route. Northern Ireland enjoys a higher than average VFR market, which accounts for 46% of all visitors from outside the province and 34% of all domestic overnight trips. Part of the appeal of Northern Ireland has been the North Coast ‘pleasure periphery’ with its Victorian and Edwardian seaside resorts, as well as the striking coastal scenery. For decades visitors have journeyed along this coastal road/route to take in its scenery, heritage and culture. Over the past few years as part of efforts to develop tourism in the area further, the coastal drive has been officially designated and marked by scenic signs and given the label Causeway Coastal Route. It is officially labeled a general sightseeing tour circuit, but it is also an opportunity to experience one of the most dramatic routes in the world (Boyd, 2013). The 129 km CCR is, according to the Northern Ireland Tourist Board, ‘the essential Irish journey’ with panoramic views of windswept cliffs, spectacular scenery, relatively unspoilt beaches, historic castles, resort communities, coastal villages, churches, heritage centers (Continued)

86

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Causeway Coastal Route (CCR), Northern Ireland (Continued) and forts (see Figure 3.9). According to a travel section of the Independent newspaper in 2009, the CCR was chosen as the best coastal route in the UK, on par with the Garden Route in South Africa and the Pebble Beach/ Carmel Coastal Drive in California, USA. The CCR was part of the Causeway Coast and Glens Masterplan (2004–2013), and the route (including two additional inland ways) was developed in conjunction with 10 local authority regions through which the route passes (from Derry City Council in the north-west, to Newtownabbey Borough Council on the northern edge of Belfast). In total, there are today 400 waymarks along the route and a number of inland secondary loops as shown in Figure 3.9. Visitors can enjoy cultural heritage and natural scenery at 15 highlighted ‘stops’ identified along the route. These all have the potential to act as points of intervening opportunity, either as major or minor nodes/attractions. While it is a driving route, several principal attractions divert visitors off the route itself. The main natural and cultural node located midway along the CCR is the Giant’s Causeway, the only World Heritage Site in Northern Ireland. It was inscribed in 1986, at the same time as Stonehenge in England. Situated on the province’s north coast, this marvel of 40,000 solidified basaltic hexagonal columns formed from the lava flow of an ancient volcanic eruption, protrudes out of a cliff face and forms a section of the seashore. It has held the fascination of visitors and early writers as far back as the mid-1700s. Some early visitors between 1883 and 1949 traveled to view the attraction using Europe’s first hydro-electric tram, which operated from the coastal resort of Portrush to the Causeway. The Giant’s Causeway has been an integral market brand for Northern Ireland’s tourism. The hexagon was adopted as the logo of the Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB), and the Giant’s Causeway has been a popular image on promotional material over the years. Since early records began in the 1970s, when the NITB first collected statistics at visitor attractions, the causeway has consistently been in the top three attractions in Northern Ireland; most years it has held the top spot. There has been a long history of commercial activity at the Giant’s Causeway. Early pictures reveal souvenirs sold from small huts, as well as interpretation and guiding services being offered to elite visitors, all located on the service road leading down to the causeway itself. A modern visitor center was partially destroyed by fire in 2000. Temporary facilities were erected pending a new center being built – a wood-framed structure serving as a souvenir shop. Unfortunately, a protracted period of time ensued before government plans, which had been in place since 2003, were

Figure 3.9 The Causeway Coastal Route

(Continued)

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes 87

88

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Causeway Coastal Route (CCR), Northern Ireland (Continued) approved and a new visitor center built. The new center opened in the summer of 2012 at a cost of £18.5 million (Figure 3.10). Visitors can choose to park at the center itself or have the option of a park-and-ride scheme from the nearby village of Bushmills, which is also home to the world’s oldest working whiskey distillery. Alternatively, visitors can take a nostalgic journey on a narrow-gauge heritage railway that runs from Bushmills to the causeway; the station is only a few hundred meters away from the new visitor center. Two 40-seater carriages are equipped with audio commentary facilities that offer visitors a history of the electric tramway and of places of interest along the short journey. The Giant’s Causeway has in the past been viewed as a stand-alone attraction; some organized tours chose to combine it with a visit to the nearby Old Bushmills Distillery (off the route itself), thereafter leaving the coastal region and returning to Belfast or even traveling further afield to places such as Dublin, using major inland arterial routes. Since its opening, the visitor center, combined with actually viewing the causeway, has the potential to be the base from which visitors choose to explore the CCR, thereby bringing the concept of intervening opportunity into play. In its first year of re-opening (2012) the visitor center received 782,000 visitors, surpassed only by Titanic Belfast, which received over 805,000 visiting during its first year of operation (Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, 2013).

Figure 3.10 The Causeway Coast visitor center

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

89

Other stops along the route have a strong heritage dimension. Close to the capital city of Belfast near the southern end of the CCR is Norman Carrickfergus Castle (built 1177) on the shores of Belfast Lough. Visitors can tour the castle and learn about its history. Other key attractions/nodes on the route include Ballycastle, known as the venue for Ireland’s oldest open fair (traditional in the past as a horse-trading fair, a practice that still takes place but within strict ethical controls), which takes place on the last weekend of August. Another node/attraction, is Dunluce Castle, a ruined medieval castle with an interesting history of occupation by several Irish families. The castle is popular in imagery used to promote this region of Northern Ireland. It is often shown as a backdrop silhouetted against the night sky. The remains of the castle serve as another short stop, offering visitors an opportunity to walk through the ruins and learn about its history and stories in a recently renovated interpretive center. Other nodes along the north coast include the seaside resorts of Portrush and Portstewart. Dating back to the Victorian and Edwardian periods, the lure of the sea and the rise of sea bathing culture, both resorts have suffered decline over the years and have become principally domestic holiday ‘bucket-and-spade’ destinations. Recent events have brought about slight rejuvenation, as these communities have hosted annual events that range through most of the peak summer season. Portrush hosted the Irish Golf Open in 2012, and the town is now marketed with a distinct label as the home of two of the three most internationally renowned Northern Irish golfers. Significant investments have gone into projects along the CCR. Tourism infrastructure improvements took place at 40 sites along the route, with the majority under local council ownership. According to a 2012 Audit Commission report, the combined cost of these improvements was £8.6 million, of which £4.1 million was supported by NITB grants facilitated through its Tourism Development Scheme. Part of that investment has focused on interpretation along the CCR, including story-telling at sites along the route to create a ‘seamless story’ of ‘the essential Irish journey’. Prior to the route officially being designed and marked, there were inconsistent messages, with variations in style and design. In place today are panels, way-markers and bespoke benches that enhance the visitor offering, all designed to encourage travelers to get off the route and explore its attractions. There remain several servicing issues that will require buy-in from the private sector. These include more places to eat and more highquality accommodation, particularly along the north coast section. A lack of suitable rooms has resulted in people deciding to stay in Belfast. (Continued)

90

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Causeway Coastal Route (CCR), Northern Ireland (Continued) In 2009, a Portrush Regeneration Strategy invited tender bids for privatesector development of four-star hotels, including a conference center. To date, however, no new quality lodging has been added, with the only significant improvements being publicly funded. This was particularly the case prior to the 2012 Irish Open Golf tournament in Portrush. Anecdotal information suggests that footfall has risen since the route was established. A survey of 575 visitors at the Giant’s Causeway in June 2007 found that 78% had heard of the CCR and 63% had used the CCR to get to the Giant’s Causeway, as opposed to the faster inland major arterial routeway. This is a positive outcome given that the route was formally marked only earlier that year. More recently, the 2011 Northern Ireland visitor attitude survey for the Causeway Coast and Glens region showed that 80% stated they had visited the Giant’s Causeway, seven in 10 had followed the CCR, and one in four had visited a historic castle or house, suggesting that the CCR was the preferred means of accessing this region and visiting its attractions. Looking forward, the Causeway Coast and Glens Tourism Partnership, which includes six of the nine councils involved with the CCR, published a Tourism Area Plan for 2012–2017, which acknowledges the route as a premier touring trail as part of its 2012 baseline for growth (Causeway Coast and Glens Tourism Partnership, 2011). Presently there is an absence of research on the support of local communities for the establishment of this scenic driving route. It is yet to be seen if footfall and economic benefits have increased since the scenic drive was designated, and whether or not all visitors to Northern Ireland would want to include it in their trip itineraries.

Rails-to-trails Railway transportation became popular in Europe and North America in the latter part of the 19th century for products and passengers. It was the most efficient means of transporting goods and people by land until the advent of the combustible engine and the widespread use of cars and other gasoline-powered vehicles in the early 20th century, as well as the popularization of the airplane after World War II. Although trains are still important modes of transportation, the road- and highway-based conveyance of goods and products is usually more efficient in large container trucks, a fact that has diluted the use of railroads for the commercial movement of goods. As well, while passenger train travel is still prevalent in Europe and parts of Asia, its popularity in North America has waned considerably since the 1970s to the point where relatively few places in Canada and the US are accessible by train.

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

91

The popularity of the personal automobile and the freedom of mobility it inspired, as well as the sophisticated network of highways in North America and standardization of air travel hastened this decline. As a result of dwindling train use, many rail lines were abandoned or torn apart, resulting in overgrown vacant spaces and derelict linear landscapes that blighted many regions and communities. Old rail lines were considered unsafe, unsightly and incongruent with their surrounding environments. In response to the question about what to do with disused railway lines and increasing public demand for recreation spaces and activities (Bowers, 2000; John Grimshaw & Associates, 1982; Leisure Information Network, 2003), during the 1970s and 1980s, post-Fordist gentrification movements in North America, Australia, New Zealand the UK and elsewhere began transforming these landscapes of abandonment into linear recreation and tourism resources known as rail-trails (Graham, 2004; Leisure Information Network, 2003; Lipscombe & Geddis, 2000; Wandres, 2000; Wood & Lemery, 1994). In the US, rail-trails are an extremely popular recreation resource (Figure 3.11). When the original railways were being developed a century ago or more in the US, landowners were given the choice of selling the land or having it taken from them under the code of ‘eminent domain’. However, following the decline in rail use, ownership of many kilometers of abandoned railway corridors reverted back to previous landowners in the 1970s. Since the 1950s and 1960s, more than 320,000 km of railroad lines have been abandoned in the US, and estimates suggest that thousands of kilometers more are vacated each year (Gibson, 1999; Wandres, 2000). Realizing the potential value of preserving these linear passageways for potential future transportation needs, the US government amended the 1968 National Trails System Act in 1976 via the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act, which

Figure 3.11 A popular rail-trail in Illinois, USA

92

Tour ism and Trail s

authorized the preservation of relinquished rail corridors for public uses (Vance, 1991; Wright, 1997). In 1983, the US Congress extended the law to endorse the conversion of deserted railroad lines into hiking and biking trails under the principle of ‘railbanking’, or the act of preserving established railroad easements or rights of way for future reactivation ‘just in case they should ever be needed again as railroads’ (Thompson, 2000: 80). As part of this legislation, the federal government promised to devote significant sums of money to railbank and reserve rail lines for trail conversions. Trail and environmental advocates have actively sought to use this legislation to ‘buy out’ less profitable railroad companies, which would, according to Welsh (1998: 56), earn more money from the government by terminating their operations than continuing to operate. Rail-trails often link into other routes or connect smaller ones into longer-distance trails (Hiss, 1997). However, many are distinct route experiences themselves. Some rail-trails are located in city centers or suburbs, but most line portions are located in rural areas, in some often remote parts of the world. As such, trail users (hikers, bikers and horseback riders) are particularly fond of the relatively undisturbed natural areas, flora and fauna, woodlands, farmlands, historic bridges, tunnels, old rail cars, railway stations and heritage features along the way (Blackwell et al., 2009; Cain, 1991; Forsberg, 1995; Gangewere, 1991, 1992; Gibson, 1999; Hill, 1997). They are also fashionable tracks for cross-country skiing and snowshoeing in the winter (Hedberg, 1989). Their natural and cultural value as transportation corridors and recreational thoroughfares is underscored by one former rail-trail director: ‘With rails-totrails, we’re building a second national park system . . . It will interconnect trails and parks coast to coast. There are no more Yosemites and Yellowstones to be developed, but we do have this wonderful network of trails’ that resemble ‘linear parks . . . ribbons of land, shielded from the real world by a buffer of greenery’ (quoted in Pena, 1991: 92). Similarly, one rail-trail user exemplified the mixed purpose appeal of rail-trails in his statement that As I biked through rolling fields and small towns that day, past red barns, gleaming silos and green fields dotted with black-and-white cows, I saw our country the way John Mills had seen it – from the backyard. It was an intimate, reassuring homey view of the heartland, with its clotheslines and vegetable gardens, toolsheds and woodpiles, back stoops and corncribs. It seemed to suggest that all was well in this particular slice of rural America, and for a former child of the suburbs, who vacationed every summer in Los Angeles, exploring it was more fun than a trip to Disneyland. (Mills, 1990: 133) Rail-trails in the US are managed by many organizations, including government agencies, non-profit citizen groups, land trusts and community

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes

93

foundations (Gibson, 1999). One such organization is the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (RTC), which was founded in 1985 as a non-profit association with the aim of helping communities or organizations establish rail-trails, petition the national government, facilitate rail-trail research and publish newsletters and guidebooks about American rail-trails (Mills, 1990). While the RTC itself does not operate rail-trails, it facilitates and supports the designation and operation of trails across the nation. It serves as a kind of clearinghouse whose mission is to promote a national network of rail-trails to improve the health of America’s environment, economy, transportation, places and people (Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, 2013). Presently there are 1785 rail-trails, totaling 34,181 km, in all 50 of the US states (Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, 2013). The Katy Trail is perhaps the most famous rail-trail in the US and is the country’s longest at 383 km. It follows the Missouri River in large part and is known for natural scenery and wildlife (Ioannides & Timothy, 2010; Vance, 1991). Australia is home to 111 rail-trails, with several more in progress (Railtrails Australia, 2013). New Zealand boasts four rail-trails, and Canada is home to at least 58, with dozens more throughout Europe, South America and Asia. The networks of rail-trails in the US and Australia are especially active with the RTC and Railtrails Australia having similar goals and purposes in promoting the conservation of disused railway lines and creating a wide network of rail-trails in their respective countries. The 2000 inauguration of the 150 km Otago Central Rail Trail, New Zealand’s first rail-trail, was the result of several years of negotiations between the DOC and the Otago Central Rail Trail Charitable Trust. The project entailed converting a disused line into a popular trail that is now attracting tens of thousands of cyclists, hikers and equestrians each year (Graham, 2004). The project entailed reconstructing 68 bridges of varying lengths and historic importance, removing rock ballasts, re-grading the trail surface, constructing car parks at the former station sites, installing directional and interpretive signs and building 14 ecologically friendly toilets along the way (Graham, 2004: 33). The cultural heritage of the villages along the trail, opportunities to go ‘pub-hopping’ and natural scenery are among the path’s leading attractions.

Case Study: Monsal Trail, Peak District National Park, England The Peak District is England’s first national park, designated in 1951. It is an area of great diversity often split into the northern Dark Peak and the southern White Peak. It is regarded as Britain’s most visited national park with visitor numbers as high as 22 million annually (Holloway & Taylor, 2006), although the park authority maintains this is a gross (Continued)

94

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Monsal Trail, Peak District National Park, England (Continued) over-estimation, suggesting it is likely closer to 10 million visitors per annum (Peak District National Park Authority, 2012). This region has enjoyed a long history of tourism and transport networks, connecting many of the major industrial cities of the Midlands of England, the national park houses remnants of disused railways across the White Peak as a result of the closure of many uneconomical rail lines in the 1960s under the Beeching Axe. The Manchester, Buxton, Matlock and Midlands Junction Railway is now closed between Rowsley and Buxton, where the trackbed forms part of the Monsal Trail (Peak District National Park Authority, 2013). The national park authority took over the disused line in 1980. The Monsal Trail subsequently opened to the public in 1981 as a traffic-free route for walkers, cyclists, horse riders and wheelchair users. It runs along the former Midland Railway line for 13.7 km from Topley Pike junction, 4.8 km east of Buxton (a major spa town in the past) and runs to Coombs viaduct 1.6 km south-east of Bakewell, one of the most visited tourism hotspots in the park. A short recreational trail, it affords cyclists breathtaking views over the Headstone Viaduct, but was nevertheless interrupted by the closure of access through a number of tunnels with public footpaths put in place to direct people around them. In May 2011, four railway tunnels were opened for public use. By January 2012, 50,000 cyclists had used the trail. According to the Park Authority, on average since the tunnels opened, an average of 226 cycles has been recorded on a daily basis. Between May 2011 and January 2012, the trail’s automatic counter had recorded 17,160 cyclists traveling toward the tunnels and 32,855 cyclists toward Bakewell. Recreational use supports a number of cycle hire businesses and cafes along the way, with visitors encouraged to stop and visit local mills, Cressbrook and Litton.

Conclusion This chapter has described natural and mixed trails and routes. Because it is feasible for a trail to exist in any natural setting, the chapter first discussed routes within the most common natural settings, namely wilderness, water, geology and forest canopy environments. Nature trails that are a consequence of recreational activities like skiing and snowmobiling, rambling or long-distance walking were also examined. Conceptually, what emerges from this discussion are two distinct typologies of nature trails (see Figure 3.12, part (i)). The chapter also presented ‘mixed routes’, given that the line

Nature Trail s and Mixed Routes (i)

95

Nature Trails Type 1 Original nature trail Original nature track developed for tourism

Type 2 Start

Modified nature trail by activities

Finish Natural tracks as a consequence of recreational activity

(ii)

Mixed Routes Phase 1 Defined natural geographic setting Heritage/cultural point/node attractions

Phase 2 Start

Cultural & heritage point attractions

Finish Designed track/route

Figure 3.12 Types of nature trails and mixed routes

between ecology and cultural heritage is often blurred. The trails described in this chapter – bicycle trails, borderland greenways, self-drive scenic byways and rail-trails, illustrate that in some cases the natural environment might be a mere backdrop to a more cultural heritage-oriented trail experience. In other scenarios the two dimensions of nature and culture complement each other, providing visitors with a more holistic experience. Conceptually it is possible to redraw Figure 2.1 (especially part (ii)) here by replacing ‘zone of thematic interest’ with ‘defined natural geographic linear setting’ on which is superimposed ‘cultural and heritage point attractions’ rather than ‘developed thematic nodes’ as is shown in Figure 3.12. The difference between nature trails and mixed routes is that, for the former, there may be two clear types, while for the latter, mixed routes evolve where cultural heritage appeal is as important as the natural setting where they are found. Chapters 2 and 3 have made perfectly clear that there is a nearly unending resource base upon which trails have evolved and developed. The next chapter goes beyond the supply to explore the demand elements of trails and routes.

4

Demand for Trails and Routes

Introduction Demand in the context of tourism is accepted as the total number of persons who travel or wish to travel, to use tourist facilities and services at places away from their places of work and residence. In this book, demand relates to aggregate patterns, volumes of use and levels of participation with respect to routes and trails as part of overall tourist and recreational experiences. There is widespread recognition among land managers and researchers that trail use is on the rise, with nearly every form of trail and use increasing in popularity in recent years (Dolesh, 2004b; Moore & Shafer, 2001; Turner & Davies, 1995). However, in saying that, the ability to measure use and participation rates within populations is difficult given at least four major limitations in understanding the ‘bigger picture’ of trail demand. First, as in the case of many types of tourism environments, it is often impossible to distinguish between recreationists (locals) and tourists (nonlocals), as both use the same trail resources. The only factor that separates them is the length of time they spend away from home, and measuring that criterion is often very difficult, if even necessary at all. In the minds of most destinations and trail managers, whether or not a route consumer is an outof-town visitor or a local resident is less relevant that the fact that someone is making use of the resource. Second, it is hard to measure trail participation at both micro and macro levels. In the case of the former there is a greater propensity for use and participation to be associated with recreational use, walking and healthy lifestyles, whereas for the latter, the perception is that participation is more likely to be associated with tourism. Discounting the size of a given corridor, the main constraint is a lack of funneled entry points where records can be kept and data collected. With the exception of very small paths at archaeological sites, natural areas or museums, where access is controlled and counted, almost anyone can enter a pathway at multiple points and use only a small section of it, or visit specific sites on a given route. This is the case for long-distance cultural and hiking routes, as well as short- and medium-distance nature trails. Similarly, few trails require a fee, 96

Demand for Trail s and Routes

97

which is often a surrogate indicator of use or visitation. Fees may be required to enter a national park or cultural site, but not everyone who enters these areas utilizes paths and trails. A related second major limitation is a general lack of academic research on macro-scale patterns of route and trail use. Numerous agency-funded quantitative investigations have been carried out using intercept surveys, post-experience surveys or automatic counter devices. However, these assessments are rather descriptive, lacking conceptual depth or explanatory power, and they are site-specific case studies with little potential for understanding trail use on regional, national or global levels. Finally, a disproportionate sum of published and accessible research on route and trail demand has been done in the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK), and secondarily in Australia and New Zealand. This has resulted in a dearth of information outside these countries to understand broader global patterns of demand. Few studies have been published in the international literature outside these countries. Thus, relatively little is known about route visitors and their experiences in Asia, Europe, Africa and Latin America. What has been written in these societies takes a more supplyside approach, virtually ignoring demand and trail participation. Against this backdrop, this chapter examines demand for trails and ties together many divergent ways of understanding the level of use and participation in route-based tourism and leisure. The chapter commences by looking at general patterns of trail-based outdoor recreation. A number of trails are examined in-depth to illustrate levels of participation. Second, the literature on trail user characteristics is examined, reflecting on gender, age, level of education and ethnicity. Third, trail use is examined against locational factors. Fourth, the reasons why people use trails are considered, including personal health, fitness, quality of life and commuting. The fifth section explores the wider issue of motivation, including nostalgia and seeking enjoyment and meaningful experiences. Finally, non-participation is addressed, focusing on intrapersonal, interpersonal and structural constraints.

General Trends in Demand As noted in the last chapter, nature trails of many sorts are important recreation and tourism resources and are increasing in popularity throughout the world. Ecotourists or other nature enthusiasts are more inclined to hike, view wildlife and stay longer on the trail (Hvenegaard & Dearden, 1998). According to a study by Texas A&M University (Outdoor Foundation, 2012: 1), approximately half of all Americans over the age of six participated in at least one outdoor activity in 2011, comprising an estimated 11.6 billion outings. Despite the important role of video games, online games and other internet and technology-based activities, outdoor recreation has seen a steady growth in the past several years. The most popular activities among young people

98

Tour ism and Trail s

were running, biking, camping, fishing, hiking, skateboarding, birdwatching and triathlons (Tables 4.1 and 4.2). These activities were also extremely popular among the adult US population during the same year. Although the report only mentions running, jogging and trail running as a distinct category, all of these outdoor pursuits are related to trails and may rely heavily on them (e.g. triathlons, hiking and cycling). Trail running alone saw a notable 15.5% growth between 2006 and 2011. Cycling has seen a consistent growth in participation over recent decades with bicycle sales increasing in response to increased fuel costs, an increasing environmental awareness and a widespread desire to live healthier lifestyles. These factors are particularly pronounced in Europe, where bicycles have gained widespread acceptance as a transportation mode for commuting and recreation. As a result, a multitude of trail networks has developed all over the continent, as noted in Chapter 3. According to the European Cyclists’ Federation (2013b), residents of Denmark purchased the highest number of bicycles in 2009 at nearly 160 bicycles per thousand inhabitants that year. Following at a distance were the Dutch, Finns, Austrians and Swedes, all of whom are among the most avid cyclists in Europe. Bicycles as the primary mode of transportation was greatest in the Netherlands in 2009 Table 4.1 Five most popular outdoor activities in the USA by participation rate, 2011 Activity

Youth (%)

Adult (%)

Running, jogging and trail running Bicycling (all types) Camping Fishing Hiking

26.2 21.9 20.6 18.8 12.9

14.8 12.4 12.7 15.1 11.8

Source: Compiled from Outdoor Foundation (2012).

Table 4.2 Five most popular outdoor activities in the USA by frequency of participation, 2011 Activity

Youth (frequency – total outings)

Adult (frequency – total outings)

Running, jogging and trail running Bicycling (all types) Skateboarding Triathlon Birdwatching

1.8 billion 1.1 billion 263.4 million 23.5 million 54.2 million

2.9 billion 1.3 billion 37.3 million 60.5 million 405.2 million

Source: Compiled from Outdoor Foundation (2012).

Demand for Trail s and Routes

99

(approximately 32%), followed by Denmark, Hungary and Sweden. Other countries where bicycles are the main transportation mode include Germany, Belgium, Austria, Slovenia, Slovakia, Czech Republic and Latvia (European Cyclists’ Federation, 2013b). Many regions and countries are tapping into this growing trend and providing sign-posted routes and guides for recreational cyclists, particularly on disused railway lines, forest paths and canal towpaths (Cyclists’ Touring Club, 1985). Between 2006 and 2011, cross-country skiing activity increased by 12.2% (Outdoor Foundation, 2012), and there has been a notable increase in waterbased sports, including kayaking and white-water rafting, since the 1980s and 1990s (Lengfelder & Timothy, 2000) (Table 4.3). This is reflective of the growth in number and popularity of winter and water trails as well. The good news for the water trails subsector is that between 2010 and 2011 recreational kayaking saw the largest increase of all outdoor activities, with a growth of some 27% in one year and 32% over the previous three years (Outdoor Foundation, 2012). With respect to research in the UK on active sports and free-time activities, the availability of data is somewhat disappointing. In Table 4.4, sport and exercise is recorded alongside other non-recreational activities performed Table 4.3 Trends in demand for trail-type water activities, 2006–2011 (in thousands) Activity (participation)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Canoeing Recreational kayaking Sea/tour kayaking

9154 4134 1136

9797 5070 1485

9935 6240 1780

10,058 6212 1771

10,553 6465 2144

9787 8229 2029

Source: Compiled from Outdoor Foundation (2012).

Table 4.4 Selected activities in England performed in free time by age, 2007–2008 Activity

16–24

25–34

35–44

45–64

65+

Watching television Spending time with friends/family Listening to music Shopping Reading Days out Sport/exercise Gardening

82 83

83 84

84 82

85 79

89 76

All aged 16 and over 85 80

83 69 47 50 59 12

74 67 60 63 58 32

72 65 63 66 57 48

70 64 71 65 51 61

65 67 74 58 34 61

72 66 65 61 51 47

Source: Compiled from Department for Culture, Media and Sport (2010).

100

Tour ism and Trail s

in free time and for people aged 16 and over, it is ranked eighth. Not surprising, the top five ranked free-time activities are passive forms of leisure. When examined across age groups, sport and exercise show relatively little variation in participation, the exception being for the last age cohort of 65 and over. Table 4.5 provides more interesting statistics for active sports in England by gender. The two activities that could be associated with trail environments are cycling and jogging. There are very clear differences in preference and take-up of these two activities by gender, with men preferring these more than women; there is some difference though in their ranking positions, but the percentage stating they engaged in this form of active sports is the more important statistic. Nevertheless, these sets of statistics are disappointing in the depth of information they can convey compared to the more detailed breakdown of the survey by the Outdoor Foundation in the US. Demand and participation in outdoor leisure and sports in many Western nations, as the above information conveys, is driven by interests in health and well-being, and the need to combat rising obesity. The importance that people place on health and fitness, gym attendance and taking an array of classes (see Table 4.5) is a reflection on the importance of the ‘self’ in today’s society. The focus on the individual has for many become a new form of religion at a time when conventional religion as expressed in church attendance has declined considerably in many Western countries over the past quarter century. The focus also includes people becoming more aware of their spiritual selves. Many people are recommitting themselves to living their religion, which in many cases results in increased travel for pilgrimage purposes. Religious tourism is one of the most significant forms of tourism today, with Table 4.5 Top 10 active sports by gender in England, 2007–2008 Men

Percent

Women

Percent

Indoor swimming or diving Snooker, pool, billiards

28 23

35 22

Cycling Health, fitness, gym or conditioning activities Outdoor football Golf, pitch and putt, putting Outdoor swimming or diving Tenpin bowling Darts Jogging

21 21

Indoor swimming or diving Health, fitness, gym or conditioning activities Keepfit, aerobics and dance exercise Outdoor swimming or diving

16 14

20 18 16 15 12 12

Tenpin bowling Cycling Jogging Snooker, pool, billiards Badminton Yoga

13 13 8 7 7 6

Source: Compiled from Department for Culture, Media and Sport (2010).

Demand for Trail s and Routes

101

the largest tourist gatherings in the world being of a religious or spiritual nature (e.g. kumbh mela and the hajj). Increasing numbers of Muslim pilgrims desire to undertake the hajj, and pilgrimage among Buddhists, Hindus and Christians, as well as many other religions, is increasing in popularity as an outward way of showing devotion to deity (Stausberg, 2011; Timothy & Olsen, 2006). A great deal of the ritualization and humbling of pilgrimage travel is connected directly to trails. Given that much scholarly work on trails has focused on supply over demand, there exist relatively few studies that explicitly examine demand for certain types of trails and routes. There are some exceptions to this, however. First, Eby and Molnar’s (2002) study is one of the few to examine demand for scenic routes and byways. Research on scenic route use suggests that distance, directness of route, potential congestion and safety are the most influential factors affecting travelers’ decision-making processes. Secondary factors include the pleasantness of the route and whether or not

Case Study: Participation in the Camino De Santiago As Chapter 2 noted, many pilgrimage paths have become focal tourist attractions. The pilgrimage way of Santiago de Compostela (the Way of Saint James, or the Camino de Santiago) is one such attraction (Fernandes et al., 2012). In 2012, approximately 192,488 sojourners completed enough of the Camino de Santiago to be ‘official’ pilgrims, as defined in Chapter 2 (i.e. having their compostela stamped and recorded at the end of the route) (Table 4.6). Some 86% of pilgrims traveled the trail by foot, followed at a significant distance by bicycle and horseback. Santiago pilgrims came from 133 different countries in 2012, with domestic Spanish tourists comprising nearly half (Table 4.7). Other nationalities were from Europe, North America and South America. Table 4.6 Pilgrims’ mode of transportation on the Way of St James to Santiago de Compostela Transport mode Foot Bicycle Horse Wheelchair Total

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

76,674 81,783 93,953 103,669 120,605 237,852 153,065 164,778 16,985 18,289 19,702 21,143 24,892 32,926 29,949 27,407 242 294 364 290 341 1315 341 281 23 11 7 39 39 42 11 22 93,924 100,377 114,026 125,141 145,877 272,135 183,366 192,488

Source: Compiled from Oficina del Peregrino (2006–2013).

(Continued)

102

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Participation in the Camino De Santiago (Continued) Table 4.7 Top 15 nationalities completing the Camino de Santiago, 2012 Country of origin

Percentage of total pilgrims completing the route

Spain Germany Italy Portugal France USA Ireland United Kingdom Netherlands Canada South Korea Poland Brazil Belgium Australia

49.5 8.11 6.44 5.37 4.22 3.67 2.00 1.95 1.56 1.51 1.30 1.20 1.16 1.02 0.98

Source: Compiled from Oficina del Peregrino (2006–2013).

it is marked by a scenic byway. Scenic byways appear to have a larger number of first-time motorists compared to other non-designated routes and a wider range of vehicle types (Eby & Molnar, 2002), which likely reflects people choosing to use these highways as part of their travel experience and the increased likelihood of using caravans and motorhomes. Another study that focuses on actual participation on a trail is the work of Plummer et al. (2005), who researched beer tourism along the Waterloo-Wellington Ale Trail in Canada. They examined the level of interest in a self-guided tour of six craft breweries during the 1999 and 2000 seasons. Their study revealed interesting findings about demand for beer the product, and hence for the trail itself. Most planned to visit between two and three of these breweries each day, citing this to be either ‘important’ or ‘very important’ to their overall visit. Demand for the trail was predominantly day visits, though approximately one-fifth of the people surveyed reported staying in the region for two to three days. The numbers staying longer than three days were minimal, suggesting that as a trail, demand is met in a relatively short period of time.

Demand for Trail s and Routes

103

Characteristics of Trail Users Trail travelers have many things in common, according to a vast and growing research literature. At the same time, differences also exist between different types of users and their personal characteristics and preferences (Mowen et al., 1998). This section aims to consolidate what has been written on route consumer demographic and other characteristics and highlight some unique features of different sorts of trails. In very general terms, consumers of trails, paths, tracks and routes are better educated with higher income levels than other social cohorts. They tend to be male, relatively young to middle aged, and prefer to travel with others. From the perspective of nature trails and cycling routes, research shows that more men are involved than women (Cope et al., 1998; Dowson & Doxford, 1997). In the study by Cope et al. (1998), 73% of participants were male, while 27% were female. Troped et al. (2001) concluded that men were approximately two times more likely to have used the Minuteman Bikeway than women were. Studies by Merom et al. (2003), Hammitt and Patterson (1993), Nelson et al. (2002), and Bichis-Lupas and Moisey (2001) also found that the use of cycling trails, backcountry paths and rail-trails is more prevalent among males than females. It is possible, however, that different trail types and settings can have different gender appeal, as evidence in one study suggested that urban greenway users comprised slightly more females than males (Furuseth & Altman, 1991). Perhaps women are more inclined to use urban and suburban trails, but additional research is needed to verify this and to understand the gender differences in trail preferences. Most route cyclists in one study were 26–40 years of age (Cope et al., 1998), and in a study of track bushwalkers in Australia, most users were 15–39 years old (Garrard, 1982). The average age of backcountry trackers in Hammitt and Patterson’s (1993) study was 33 years. In one demographic assessment of Katy Trail (a rail-trail) recreationists, 42 years was the average age (Bichis-Lupas & Moisey, 2001). All of these findings are consistent with the general notion of younger and lower middle-aged people being the most avid users of trails, with most being married with young children at home (Moisey & Bichis, 1999). This is the general trend of nature tracks or railtrails. One exception to this general pattern, however, is scenic byways. According to Eby and Molnar (2002), older people are more inclined to seek out and travel scenic byways than younger people are. In fact, the 18–29 age range rated scenic byways much lower than older drivers in terms of their interest and importance. The favorability of scenic routes among the older population could be an indicator of retirement status with more time to travel by recreational vehicle (RV) or car along interesting long-distance routes (Figure 4.1). They also tend to appreciate heritage more than many other age groups (Timothy, 2011a).

104

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 4.1 RVs are popular along scenic routes and byways

Higher levels of education and higher than normal socio-economic status seem to be characteristic of most consumers (Bichis-Lupas & Moisey, 2001; Hammitt & Patterson, 1993; Troped et al., 2001). This likely has to do with the increasing health and environmental consciousness among middle and upper classes in the Western world (Moisey & Bichis, 1999). A higher-than-average environmental appreciation also tends to be more prominent among recreational trail users (de Kok, 1991; Hall et al., 1993), with many having greener mindsets and memberships in environmental groups (Furuseth & Altman, 1991). Nearly all route and trail consumers travel with other people, with the exception of daily commuters. The majority travel in small parties of two to four people, which is especially true in backwoods and wilderness hiking (Hammitt & Patterson, 1993). As already noted, the notion of sharing natural scenery with friends or loved ones, having someone to keep company with, enjoying the outdoors, having spiritual experiences together, and the safety in numbers element are important reasons for the social aspects of backwoods track use. Beyond, gender, age and education, there is limited research on trail consumer characteristics such as ethnicity or even more contentious demographic characteristics linked to health like body mass index. An exception is the work by Librett et al. (2006), who surveyed the use of community trails and greenways by a sample of Americans drawn from a HealthStyles database. It was the first study of adults across the US to compare trail users and non-users. Trail users were the minority. Two-thirds reported not using trails at all. Regularly active people were twice as likely to use a trail at least once a week, as opposed to irregularly active or inactive people. Trail users were predominantly white (71%), followed by Hispanic (12%) and African

Demand for Trail s and Routes

105

American (11%). As for body mass index, there was relatively little difference over those who used trails, the total weighted percentage being slightly higher for those with a body mass index of less than 25. Omar et al. (2012), in their study of walking trails in Kuala Lumpur, noted clear differences to walking activity by ethnicity. The Malay people surveyed were predominantly irregular walkers, compared to the Chinese population, who were predominantly non-walkers. Only the majority of the Indian population surveyed stated that they were regular walkers. This difference in trail users is important for local government and tourism authorities as they plan improved walking trails that will encourage higher levels of participation.

Case Study: D&L Rail-Trail, Pennsylvania, USA The D&L Trail is a 270 km multi-use rail-trail and canal towpath in the US state of Pennsylvania. It is a popular heritage corridor utilized predominantly by state residents, though over one-fifth of its visits are outof-state domestic and international users. Visitor characteristics, as shown in Tables 4.8 and 4.9, reveal an active older-age cohort making use of the trail with varying frequency of use from first-time users to frequent Table 4.8 Geographic and demographic characteristics of D&L Trail users Characteristics

Percentage of users

Residence Residents of Pennsylvania Out-of-state and international users

77.5 22.5

Age 66 Gender Male Female

1.2 4.8 10.6 12.4 26.4 27.8 16.8 55.5 44.5

Source: Compiled from Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2012).

(Continued)

106

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: D&L Rail-Trail, Pennsylvania, USA (Continued) Table 4.9 Trail use characteristics of D&L Trail users Characteristics

Percentage of users

Frequency of use Daily Once a week Twice a week More than twice a week Once a month A couple of times per month A few times a year This is my first time Primary activity Biking Walking/hiking Jogging/running Horseback riding Cross-country skiing/snowshoeing Skating Fishing Dog walking Other (e.g. photography, birdwatching, etc.) Primary motive for using the trail Health and exercise Recreation Commuting Training Fishing Walking to school Boating Other Length of time spent on the trail Less than 30 minutes 30–60 minutes 1–2 hours More than two hours Trip type Out and back (loop trip) Through trip (one-way) Source: Compiled from Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2012).

6.9 9.2 10.7 18.5 4.5 14.1 14.9 21.1 46.9 29.7 8.2 0.1 2.2 0.1 2.7 8.0 2.2 52.0 39.6 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 0.8 1.8 1.3 15.8 38.6 44.4 83.6 16.2

Demand for Trail s and Routes

107

weekly users. The main activity is biking, followed by general walking and hiking for the purposes of health and exercise, where time involved is more than a few hours. These findings are not surprising with this age cohort (46–55), which is becoming more active and engaging in both recreation and challenging sports, the latter redefining the grey market and being increasingly more active than the previous generation.

Access and Location Evidence suggests that access and the location of trails are extremely influential on people’s frequency of use and their satisfaction levels. With respect to access, a fundamental requirement is right of access. The following British example underscores the need to have adequate access to have good rates of participation. In England, the 2010 State of the Countryside report stated that over the past decade people made fewer visits to the countryside per year for recreation, and much of the decision to visit was based upon having access to trails. Part of the access results from the Common Rights of Way (CROW) Act of 2000, which gives people the freedom to roam over private land, but having respect for the owners of that land, to be able to walk some of Britain’s oldest paths and trails. The rights of way network extends to 189,000 km; of this total length, 78% is footpaths, 17% bridleways, 3% roads used as public paths and 2% byways open to all traffic (Countryside Agency, 2001). Some parts of the rights of way network are linked to form the 13 National Trails across England that run for nearly 4000 km through some of the country’s most spectacular landscapes. Rights of way allow people opportunities to enjoy the natural environment. These can range from wide tracks to narrow trails that run through towns and across remote countryside. Many of these paths also traverse forested lands, and in a 2009 Forestry Commission survey, over three-quarters of respondents (77%) visited forests and woodland for walks and recreation. It can only be surmised that the majority of this activity involved the use of forest trails and footpaths. An ambitious project is under way to improve coastal access in England, to create a new national trail where residents and visitors will have access rights around England’s open coast. Figure 4.2 illustrates the small section of coastal path where coastal access rights are now open. The work in progress aims to open other coastal regions and improve long-term travel over the next decade. Another project of note is Natural England’s efforts to promote the natural environment as a recreational resource venue for health improvement. A major initiative that commenced in the 1990s was the Walking the Way to Health project, which established walking groups and encouraged the public to walk in the natural environment to improve their health. By 2000 the scheme became a national program, and by the end of 2011 it had

108

Tour ism and Trail s

Coastal path open Work in progress Long-term plans

Glasgow

Belfast

Edinburgh

Carlisle

Manchester Liverpool

London

DJT

Figure 4.2 England’s coastal path: Developing a new national trail

approximately 78,000 walkers, involving 600 walking schemes that make use of footpaths, bridleways, trails and rights of way. The scheme has now been handed over to the Rambler’s Association in partnership with a national cancer charity. There has been limited research on the extent of participation given the increased access to National Trails in the United Kingdom. An exception to this is the Ridgeway Trail, which stretches for 140 km in southern central England, and is one of the oldest ‘green roads’ in Europe. According to Bennett et al. (2003), approximately 150,000 visits to the Ridgeway take place each year; 80% of these are short-distance users, predominantly walkers and joggers, and the majority (77%) came from within a 48 km radius of their access point. With respect to the location of trails, there are two primary concepts of importance, namely geographic setting and proximity to home. Common sense suggests, as does Wessell’s (1997) study, that use of urban and suburban trails is greater than rural trails, because of their proximity to a larger market catchment. Because urban and suburban trails are often employed for commuting to work or school, many people use them daily and sometimes more than once a day. Rural and wilderness trails, however, are generally less

Demand for Trail s and Routes

109

accessible to the masses and tend to have a greater recreation and tourism value. One study found that market accessibility and degree of difficulty determine trail use, with the most accessible and easiest routes being the most extensively utilized (Torbidoni et al., 2005). Although urban corridors see a higher volume of daily use, owing to their importance in exercising and commuting, outdoor enthusiasts prefer rural footpaths and other nature-oriented trails (Helleiner, 1986; Siderelis & Moore, 1995) (Figure 4.3). Class elements are also present in trail location and use (Lindsey et al., 2001). The inner-city poor may have greater access to urban trails because of relative nearness, while the more affluent classes have easier access to suburban and rural trails owing to their home locales on the city’s periphery or the countryside and higher incidence of car ownership. This leads to the second locational concept, which is proximity to home. Research shows that people are more inclined to walk, run, skate or cycle close to home. The position of trails near people’s homes translates into more participation (Davies et al., 2012; Troped et al., 2001; van Damme & van Dijk, 1990). Conversely, the more distant a trail is from an individual’s home the less inclined he or she will be to use it (Lieber & Fesenmaier, 1984; Lindsey et al., 2001; Merom et al., 2003). Thus, a simple distance-decay pattern can be deciphered to understand resident proximity and level of demand. In a study by Troped et al. (2005), most survey respondents lived only a short distance from a trail access point with the average distance being just 820 meters. Moore and Scott (2003: 883) concluded that people develop attachments to outdoor recreation areas, including trails that are closest to their homes. This also translates into personal commitment, trail attachment and increased use.

Figure 4.3 A rural footpath on the Isle of Man

110

Tour ism and Trail s

Trail Uses ‘To users, trails are travel routes and settings for activities and experience. Many users visit trails purely for recreation. Others use them more as a means to get from one place to another, perhaps trailhead to alpine lake or home to subway station. Either way, there is no doubt that trails are extremely popular settings for recreation and valuable for transportation’ (Moore & Shafer, 2001: 2). This quote illustrates two of the most prominent uses of recreational routes and trails, but there are others as well. One of the most often-cited uses of trails is personal fitness and health (Bichis-Lupas & Moisey, 2001; Dowson & Doxford, 1997; Lee et al., 2002; Librett et al., 2006; Neff et al., 2000; Omar et al., 2012; Shafer et al., 2000; Troped et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2004a; Watkins, 1984). During the past quarter of a century there has been a social movement in the Western world toward more active living, including healthier food, increased exercise and natural health care approaches. With the realization that sedentary lifestyles are contributing to increased obesity and related health problems, trails have been fingered as one of the most salient exercise venues for this movement toward healthier lifestyles (Gobster, 2005; Merom et al., 2003; Schasberger et al., 2009). This trend can be seen in the increased popularity of bicycles and canoes for trail use during the past few decades (Lengfelder & Timothy, 2000; Ruff & Mellors, 1993) and the development of public campaigns, such as Trails for Health, noted in the previous chapter. Also part of this movement is the employment of trails in official school physical education curricula, which aims to teach children about the wellness and recreational value of pathways and to commit them to using them in the future (Desjardins & Schwartz, 2007). Related to wellness is the importance of trails as recreational resources. As the urbanization process unfolded during the 20th century and in ever more crowded cities and towns today, people have desired to escape to the countryside in search of solitude and communion with nature, increasing the popularity of trails for recreational and tourism purposes (Beeton, 1999b; Lumsdon, 1996; MacDonald, 1987; Marrell, 2000). Trails, routes and greenways contribute to the overall betterment of quality of life in communities (Shafer et al., 2000) and are often more cost-effective than operating sport facilities or parks (Palau et al., 2012). Omar et al. (2012) noted that trail provision has been found to be the best intervention strategy to increase walking in neighborhood areas for the purposes of exercise and health. Tracks and trails are used to experience scenic beauty and cultural heritage (Wessell, 1997), and in so doing, they have been shown to build social solidarity and a better appreciation for local culture and nature (Lew, 1991). Every form of route, trail, path and track can be a tourism resource. Some people travel thousands of kilometers to experience renowned hiking

Demand for Trail s and Routes

111

or driving routes of historic importance, undertake a pilgrimage, ride a historic railway, pursue equestrian interests, or visit a park with self-contained interpretive trails. The economic potential of these linear resources is highlighted later in the book, but it is considerable, and many places have elected to use trails as important, even iconic, marketing mechanisms to build destination images and increase arrivals and expenditures. Long-distance walking, hiking and cycling paths are important tourist attractions. The National Trails in Britain exude a notable tourist appeal, with annual users numbering in the millions of domestic and foreign tourists (Cope et al., 1998). According to a 2004–2005 study, approximately 12 million people use the National Trails network each year in England and Wales (National Trails, 2013). Lumsdon’s (1996, 2000) work illustrates how important long-distance cycling networks can be for tourism development. Not only are they important attractions that can draw people from near and far, they provide more sustainable forms of tourist mobility than private vehicles or public transportation can. A third important use of trails is an alternative commuting route. Urban and suburban paths are important commuter lines for people traveling to work, school or to visit friends by foot or bicycle (Troped et al., 2005; Wessell, 1997). Teenagers are especially inclined to use trails that connect nearby small towns or urban neighborhoods because they lack driving licenses and cars (Bowers, 2000). In the most bicycle-oriented countries, such as the Netherlands, trails play an even more critical role in people’s daily commutes (de Vink, 1989). Commuter trails are increasing in popularity for a variety of reasons. First, they are seen as safer alternatives to busy roads and highways. Rail-trails and other pathways help users avoid road congestion and careless drivers by remaining outside the normal traffic flow (Watkins, 1984). An interesting insight into the security element of trails is sometimes referred to as the ‘safewalk’ (Lusk, 1995). Safewalks are inner-city greenways that provide more secure paths to and from popular hang-out spots, such as corner markets, malls, basketball courts and playgrounds. These are typically purpose-designated paths that utilize greenbelts or sidewalks; they are welllighted and have a zero-tolerance policy toward drugs, violence and sex solicitation. They are meant to provide safe passages for children, the elderly or youth. In many densely populated inner cities in North America, these sorts of safe route programs are receiving more attention by planners and decisionmakers. Second, trails provide a less-expensive way of getting around the city or the countryside (Watkins, 1984). Cycling, walking and roller-blading, or skiing and snowshoeing during winter months, are efficient ways of traveling from home to the store, school or office. In addition to the gasoline savings, trail commuting also saves money on parking, insurance, car maintenance and bus and taxi fares. Third, trail commuting can in some cases save more time than driving a personal vehicle. This is particularly the

112

Tour ism and Trail s

case in crowded cities where parking is difficult to find and where backed-up rush-hour traffic increases travel time significantly. Finally, with the more pervasive social adoption of sustainability principles in recent years, increasing numbers of commuters are accepting responsibility for environmental stewardship. In many cases, this translates into increased use of trails and greenways for transportation because of its potential to reduce individual carbon footprints and offset the times when commuters have to use their cars or public transport (Shafer et al., 2000).

Experience, Enjoyment and Satisfaction The seminal work of Pine and Gilmore (1999), which suggested that services can be re-packaged and presented as experiences, has much to offer tourism today, and in the context of this book, people’s engagement with making use of trails and routes. Today’s travelers desire experiences that extend beyond the idea of just services, to that which is memorable and personal to them, leaving them with lasting sensations. Table 4.10 illustrates the distinctions between offering services versus experiences. According to Pine and Gilmore (1999), experiences may fall into four distinct realms: entertainment, educational, esthetic and escapist, and these realms are dependent on where these experiences are located along two dimensions: (1) whether the experience requires passive or active participation; and (2) whether the experience results in the absorption or immersion of the participant (Figure 4.4). Applying their thinking to trail use, it could be argued that participation in trails involves some degree of escapism but also a willingness to learn, especially if the route is marked with interpretive panels and offers stops along the way to other places of interest. Collectively, the trail user is both absorbed and immersed in a form of active Table 4.10 Economic distinction between goods, services and experiences Economic offering

Goods/products

Services

Experiences

Economy Economic function Nature of offering Key attribute Method of supply

Industrial Make Tangible Standardized Inventoried after production Manufacturer User Features

Service Deliver Intangible Customized Delivered on demand Provider Client Benefits

Experience Stage Memorable Personal Revealed over duration Stager Guest Sensations

Seller Buyer Factors of demand

Source: Based on Pine and Gilmore (1998: 98).

Demand for Trail s and Routes

113

Absorpon

Entertainment

Educaonal Acve Parcipaon

Passive Parcipaon Esthec

Escapist

Immersion

Figure 4.4 Applying the realms of experience to trail participation Source: Modified from Pine and Gilmore (1998: 102).

participation. Absorption may be achieved if, as Hayes and MacLeod (2007: 51) suggest, trail developers ‘telling a compelling story . . . to attract and satisfy visitors by providing a memorable experience’ is important enough. In the case of food and wine trails, Mason and O’Mahony (2007) argue the need for interactions between visitors and the people engaged in story telling of the description, preparation or presentation of not only the product, but also the process and place. Compelling stories help to form lasting memories of the experiences involved (e.g. taste, appearance, texture, color, cost, history, aroma) and reinforce the place (region, rurality, seasonality, soils, terroir, the farm), the process (methods of cooking, machines, tools, ingredients, markets, sustainability, culture) and the people (producers, famers, locales, ownership, producer–consumer relations). Work on the experience economy suggests that a ‘memorable experience’ may mean participation in activities that help tourists understand and appreciate the story, which requires more than simply listening. With the case of the Malt Whisky Trail in Scotland, participating is more important than listening (Martin & McBoyle, 2006), often expressed in tasting sessions which have become common practice in most food and wine attractions with the tour ending with opportunities to sample and purchase. The experiential component and the nostalgia behind engaging with trails have been somewhat overlooked in the literature. This is often a criticism of the broader cultural heritage encounter, though some scholars emphasize the importance of the personal heritage or legacy (Timothy, 1997) individuals experience at sites they share an intimate affinity with (Poria et al., 2006). According to Timothy and Boyd (2003), nostalgia involves more than just remembrance and reminiscing, but rather a filtering of memories. Davies (1973) viewed nostalgia as juxtaposing particular positive constructions of the past with particular negative constructions of the present. Nostalgia has in

114

Tour ism and Trail s

part shaped the heritage industry in how the past is both presented and repackaged to visitors today as part of a larger framework of place commodification (Dann, 1994; Vesey & Dimanche, 2003). Vesey and Dimanche (2003: 55) suggest that destinations, particularly heritage ones, are ‘marketed, sold and consumed via systems of icons that represent particular meanings of place while omitting others’. This position does not take into account that today’s visitors are not passive but rather more ‘mindful’ as they question the way they view the world (Moscardo, 1996). Caton and Santos (2007) combine experiences and nostalgia concepts in their study of how visitors experienced the Route 66 National Historic Corridor. Based on interviews with tourists traveling the corridor, elements of the route experience involved gaining historical insight, driving, visiting unique places, interacting with people and undertaking an odyssey. However, their experiences did not match the notion of nostalgia, because they held present-centered views, that the history they took from the route was not always a positive one, and that instead of seeking and experiencing familiarity along the way, participants sought and experienced a challenge and personal growth. Their research establishes that with heritage routes, the visitor experience is both complex and multifaceted, given that this type of traveler is engaged in activities that require mindfulness, rather than mindlessness, leading to greater levels of enjoyment and satisfaction. Willard and Beeton (2012) focused on visitor experiences as regards the quality of a rail-trail in Australia, over the physical aspects of the trail itself. They found that ancillary services were important to trail users, and that quality services helped create good experiences, while poor service has the potential to ruin an experience. Many variables influence whether or not a person has an enjoyable or satisfying route experience. Emotions, connections to nature or culture, past experience, purpose of use, frequency of use, time constraints or lack thereof, motorized or non-motorized use, location and surrounding environment, design, place attachment, trail type and pathway features can all influence the level of gratification gained from using a trail or route (Andereck et al., 2001; Kyle, Graefe & Manning, 2004; Lee & Shafer, 2002; Lieber & Fesenmaier, 1984, 1985; Moore & Graefe, 1994; Wessell, 1997). Research by Eby and Molnar (2002: 99) elucidated several important factors that influence route choice for people traveling to a destination on an overnight drive trip (Table 4.11). As Eby and Molnar note, the most highly-rated variables were associated with the actual characteristics of the route and the act of driving.

Past experience and loyalty In the context of nature, it appears that past experience influences trail choice and satisfaction. As trail users gain more experience, they tend to

Demand for Trail s and Routes

115

Table 4.11 Mean importance ratings for factors influencing a route choice Influential factor

Mean (1 not important, 5 extremely important)

Directness Road conditions Travel time Safety Weather Businesses Congestion Distance Stops/delays Scenery Stress of driving Designated scenic byway Roadside development Historical/cultural features

4.0 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.1 3.1 2.6 2.6 2.4

Source: after Eby and Molnar (2002: 99).

select different settings to undertake trail pursuits. Experienced users, according to McFarlane et al. (1998: 209), select more challenging and more remote trails. Initially, they may be casual users who choose shorter or less-challenging trails, but as they become more diehard enthusiasts, they graduate to more arduous courses that take longer to complete (Torbidoni et al., 2005). Another way of looking at experience and choice is the conjoined notions of loyalty and attachment (Kyle et al., 2004). After experiencing a particular trail or type of trail (e.g. wine route or mountain track) some people begin to identify with that route and become ‘loyalists’ or otherwise socially attached to it in a way that resembles what Turner (1973) termed communitas in the context of pilgrimage. This phenomenon refers to spontaneous, existential and temporary communities wherein individuals are treated as equals and are bound by solidarity through common experiences, often of a spiritual or ritualistic nature. Rickly-Boyd (2012) examined lifestyle rock climbers partially through the lens of communitas and found that many of their subcultural characteristics are in line with Turner’s thinking and match many characteristics of ‘secular pilgrims’ in the same way many devoted music and sports enthusiasts identify intensely with other fans who collect places, experiences and memorabilia associated with famous musicians or athletes (Cusack & Digance, 2009; Frost, 2008). Like these examples, a connection to individual famous trails is often accentuated by one’s ascension into the subculture of trail attachment and fanship (Gobster, 2005). Loyalty and group solidarity develop. In this sense,

116

Tour ism and Trail s

as Rickly-Boyd’s (2012) study noted with rock climbers, various levels of communitas develop as more people become involved with and attached to the trail. This results in many people undertaking pilgrimage-like journeys to conquer, collect and achieve bragging rights. For some, it is a quasi-spiritual journey and, according to Kyle, Graefe and Manning (2004), a significant predictor of hiker satisfaction. The Appalachian Trail Conservancy has helped develop this sense of community by bestowing the official title ‘2000 Miler’ to anyone who completes the entire trail. Between 2005 and 2011, some 4177 Appalachian Trail hikers received this coveted label (Appalachian Trail Conservancy, 2013). Because the number of thru-hikers and 2000 Milers is quite small, their sense of community is strong. As with most groups of people embarking on an arduous journey with a commonly understood vision, a group culture is created wherein people strive to collect sites and figurative trophies (Nisbett & Hinton, 2005).

Trail design and environmental features The physical characteristics of trails and routes and their immediate environments are influential on people’s satisfaction with, and enjoyment of, their recreation and touristic experiences. Footpath and trail surfaces are of particular concern to bicyclists, and to a lesser extent to runners, hikers and equestrians. Smooth surfaces and well-maintained ways are highly favored by most consumers, with the exception of wilderness hikers and longdistance cultural route travelers. In-line skaters, skateboarders and wheelchair-bound participants are severely restricted by corridor surfaces which, especially for people with disabilities, can significantly reduce their level of satisfaction with a recreational trail encounter. For non-mountain biking cyclists, paved trails are preferred over any other surface type (van Damme & van Dijk, 1990). In Lieber and Fesenmaier’s (1984) study, cyclists favored paved trails so much that they would have been willing to travel an extra 35 minutes to access a paved trail rather than settle for an earthen or gravel path. Related to surface characteristics is elevated relief and challenging topography. Hilliness or other drastic changes in elevation are among the most difficult challenges for cyclists and hikers on almost all types of trails (Cope et al., 1998; Troped et al., 2005). These issues are less relevant for bridleways, automobile-based heritage routes, or many urban greenways, but for wilderness tracks and cross-country trails they may prove to be significant challenges. Difficult terrain is one of the most common complaints among bikers on England’s Coast to Coast Cycle Route (Cope et al., 1998). Studies have also shown that good-quality waymarking and signage are important positive attributes (Downward & Lumsdon, 2001; Troped et al., 2005). In one study, cyclists cited a lack of signposting, good maps and quality guides as their greatest source of dissatisfaction with long-distance,

Demand for Trail s and Routes

117

route-based travel (Cope et al., 1998). Other studies have shown that toilet facilities and drinking fountains along the way would help make a more pleasant footpath experience (Nelson et al., 2002). Limited access is highly valued by many tourist and recreational users for its assurance of privacy. Crowded trail conditions are one of the foremost concerns among current and potential users (Downward & Lumsdon, 2001; Hearne & Salinas, 2002). Much of this concern derives from multi-use trails, where hikers encounter mountain bikers or equestrians and vice versa. There is a tendency for single-purpose trails to be more acceptable in the public eye and provide better visitor outcomes than multi-purpose trails (Lieber & Fesenmaier, 1984). A common complaint among wilderness hikers is the intrusion of mountain bikes, which ‘make the countryside too much like the town’ (Ruff & Mellors, 1993: 104). While the path itself is the primary focus of most trail studies and is the main raison d’être of route-based recreation and tourism, the environmental setting in which trails are located often determines the motives for undertaking an outing and can affect the outcomes of the trip. Gorgeous scenery can be the highlight of a trip (Axelsson-Lindgren & Sorte, 1987; Eby & Molnar, 2002), while forest fire-scarred landscapes may be a low point (Hesseln et al., 2004). Kent’s (1993) study sought to understand the characteristics of routes that influence people to take scenic drives. Natural beauty, characteristic landscape features, scenic variety, historic and cultural features, rural character, road type (e.g. paved or gravel), route length and nearness to cities inspire people to want to take a scenic drive and guide their selection process (Kent, 1993). Table 4.12 outlines the most important attributes that contribute to the pleasure of driving a scenic route. For the most part, the most influential qualities are natural elements, followed by historic sites and rural landscapes. There was an apparent displeasure with commercial businesses, multi-family housing and signs and billboards. These were seen as too distracting and inharmonious with the natural and cultural qualities of the trail. Kent (1993) also surveyed the reasons people enjoyed a scenic route (Table 4.13). Again the natural and rural landscapes featured most prominently and contributed to a sense of excitement, relaxation, and a chance to clear one’s mind.

Personal motivations While there are many inherent characteristics that make a pathway enjoyable, research has also highlighted a number of motivations that cause people to use them. A study by Bichis-Lupas and Moisey (2001) identified four types of people who utilize the Katy Trail in Missouri based upon a benefits segment approach. These types reflect a wide range of motivations associated with people using this well-known rail-trail. Fitness seekers, mostly males, were only interested in exercise and the health benefits of the

118

Tour ism and Trail s

Table 4.12 Desirable attributes of a scenic byway Desired characteristics

Average rating (1 = not important, 5 = very important)

Water (lakes, streams, rivers, coasts) Mountains, hills or topographic variation Long-distance views Natural vegetation (trees, shrubs) Stone walls Unique or distinctive features Clearings, meadows, pastures The road follows the lay of the land Landmarks and historic sites Neatness, tidiness, order Farms and farm buildings Alternating sunny and shaded areas Crops and agricultural land Cemeteries The roadway feels enclosed Single family houses Commercial establishments Multi-family housing Signs and billboards

4.7 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.2 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.7 3.4 3.3 3.1 1.9 1.8 1.6

Source: Based on Kent (1993: 96).

trail. Typical trail users were interested both in fitness and nature and appreciated all outdoor activities available – walking, biking, jogging, nature appreciation and wildlife. The third cohort, group naturalists, saw the value of the Katy Trail more in nature appreciation than in exercise. Their motives included spending time with friends and family in natural surroundings, walking and picnicking. Bichis-Lupas and Moisey called their final group ‘enthusiasts’, which was the largest cohort in their study. Enthusiasts rated all aspects of the trail as highly important: nature, fitness, getting away, exploring and family time. Lee et al. (2002) found that exercise/fitness was the most significant motive for using a suburban trail, especially among in-line skaters and runners (Table 4.14). They also noted other motives and the user group most predisposed to appreciate these motives. Not surprisingly, skill development ranked highest with skaters, bicyclists and runners, while runners were most inclined to use trails to build friendships. Other important motives not listed in Table 4.14 include getting away from the typical demands of life;

Demand for Trail s and Routes

119

Table 4.13 Top 15 reasons people enjoy scenic byways Characteristic

Average rating (1 = not important, 5 = very important)

Opportunity to experience the beauty of nature Chance to view rural scenery Driving scenic byways makes me feel better Visual excitement or stimulation Allows a more relaxed pace of travel Opportunity to see historic buildings Sense of oneness with nature A break from daily routine What you see is always interesting Freedom of the open road Alternative to high-speed roads Chance to revitalize oneself Provides time for thinking Change from city life It is a good family-oriented activity

4.5 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.4

Source: Based on Kent (1993: 98).

appreciating nature, scenery and outdoor sights and sounds; enjoying solitude in nature; reflecting on life; and seeking novelty, or doing something different (Lee et al., 2002: 26). The West Highland Way (WHW), the first long-distance route in Scotland, was established in 1980 and has become an extremely popular hiking trail through the country’s dramatic natural and cultural landscapes (Aitken & Smith, 2002; Marsh, 2003). Marsh (2003) and Aitken and Smith Table 4.14 Motivations and user type of a suburban all-purpose trail Motivations

Activity/user type

Exercise Enjoyment Personal control Family togetherness Excitement Friendship ties Skill development

In-line skaters, runners In-line skaters, bicyclists In-line skaters In-line skaters, runners, walkers In-line skaters, bicyclists Runners In-line skaters, bicyclists, runners

Source: Based on Lee et al. (2002).

120

Tour ism and Trail s

(2002) estimated in the early 2000s that approximately 17,000 people complete the path each year and 50,000 use it for day walking or part-way hikes (den Breejen, 2007), although this number is likely to have increased in the intervening decade. One study (den Breejen, 2007) measured WHW users’ motivations and experiences in hiking the trail (Table 4.15). The study found that WHW hikers were overall seeking a self-enhancing experience in nature and that the relationships between the expected outcomes, the importance factors and the reasons for walking the trail were important. ‘The strong relationship that walkers forge with their surroundings and the expected sense of achievement they attain from completing a multi-day, challenging walk are variables that largely appear to determine the reported upward trend in experience’ (den Breejen, 2007: 1426). There are many personal and situational variables that motivate people to use a longdistance footpath, including self-improvement, reflection and escape, as well as the amenities of the trail itself and a sense of adventure. Wine tourists follow viticulture/wine routes for a number of reasons, but foremost of these tends to be a desire to learn about wine and its production, as well as to sample various wines (Bruwer, 2003). Hall and Macionis (1998: 198) suggest that consumers participate in wine routes for several reasons, including sampling and buying, participating in events and festivals, socializing with friends and family, enjoying a rural setting, enjoying other nearby attractions, learning about wine-making, dining at a winery, touring a winery, and meeting winemakers. Wine route travelers tend to be wine aficionados and require certain features to have enjoyable experiences. These include quality of wine, overall wine experience, nice attractions along the route, access to Table 4.15 Motives and influential factors for hiking the West Highland Way, Scotland Expectations

Importance factors

Reasons for deciding to walk the WHW

Mental relaxation Get away Challenge oneself

Explore new places Meet likeminded people Quality time with friends and family Seek esteem from others Challenge oneself Mental relaxation Escape from daily routine Enjoy nature Feel stimulated Feel a sense of freedom

Scenery and landscape Good walking opportunity Well marked path

Feel close to nature Feel in control A sense of accomplishment

Source: Based on den Breejen (2007: 1423).

Quality standard of the path A recommendation The challenge/experience Avid long-distance trail walker Discover new places Total length of the trail

Demand for Trail s and Routes

121

wine estates, good information and brochures about the wineries, staff service at wineries, and good signage along the way (Tassiopoulos et al., 2004: 58). Tourists who use ecotrails, heritage trails, food or wine routes are often motivated by a desire to learn about, and become immersed in, an ecosystem, a cultural area or a viticulture practice (Timothy, 2011a; Timothy & Boyd, 2006). The ecotourist who undertakes the vast network of trails and routes through the Monteverde Cloud Forest, Costa Rica, does so to learn about the unique flora and fauna. The previous discussion on heritage Route 66 identified that the motivation behind touring this route extends beyond that of nostalgia to become a meaningful personal journey. Sims (2009), argues that food trails appeal to visitors’ desires for authenticity. Based on comparative case studies of the Lake District and Exmoor in Britain, Sims argues that local food has the potential to enhance the visitor experience by connecting consumers to the region and its perceived culture and heritage; using food to establish the local story, a notion noted earlier by Mason and O’Mahony (2007). Spiritual growth, healing, repentance, fulfilling a religious obligation and drawing nearer to a deity are among the most common motives for walking a pilgrim route (Santos, 2002; Olsen & Timothy, 2006). Walking, and crawling in some extreme cases, denotes humility and makes a devotee penitent.

Barriers to Use For every trail user, there are hundreds more who do not use them. Although the popularity of routes, trails and footpaths is increasing, a significant portion of the population does not use them for recreational, tourism or transportation purposes. A growing body of literature explains why people elect not to use trails, even when they exist within reasonable proximity to home. This plays into the long-established subfield of leisure constraints. Researchers have amassed a vast literature on leisure constraints, with a multitude of ways of seeing barriers to leisure participation (Jackson, 2005; Jackson & Scott, 1999; Mannell & Kleiber, 1997). One of the most common classifications of leisure constraints was proposed by Crawford and Godbey (1987) and later refined by Crawford et al. (1991). According to their analysis, barriers to leisure usually manifest in one of three forms: intrapersonal, interpersonal or structural. Intrapersonal constraints are psychological in nature and are internal to the individual. Attitudes, moods and personality features are part of the intrapersonal type. Interpersonal constraints derive from one’s interaction with other people, including co-workers, friends and family members. Lack of common interests and familial conflicts are two examples of interpersonal barriers. Finally, structural impediments are external variables that keep people from participating. These are sometimes related to the recreational environment and

122

Tour ism and Trail s

are not inherent in individuals or their interpersonal ties. Lack of money, inaccessible locations for people with physical disabilities and inclement weather are examples of structural constraints. Limitations on path and trail use can also be seen from these perspectives (Ravenscroft, 2004; Ravenscroft & Rogers, 2003).

Intrapersonal constraints Perceptions of crowdedness are a common intrapersonal constraint. While people are willing to withstand crowded conditions on urban streets, it appears they are less tolerant of crowding on trails and paths. Perceived congestion has been noted in several studies as a salient barrier to participation in a variety of contexts. One of the biggest complaints among trail walkers and runners is the additional congestion caused by bicyclists and skaters. An abundance of walkers and runners seems to be more tolerated than wheeled users, who are perceived to get in the way more often and are less considerate of others (Troped et al., 2005). While there might be real safety concerns on some wilderness trails (e.g. wild animals, poisonous plants) or in urban areas (e.g. high crime, busy streets), most safety concerns when it comes to trails are perceptual. As already noted, crowdedness can prevent some people from using paths, but it can also become a security concern when too many people are on the trail or when mixed-use trails become too busy with wheeled traffic (Troped et al., 2001). Concerns also mount when a track or path requires travelers to cross busy streets or highways or when it passes through a dark and secluded part of town where dubious activities might take place. Aside from long-term disabilities, a lack of physical fitness is a significant intrapersonal barrier for some people traveling by foot, horseback or bicycle on a long-distance route. Even if an individual has a desire to undertake a long-distance journey, he or she might shy away from it if feelings of physical inadequacy arise. For many trail buffs, a primary purpose of an activity might be to learn something new about history, ecology or culture. One of the main aims of interpretive trails, ecotrails and cultural routes is to educate visitors about the issues and items of prominence on the trail. In common with other interpretive and educational situations, such as at museums, to many people the educational element is not their forte; their lack of educational preparation keeps them away (Timothy, 2011a). Evidence suggests that individuals who were conditioned as children to visit museums, heritage places and natural areas and learn from their experiences are more likely to continue this trend into adulthood (Krakover & Cohen, 2001). Many people simply lack an interest in the outdoors, nature, water resources or cultural heritage. To them, cultural routes and nature trails are essentially unappealing. This lack of desire might be compounded by the

Demand for Trail s and Routes

123

need to travel away from home for a significant period of time to participate in a hike, rail trip or other linear journey (Davies & Prentice, 1995; Timothy, 2011a). Short attention spans bear on this as well. Boredom has been cited as a reason for not using nature or heritage trails (du Cros, 2008; Troped et al., 2001) or as a reason to cut a visit short.

Interpersonal constraints There are in fact relatively few interpersonal barriers to trail participation. The main interpersonal limitation, however, is a paucity of people to socialize with. As the information earlier in the chapter noted, most trail users travel together with friends or relatives. Sharing enjoyment of natural or cultural routes with other people is an important motive. Having nobody to share the experience with may prevent some people from frequenting trails. As well, traveling, hiking or cycling with other people might provide a sense of security, so that not being able to visit trails with others can be a barrier in this regard as well.

Structural constraints Access is a crucial issue in people’s decisions not to visit a trail. As noted earlier in the chapter, people are more inclined to use trails that are closer to home. It makes sense, then, that the further a trail is from one’s residence the less likely he or she will be to visit (Troped et al., 2005). Although traveling a route or trail might be the aim of a person’s vacation experience, the need to travel great distances to access a linear corridor is clearly a significant barrier for some people. Related to this, difficult terrain, hilliness and inadequate parking facilities near trails are salient obstacles for many who might otherwise desire to use a path. One of the most salient issues being discussed in tourism and recreation studies these days is access for people with disabilities. Many pathways are not able to cater to the needs of all sectors of society, including those who might have mobility problems (Haynes & Cope, 1998; Moore et al., 1996). The lack of accommodation for people with physical disabilities prevents a huge segment of the population from using most trails (Troped et al., 2001), although many urban and suburban pathways have been hardened and gradients changed to be able to facilitate users with special needs. Stronger legislation in many parts of the world aims to facilitate access to everyone, but in some cases, such as on many wilderness trails or at certain cultural sites, accessibility cannot be guaranteed, and there are legal waivers that prevent complete access if it means threatening the natural or heritage significance of the place (Timothy & Boyd, 2003). While people cite low levels of discretionary income as a constraint to using heritage and natural resources, including trails, this may be a question

124

Tour ism and Trail s

of priorities. While access to most trails is complimentary, there may be costs associated with using them, including fuel costs or bus fares to arrive at trailheads or equipment expenditures if one’s interest is roller-blading or cycling. Despite some of these potential expenses, trails provide one of the cheapest avenues for recreation and tourism. Most people’s perceptions of cost refer to entrance fees into museums, parks or historic sites rather than the trails themselves (Hood, 1983; Thapa, 2012).

Conclusion Besides demand for actual pathways and routes, there is significant demand for other services that help create the trail experience. For example, in 1996, three-fifths of all nights on the Coast to Coast Cycle Route were spent in bed and breakfast establishments. Some 21% were spent in camping grounds, while 12% were spend in youth hostels (Cope et al., 1998). As may be expected, for long-distance hiking and wilderness tracks, camping is the most used lodging type (Daigle et al., 1994; Spencer et al., 1999). Other types of lodging tend to be more closely associated with urban trails, scenic byways or heritage railways. This chapter has not examined these ancillary services in detail. Rather, they will be highlighted in more depth in the economic impacts discussion in the next chapter. This chapter set out to address the demand for trails and routes. Figure 4.5 models the influences on demand, including general trends in demand for

Characteriscs of trail users

Trail uses

General trends in demand

Elements of locaon

Demand for trails & routes

Experience, enjoyment, sasfacon

Barriers to use

Figure 4.5 Factors shaping demand for trails and routes

Demand for Trail s and Routes

125

leisure and recreation, characteristics of trail users, elements of location, trail uses, experiences sought, enjoyment and satisfaction, and barriers to use. The weighting of each of these factors of course varies; some are less important than others. For instance, the ability to separate recreational day users from tourists is not a major factor in determining ongoing demand where trails and routes are concerned. This differentiation is not a major issue given that expected use of urban greenways will be overwhelmingly by locals, and urban trails of significant cultural and heritage interest, such as the Boston Freedom Trail, are frequented by tourists more than residents. The same will apply to rural trails where level of use is influenced by where the consumer lives. It is not surprising that most users of long-distance walking trails are local residents, frequenting trails as part of an exercise routine, social situation or mode of transportation. The importance of providing enjoyable and satisfying experiences is critical in determining future levels of demand, since today’s tourists and recreationists increasingly seek these as standard requirements of any trailbased opportunity. Other important factors of demand include trail quality and reasons for engagement, be they nostalgia or simply a greater willingness to learn about nature or heritage. A final point of note is that if trails and routes are to become a larger part of the wider experience economy, overcoming the barriers for non-participation still remains a challenge. As noted earlier in the chapter these barriers can include crowding, safety, a general lack of physical fitness, or a disability that prevents participation. Some of these constraints are easier to overcome than others. A pressing concern is that current trends in levels of activity, particularly in Western countries, reflect wider leisure patterns that are more passive than active, indoors-focused rather than outdoors-oriented, and focused more on technology and communications than on participation in sports and can mean less demand for trails and routes.

5

Tourism, Recreation and Trail Impacts

Introduction For years social scientists have been interested in the environmental impacts of tourism and recreation. While many people envision ‘the environment’ as naturally occurring phenomena and elements of the natural landscape (e.g. trees, rivers, lakes, forests, mountains), it is much broader than that. The environment is essentially everything surrounding humans on earth. It can, in essence, be seen from three broad perspectives, however, including the physical, socio-cultural and economic environments (Mathieson & Wall, 1982). These can be broken down even further into various subtypes of environmental systems. The physical environment comprises soil, water, wildlife and vegetation, where the relationship between tourism and these natural elements can be viewed as positive, negative or of questionable impact (Wall & Wright, 1977). Holden (2008) provides another perspective of ‘the environment’, one that is grounded in the experiential dimension tourists and recreationists gain. He suggests that the environment can be looked upon from four dimensions: (1) as the setting for action; (2) as a social system; (3) as emotional territory; and (4) as self. This typology can be adapted to the environments that this book is examining, namely linear corridors. In the ‘setting for action’ category, trails and routes are known for their recreational use. As a ‘social system’ they are venues for important family and friend interaction. As ‘emotional territory’ they are recognized as part of journeys taken and repeated, and lastly, ‘as self’, the merged physical characteristics of the linear space with its cultural attributes combine creating something more valuable and important than staying at home. Some of this alternative understanding of environment was addressed in parts of the previous chapter, and while it is a valuable perspective, a more traditional approach is taken in this chapter where the focus is on the impacts that occur in physical, socio-cultural and economic environments. 126

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

127

Research since the 1960s and 1970s, with increased attention during the 1980s and 1990s, has shown that tourism, wherever it develops, has social, economic and ecological outcomes, some of which are positive while others are negative (Besculides et al., 2002; Buckley & Pannell, 1990; Deery et al., 2012; Din, 1988; Dwyer et al., 2010; Eagleston & Rubin, 2013; Kottke, 1988; Wong, 2004). This chapter examines the ecological, social and economic impacts arising from trail and route utilization. With regard to ecological impacts, research on both negative and positive impacts are addressed, including soil compaction, erosion, vegetation change, wildlife and tangible heritage. Research on social impacts of trails and routes focuses on resident perceptions and reactions, trail user perceptions and reactions, as well as social benefits. Economic impact research on trails and routes examines user expenditure and indirect economic effects. A number of detailed impact case studies are provided for each of these three environments, along with smaller examples within each section. The chapter commences by addressing research on the ecological impacts of trail and route utilization where the focus has been the negative implications.

Type of Trail/Route Impacts Ecological impacts The physical environment consists of many parts, including soil, water, vegetation, animals, bedrock, air and cultural artifacts. Each one of these is an important part of an ecosystem or cultural environment and is impacted by the utilization of trails and routes for tourism and recreation (Cho et al., 2004; Farrell & Marion, 2001, 2002; Kwon et al., 2004; Maikhuri et al., 2000; Marion & Leung, 2001; Mbaiwa, 2003; Pendleton et al., 1998; Woo, 1991). Research on the physical structure of trails strongly suggests that impacts are most noticeable and measurable on countryside or wilderness tracks that are non-hardened, unmaintained or poorly designed (Marion & Leung, 2001). This describes the majority of trails throughout the world. Of these subsets of the physical environment, soil, flora, fauna, water and material culture are the most pertinent in the context of trails. This section describes the effects of route-based recreation and tourism on trails and several of their associated physical environments.

Soil compaction and erosion One of the most often-cited physical impacts of trail use on the natural environment is soil compaction and other soil disturbances. This has been the focus of many ecological studies, particularly in the context of unplanned and wilderness trails, where these effects are most vivid (Azlin & Philip, 2004; Chizhova, 2004; D’Antonio et al., 2013; Dolesh, 2004b; Hornby & Sheate,

128

Tour ism and Trail s

2001; Leung & Marion, 1999a; Magro & Amando de Barros, 2004; Marion et al., 2006; Sack & da Luz, 2003; Tinsley & Fish, 1985). In addition to compaction, trail widening and ‘renegade routes’ have been shown to be significant soil-related problems on wilderness trails (Li et al., 2005; Lynn & Brown, 2003; Magro & Amando de Barros, 2004; Wilson & Seney, 1994). However, water and mud frequently force hikers to leave the trail, widening the impact area in the process (Figure 5.1). As well, footpath users may bypass damaged areas or trees that have fallen across a trail. This ‘trail braiding’ can severely damage vegetation and compact the soils in areas away from the designated trail (Landsberg et al., 2001: 41). Likewise, hikers, equestrians and cyclists are ardent shortcut takers. Switchbacks on designated mountain trails are often bypassed by people seeking faster shortcuts straight uphill (McQuaid-Cook, 1978). Renegade routes are new path areas away from designated trails that have been blazed by off-road vehicles, hikers or horses. Dolesh (2004b: 59) infers that there are approximately 96,500 km of unplanned, renegade trails on US Forest Service lands, significantly diminishing the environmental integrity of the public lands. These shortcuts sometimes result in deep incisions and steep gullies (Arrowsmith & Inbakaran, 2002) that facilitate ‘unnaturally fast meltwater and rain runoff from the surrounding ground in the spring and early summer’ (McQuaid-Cook, 1978: 210). The result is soil compaction, which can have disastrous results, including increased water runoff, flooding and increased soil erosion (Jacoby, 1990). Horses and off-road bikes are often said to be the most damaging to soils and trail widening (Deluca et al., 1998; Goeft, 2000; Whinam & Comfort, 1996). Soil displacement by tire throw and breakup of packed areas by horse

Figure 5.1 The widening effect of off-trail use in the Himalayas of Bhutan

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

129

hooves are major environmental concerns (Sack & da Luz, 2003; Wilson & Seney, 1994). When soils are compacted or trails widened through compression by hikers’ feet, horse hooves or bike tires, it results in several undesirable outcomes. Foremost among these is excess water runoff, which causes erosion, flooding and in some extreme cases, mudslides. According to research by Wallin and Hardin (1996: 520), runoff coefficients (ratios of runoff to rainfall) are highest on compacted trails versus off-trail areas. At their study sites, average runoff was 12 times greater on trails than in off-trail areas, although some sites’ runoff coefficients were 40 times higher on trails than away from the trails. At one site they estimated that 15 mm of rain falling in 30 minutes would detach 3186 kg of trail soil and 4781 kg at another location. A related outcome is altered soil composition. The chemical composition, temperature, organic materials structure and moisture content of soil change dramatically (Arocena et al., 2006; Kutiel et al., 1999). These, together with root exposure, typically result in fewer plants, narrow vegetal diversity and the invasion of ruderal species (Bhuju & Ohsawa, 1998). Some ecosystems or environmental components undergo different impacts than others. For example, the soils of heathlands and shrublands are affected differently by horse trampling than dry grassland soils are (Whinam et al., 1994), and many observers believe that mid-latitude forests are more resilient to impacts than arid environments (Sack & da Luz, 2003). The most influential intrinsic factors affecting trail degradation include path gradient, rockiness, soil parent material, texture, organic content, climate and vegetation types (Bryan, 1977; Gager & Conacher, 2001; Landsberg et al., 2001; Liu, 1995; Liu & Tseng, 2003; Marion & Leung, 2001, 2004; Nepal, 2003; Nepal & Nepal, 2004; Nepal & Way, 2007a, 2007b; Price, 1983). Negative impacts tend to be most pronounced on paths that are wet, steep and unmaintained. The nature and degree of negative impacts also depends on external factors, including type of use, user behavior and amount of use (Marion & Leung, 2001). As well, different transport modes and even footwear affect trails differently. Levels of wear and tear have been shown to vary between different footwear types, including shoes and even different types of hiking boots (Kuss & Jenkins, 1984). Boots or four-wheel drive vehicles with one person have different impacts than walking shoes or a vehicle with five people on board. According to one study, equine traffic causes more damage to established trails than do bicycles, hikers or motorcycles (Landsberg et al., 2001). Landsberg et al.’s (2001: 39) experiment with horses on unmaintained trails found that soil was damaged after 30 passes by two horses. Even snowmobiling, downhill skiing and cross-country skiing can effect changes to the soils that lie beneath the snow trails, so that after the spring thaw the ground remains compacted and altered in much the same way it is on footpaths and tracks (Hornby & Sheate, 2001).

130

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Ecological Impact on Trails within Mount Robson Provincial Park, Canada Past research has suggested that the ecological impacts on trails is often related to levels of use within the early periods of usage (Sun & Liddle, 1993) or that it is a result of site-specific environmental conditions and management (Leung & Marion, 2000). Nepal and Way (2007a, 2007b) undertook research on two backcountry trails in Mount Robson Provincial Park, in British Columbia, Canada. The park is a late addition to the Canadian Rocky Mountains Park (CRMP) World Heritage Site (WHS). Initially the CRMP WHS was UNESCO listed in 1984, with Mount Robson Provincial Park and others added in 1990. The park borders Jasper National Park on the east (Figure 5.2) and is known for beautiful nature (mountain landscapes, lakes and glaciers), geological features (canyons and limestone caves) and ecological significance (alpine tundra vegetation and the habitat of rare and endangered plant species). Nepal and Way (2007a) note that the park consists of four vegetation zones: interior cedar-hemlock (ICH), subboreal spruce (SBSS), Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir (ESSF) and alpine tundra (AT). Mount Robson Provincial Park (MRPP) was established in 1913 and became popular among local recreationists as a backcountry hiking destination; in the same year a local Jasper outfitter built a recreational trail along the Robson River, known as Berg Lake Trail. It would later become

Hinton Devona

ALBERTA

Croydon 16

Valemount

Albreda

Jasper

Mount Robson Provincial Park

Jasper National Park

93

BRITISH COLUMBIA DJT

Figure 5.2 Mount Robson Provincial Park as part of the Canadian Rocky Mountains World Heritage Site

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

131

part of the itinerary of international visitors to the WHS. Berg Lake Trail (BLT) is 23 km long, and covers three of the four vegetation zones previously noted, SBSS in the valley bottoms, ESSF at higher altitudes (1350–1750 meters) and AT for regions of altitude above 1750 meters. The elevation of the BLT is between 900 and 1750 meters. The trail is well used and intensively managed; some 15,000 people hike the trail each year and just under a third of them (4000) camp overnight. The Mount Fitzwilliam Trail (MFT), by contrast, is a low-use (362 annual visitors; one-third camping overnight) and less intensively managed trail. Developed in the 1980s as an alternative overflow trail to reduce impacts on the BLT, the MFT was part of a wider management strategy to disperse visitors. Fourteen kilometers in length, with equal distances constructed or left in a natural state, MFT traverses two vegetation zones, namely ICH (trail elevation of up to 1050 meters) and ESSF (elevation exceeding 1050 meters). The elevation of the MFT ranges from 900 to 1850 meters. The appeal of this trail to the overnight hiker is the alpine conditions at the end of the trail that include a lake which is often still frozen by late June. Nepal and Way (2007a) conducted extensive research on both trails in 2003, undertaking a continuous survey of trail conditions for 18 km of the BLT and 13 km of the FWT, as well as fixed-transect surveys, 39 for BLT and 29 for FWT transects at intervals of 450 meters along both trails. Both types of surveys were designed to detect changes in vegetation conditions along the trails, comparing disturbed with undisturbed sites. The measurements taken at fixed-transect sites included: trail width (m), crosssection area (cm2), maximum incision (cm), tread surface characteristics (percentile estimates), soil penetration resistance (SPR) (tons ft2-1) and exposed rocks and roots (frequency). Other measurements included alignment, trail position, trail grade, soil texture, vegetation zone and vegetation cover. Of these measurements, five were viewed to be main ecological impact indicators: trail width, cross section area, maximum incision, SPR and exposed rocks and roots. Table 5.1 displays these measurements in terms of the amount and severity of impact for both of the trails. The above statistics suggest that the trails have different levels of impact, with the impact being greater for Berg Lake Trail. However, independent sample t tests revealed that there were only significant differences of ecological impact between the two trails for cross-section area and soil penetration resistance. Trail impact was also detected from the continuous survey of both trails using observation measurements such as running or standing (Continued)

132

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Ecological Impact on Trails Within Mount Robson Provincial Park, Canada (Continued) Table 5.1 The amount and severity of types of ecological impact on Berg Lake and Mount Fitzwilliam Trails Type of ecological impact Trail width Cross-section area Maximum incision Exposed rocks and roots Soil penetration resistance (SPR)

Berg Lake Trail 122 cm *472 cm2 6.4 cm 23.4 *4.9 tons ft−2

Mount Fitzwilliam Trail 75.5 cm *159 cm2 4.9 cm 37.6 *2.8 tons ft−2

Note: An asterisk denotes impact indicators where there was a significant difference. Source: Adapted from Nepal and Way (2007a).

water, signs of water, highly muddy areas (quagmire), heavily eroded sections and braiding. Table 5.2 compares the frequency and lineal extent of these problem areas for both trails, illustrating that despite FWT being a low-use, less intensively managed trail, it has a more areas that are considered problem areas such as wet, muddy and having quagmire conditions. Regression tests were run on four dependent variables, namely crosssection area, SPR, exposed rocks and roots and trail width to determine Table 5.2 Frequency and lineal extent of problem areas for Berg Lake and Mount Fitzwilliam Trails Problems

Frequency for Berg Lake Trail

Frequency for Mount Fitzwilliam Trail

Running or standing water on trail Signs of water on trail Quagmire (highly muddy area) Trail braiding Heavily eroded trail section Total frequency of problem areas Frequency of problem areas per kilometer Total length of wet and muddy areas (m) Lineal extent of muddy areas (m km−1)

7 1 5 2 2 17 1.0 24 1.4

7 7 8 0 1 23 1.8 2223 171

Source: Based on Nepal and Way (2007a: 397).

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

133

those factors influencing trail impacts. Results suggested that 39% of the variance for the cross-section area was explained by trail width, amount of use and vegetation type; 55% of the variance for SPR was explained by amount of use, soil texture and vegetation type; 24% of the variance for exposed rocks and roots was explained by soil texture and elevation; and finally 38% of the variance for trail width was explained by amount of use and vegetation. The level of management of both trails influences the extent of impacts occurring on the trails. While management is the focus of the next two chapters, it is important here to situate the severity of impact with management strategies. Only BLT is routinely inspected by park employees, and the level of maintenance ranges over the summer months from weekly for BLT compared to only once for FWT. There are also major differences between the trails in terms of staff deployment (four full-time rangers across the summer months for BLT, none for FWT), visitor information and education (BLT has a visitor center for pre-trip information and orientation video, compared to trailhead signs for FWT), use rationing/allocation system (hybrid reservation system for BLT of first come, first served approach, compared to no rationing/ allocation system for FWT), and visitor registration (laser counter for all users and a mandatory registration for overnight visitors for BLT, compared to self-registration for all visitors to FWT). Nepal and Way (2007a) noted a higher level of trail-related management features were in place for BLT than for FWT, features that could mitigate ecological impacts arising from trail use, such as culverts, draining ditches, bridges, hand rails, stairs and rest platforms at viewpoints. Eighty-two features were recorded for BLT compared to 31 for FWP, of which 17 were culverts. The remainder was drainage ditches and a number of retention walls. Research by Nepal and Way (2007a) found that while the two trails have similar ecological characteristics, they are very different in terms of use levels and management regimes. Both trails are more impacted with respect to soil erosion (cross-section area) and soil penetration resistance (more in highly compacted soil) as a consequence of the amount of use and soil texture. While the FWT had more visible problems (impacts) from low levels of use, for example, standing water and muddy sections, the absence of management action (for example, culverts, ditches and drains) is perhaps a deliberate decision to keep trails in as natural a state as possible, maintaining trail aesthetics for visitors who want to walk in a wilderness environment. An unwilling consequence of keeping trails as pristine as possible may actually result in greater trail impact and degradation over time.

134

Tour ism and Trail s

Vegetation As already noted, both footpath use and off-path footfall can significantly affect vegetation growth and cover (Appeldoorn, 1993; Bright, 1986; Hornby & Sheate, 2001; Liu, 1993; Liu et al., 2001; Sievänen, 1989; Taylor et al., 1993). Impacts on foliage are direct or indirect (Leonard et al., 1985). Direct impacts are induced by direct physical contact with vegetation. Trampling on plants breaks leaves, stems, roots and new growth, and results in small-scale damage or complete species depletion (Jones, 2001; McQuaid-Cook, 1978). A study in the Netherlands (Appeldoorn, 1993) found that 50% of all-terrain bikes leave the designated path, exacting severe damage to flora. Many studies have examined the effects of trail use and path widening on trees, grasses, bushes, mosses, lichens, fungi, berries and mushrooms (Nepal & Way, 2007b; Sievänen, 1989). Some scientists have studied the index of vegetation impact (IVI) and how many steps or passes are needed to exact negative changes on trailside vegetation. For the majority of plant varieties in Leonard et al.’s (1985) study, plant mortality occurred between 100 and 300 trampling passes. In another study, Landsberg and his colleagues (2001) found that vegetation changes were apparent after only 10 passes by two horses. They also discovered that a 50% reduction in vegetation cover in the Rocky Mountains occurred after 300 walkers, 80 motorcycles and 80 horses. In grasslands, a 50% reduction in flora cover resulted from 1100 walkers, 1000 motorcycles, reflecting that different ecosystems have different levels of resilience for trampling. A study in a forest park in Taiwan concluded that vegetation changes were found most clearly within two meters from the edges of a trail (Liu & Tseng, 2003). Deforestation is a problem also associated with backcountry trails. In Nepal, which became a popular trekking destination in the 1980s and 1990s, trail hiking was a cause of forest degradation (Sharma, 1997). Trekkers, who tended to stay longer in the wilderness than conventional sightseeing tourists, increased demand for firewood several-fold (Bjønness, 1982). Consequently, deforestation near trails occurred rather quickly, and when the wood was gone, guides and porters searched further afield for trees to cut to satisfy tourists’ desires for hot water for bathing, wood for cooking, and boiled water for drinking (Laiolo, 2003; Santos, 1988). Vandalism and souvenir hunting are other direct effects that may result in changes to vegetal cover (McQuaid-Cook, 1978). Souvenir hunting became so bad among pilgrims on the small trails in the Garden of Gethsemane in Jerusalem, which has deep significance for Christians, that centuries-old olive trees were beginning to die from people stripping off bark, branches and leaves to add to their Holy Land souvenir collections. Nowadays, visitors are no longer allowed to walk among the trees but are relegated to a perimeter walkway around what is left of the garden (Hughes & Subash Chandran, 1998). It is common to see names and other inscriptions carved in tree bark, or to see other kinds of scarring on trees and other vegetation; wounded trees are a

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

135

Figure 5.3 A vandalized agave plant along a heritage trail in Mexico

common site in many national parks along trails (Deng et al., 2003; Lynn & Brown, 2003; Magro & Amando de Barros, 2004; Shi et al., 2002) (Figure 5.3). The soil alterations described in the previous section are an example of the indirect effects of trail use. Soil compaction usually results in the suffocation of roots and eventually leads to the death of plants (McQuaid-Cook, 1978). Root exposure is another outcome of heavy use. These also have implications for erosion and runoff (Li et al., 2005; Magro & Amando de Barros, 2004; Yoo & Kwon, 2004), but they also have major implications for vegetation growth and change. Another consequence is the spread of invasive species. This occurs in several ways. First, forage from dry pastures and commercial animal feed is often laden with weed seeds. When horses eat the feed, many seeds pass through their dung and onto trails or beside them (Landsberg et al., 2001). Horses are not the only culprits, however. Non-native seeds are also known to spread by human traffic on backpacks, clothing, shoes and camping equipment (Dickens et al., 2005). Second, pathways in karst caves are responsible for distributing intrusive micro-organisms in underground cave systems. Changes in environmental conditions that result from human intervention, including increased temperatures and humidity, lighting and greater concentrations of carbon dioxide encourage the colonization and spread of abundant microflora (e.g. lichens, moss and algae) that continue to affect the caves’ internal ecosystems, but also leave their mark on the bedrock and substrata (Pulido-Bosch et al., 1997: 148). Third, off-trail disturbance encourages the growth of exotic and ruderal (plants that are first to colonize disturbed soils) species immediately adjacent to footpaths and tracks. Higher levels of use tend to accelerate the establishment and growth

136

Tour ism and Trail s

of non-native species along trails (Müller et al., 2004; Nepal & Way, 2007b; Potito & Beatty, 2005). In Shenandoah National Park, Hall and Kuss (1989) discovered that new species diversity increased toward the trail 80% of the time from disturbed soils but also because of the openness of the trail itself, which allowed more sunshine to penetrate trail margins and create more robust growing environments for invasive species. They conclude that ‘trampling may cause increased species diversity in areas that would normally be dominated by a single species and function much the same as a predator in fauna studies’ (Hall & Kuss, 1989: 224). In most cases, garbage and other waste materials are most prevalent at trailside camp areas (Jones, 2001), although it can be found all along trails everywhere (Basnet, 1993). Not only is it aesthetically unpleasant, it also results in direct and indirect physical impacts. Litter directly disturbs vegetation when it is dumped on grasses, moss or other flora. The deterioration process of plastics, metal or paper products negatively affects soil nutrients and plant composition and is in some cases toxic to the plants.

Wildlife Like other elements of the natural or physical environment, the use of routes and trails can result in serious changes to wildlife (Chettri et al., 2001; Griffiths & van Schaik, 1993; Omphile & Powell, 2002). Several transformations in animal behavior can be identified that are directly related to routes and trails. The first is feeding patterns. The decrease in plant growth or the intrusion of invasive species as noted in the last section may result in an area’s fauna moving elsewhere in search of its traditional diet (Griffiths & van Schaik, 1993; Meaney et al., 2002). Although some species move on, others become habituated to their new feeding environment (Griffiths & van Schaik, 1993). This may be especially disconcerting when they adapt to being fed by tourists (Figure 5.4). The second change affects animal habitats and breeding grounds. Wilderness and trail recreation has been shown to cause brown bears and bighorn sheep to flee to new habitats, resulting in a decline in populations in their traditional hunting and mating areas (Jacobs & Schloeder, 1992; Papouchis et al., 2001). Recreation trails and other human activity in the wild affect nesting patterns and nesting success among a variety of bird species (Miller & Hobbs, 2000). The birds in one study were much more likely to avoid trails by nesting elsewhere (Miller et al., 1998, 2001). And, pronghorns on Antelope Island in the Great Salt Lake were found to have shifted away from areas in close proximity to trails to higher elevations on the island to give birth and hide their fawns, but toward positions where there was a greater risk of predation (Fairbanks & Tullous, 2002). Third, some animals might even undergo a degree of evolution brought on by recreation disturbances of their habitats and behaviors. Griffiths and van Schaik (1993) speculated that some diurnal species may adapt to human

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

137

Figure 5.4 A squirrel waiting trailside for tourist handouts by the ‘do not feed the squirrels’ sign at the Grand Canyon

incursion by becoming more nocturnal, or ground-based animals could potentially evolve into more arboreal creatures. Fourth, increased traffic on scenic car routes during high season inevitably results in fatal accidents – for animals and tourists (Coffin, 2007; Gerow et al., 2010). Insects, reptiles, birds and mammals all fall victim on occasion to seasonal traffic on scenic byways and other motorized routes. Few scenic highways in North America can be driven during peak season without seeing roadkill (dead animals) on or beside the roadway. A final perspective on wildlife is the effect of underwater trails on coral, a corporeal invertebrate that lives in compact colonies throughout the oceans of the world, forming coral reefs, or underwater configurations made of calcium carbonate emitted by the corals (Ríos-Jara et al., 2013). Marine parks are home to many underwater trails, which are often interpreted with corrosion-proof signs and markers. In the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, Australia, snorkelers cause noticeable damage to corals along the trails. Although the suboceanic courses are used only lightly (approximately 15 snorkelers per trail each week), the damage caused by users is measurable and is most heavily concentrated along the trails, leading Plathong et al. (2000) to recommend that snorkelers need better training and that interpretive signs can be used better to inform participants of their potential damage.

Tangible heritage Cultural heritage is a completely non-renewable resource. Once it has disappeared, it is gone forever and cannot be resurrected. However, it can be reproduced and often is in many inauthentic ways. As such, the tangible

138

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 5.5 This trail is experiencing significant wear and tear, and its railing is beginning to fail

cultural past requires a great deal of care to ensure that it does not diminish through tourism. The effects of trail use on tangible culture are manifold. One impact is the physical damage that thousands of feet, tires or hooves inflict on cultural trails (Figure 5.5). Jones (2001) examined the physical impacts of mass tourism on the Inca Trail to Machu Picchu in Peru and concluded that as the 33 km pathway leading to the citadel has grown in popularity in recent decades, its carrying capacity has been exceeded, resulting in visible damage to the historic track and its pavestones. Similar conditions can be seen on several sections of original Roman roads in Europe. Countryside rambling also raises additional concerns for the cultural heritage of places. Overuse of footpaths and tramping through the countryside can damage cultural landscapes and archaeological relics (Hornby & Sheate, 2001). As well, historic buildings and archaeological sites near pathways are regularly looted for artifacts and other collectibles owing to a lack of monitoring and oversight. Underwater marine trails are notorious for treasure hunters and vandals (Alves, 2008; Leshikar-Denton & Scott-Ireton, 2007; Smith, 2007). Scott-Ireton (2007) noted the damage done to a shipwreck in Lake George, New York, when divers attempted to remove two cannon port lids. These kinds of situations are not uncommon under water where it is difficult to monitor users’ behavior. Despite the ecological impact arising from trail use, it also important to gauge if there is any difference in the reaction to physical impacts by tourists and residents. Much of the research has focused on national parks on visitor (tourists versus residents) perceptions of trail conditions (e.g. Noe et al., 1997) or impacts at campsites (e.g. Shelby et al., 1998; van Winkle & MacKay,

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

139

2008). Perceptions of and tolerance for impacts varies among groups of park users, but most studies have shown that visitors have a high tolerance for trail and vegetation impacts arising from natural area visitation. Residents often hold stronger values and connections to places than tourists, given their geographical proximity to the resource setting being affected, as well as being influenced by the extent to which they benefit from the tourism activity taking place (Andereck et al., 2005). Comparisons of tourist and resident perceptions of physical trail impacts are scarce in the literature, but the case study of trail conditions around Lom, Norway, by Denstadli et al. (2010) is a welcome exception.

Case Study: Stakeholder Consensus Regarding Trail Conditions in Lom and its Surrounding Region, Norway Denstadli et al. (2010) used 337 tourist surveys and 201 resident interviews to evaluate the views of both tourists and residents in and near Lom, Norway. To capture the tourist population driving through the mountainous parts of Lom municipality, surveys were conducted along the Sognefjell road, at two vehicle rest stops that had amenities and facilities. The road is the highest pass in northern Europe and is a ‘scenic road’ designated as a National Tourist Route. The residents of Lom (population ca. 2400) were surveyed face-to-face in their homes, after responding to an announcement in the local newspaper. Both populations were shown 12 pictures depicting trails of different impact as a result of trail hardening and human trampling. Seven pictures were of ‘high impact’ trails with a high level of use by hikers and vehicular traffic. Three pictures were of ‘low impact’ trails, with two remaining pictures showing boardwalk-hardened sites. Based on the photos, respondents were asked what type of trail most appealed to them and how they would rank the depicted trails on a seven-point scale (one being very negative, four being a neutral mid-point and seven being very positive). Table 5.3 shows how both populations rated the trail photos. Not surprisingly, photos that showed high-impact trails were rated more negatively than those with low impacts; but, what is equally important is that the range was not that far below and above the neutral point (4), respectively. There was no real difference in the ratings by residents depending on whether or not their income was dependent on tourism. Expectedly, high-impact trails were perceived more negatively compared to low-impact trails. Surprisingly pictures with boardwalks were ranked by both populations less positively than those showing low-impact trails. (Continued)

140

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Stakeholder Consensus Regarding Trail Conditions in Lom and its Surrounding Region, Norway (Continued) Table 5.3 Mean ratings of trail photos by tourists and residents in and near Lom, Norway Residents

High-impact trails Mean range Low-impact trails Mean range Boardwalks Mean range

Tourists

Residents

Income from tourism

No income from tourism

3.9 3.1–4.7 5.6 5.5–5.7 4.7 4.5–5.0

3.7 2.9–4.5 5.6 5.2–5.9 4.1 4.1–4.2

3.8 3.4–4.4 5.6 5.2–5.9 4.2 4.2–4.3

3.7 2.8–4.6 5.6 5.2–5.9 4.1 4.0–4.2

Note: Rating scale: (1) very negative, to (7) very positive. Source: Adapted from Denstadli et al. (2010).

The authors noted some surprise given the ecological role that boardwalks play in keeping pressure off the ground. The only noticeable difference between tourist and resident perceptions was that tourists rated the boardwalk photos more positively than residents did. Denstadli et al. (2010) explain this resident–tourist variance by suggesting that tourists use the trails more often than residents do, so they appreciate the role the boardwalks play, and that residents likely prefer to see trails in their natural state, without human-built boardwalks. This case shows that even when management tries to protect the pathway by putting down a boardwalk, low impact is still preferred over hardening measures. This implies that there is some degree of tolerance for mild physical impacts on nature trails.

Positive physical impacts There are several positive physical outcomes of trail impacts with respect to tourism and recreation, although these are fewer in number. These include, among other things, conservation, interpretation and education, urban renewal, and utility easements (Jones, 1985). Many observers agree that railtrails are a significant improvement to the natural landscape than the dirtier and less maintained railway lines that used to run before them (Iles & Wiele, 1993). In fact, they have the potential to help protect and enhance the

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

141

natural environment by providing greener and cleaner access to the countryside and suburbs. They also improve air quality and overall physical quality of places because of the open space they create (Moore & Driver, 2005). In the words of Iles and Wiele (1993: 26), rail-trails ‘help mitigate water, air and noise pollution’ because they are more sustainable alternatives to car transportation, they support the growth of plants and trees beside them, and they provide a habitat for native wildlife (Hornby & Sheate, 2001; Moore & Driver, 2005; Moore & Shafer, 2001). A related benefit is the educational value of trails. Iles and Wiele (1993) point to the existing and potential use of rail-trails to educate youth about the need to protect the ecological and cultural environments. In general, trails can in fact help promote historical understanding (Peterson, 1999) and can be useful pedagogical tools for learning about biology, history, environment, art and geography. There have been many cases where industrial waste areas, mine tailings and brownfields were reinvigorated through the development of greenways and urban trails (Villa, 2001). Two examples in the US are the Lawrence Gateway and Merrimack Riverwalk in Lawrence, Massachusetts, and the Riverfront Heritage Trail in Kansas City, Missouri (Amekudzi & Fomunung, 2004). Trails in general also support historic preservation, as the built environment along or adjacent to them is usually included in corridor protection efforts because of their association with the trail (Gangewere, 1992; Moore & Driver, 2005). For example, as mentioned in Chapter 2, the route to Santiago de Compostela was a major impetus for the restoration of ancient cathedrals and other important buildings along the Camino in Spain (Gonzáles & Medina, 2003). In fact, the route was particularly instrumental in the gentrification and renewal of many cities and towns, for the income earned by ‘Camino’ tourism, the global visibility the pilgrim path brought to the region and the mounting pride among the local people compelled the region to reconsider its conservation efforts and gear them toward the pathway’s cultural centeredness (Gonzáles & Medina, 2003). Finally, trails, particularly rail-trails, are sometimes used as utility easements. Their physical characteristics are ideal for some public infrastructure developments, such as power lines, water drainage, or microfiber installation. This is important because rail-trails can provide already open alternatives to tearing up other natural landscapes or destroying historic buildings and urban infrastructure to make way for utilities installation (Moore & Driver, 2005).

Social impacts Like all forms of tourism and recreation, route use can have serious repercussions on the visitors themselves as well as on destination residents and cultures. These impacts include, but are not limited to, crowdedness and

142

Tour ism and Trail s

conflicting use of social space, increased levels of crime, forced displacement and disagreeable relations between residents and trail users, as well as various social benefits. This section examines impacts from two broad perspectives: the perceptions and experiences of residents, and the views and experiences of visitors.

Resident perceptions and reactions The majority of research in the recreation and tourism literature undertaken on the social impacts of linear corridors has focused on the rails-to-trails development in the United States (US). This is because of its highly controversial nature since the 1980s and the expansive network of rail-trails throughout the country. While the extant research literature focuses largely on rail-trails, much of what derives from these settings can be generalized to many different kinds of tourist routes. Studies undertaken on some of the USA’s popular rail-trails during the pinnacle of heated debates about American trail development (Kaylen et al., 1993; Moore, Graefe & Gitelson, 1994) revealed a number of concerns by landowners who lived by trails or whose property the trail would bisect (see Table 5.4). According to Kaylen et al.’s (1993) study and several others (e.g. Hedberg, 1989; Parker & Moore, 1998), the biggest fear among adjacent Table 5.4 Landowners’ concerns before the Katy Trail pilot sections opened Opening the trail will result in . . .

Strongly agree

Agree

Unsure/no opinion

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Number of responses

My feeling less safe A decrease in privacy Noise problems Increased thefts Increased harassment of farm animals Increased vandalism on my property Increased trespassing on my property Increased litter on my property Increased potential for liability lawsuits Inadequate trail maintenance Increased potential for fires

16.18 36.76 16.28 19.53 16.00

19.85 29.41 15.50 17.19 11.00

27.94 11.03 34.88 27.34 37

23.53 16.18 24.81 28.13 25

12.50 6.62 8.53 7.81 11

136 136 129 128 100

22.90

19.08

27.48

22.90

7.63

131

36.49

21.89

20.44

17.52

3.65

137

25.56

29.32

21.05

20.30

3.76

133

34.33

24.63

20.14

17.91

2.98

134

25.93

22.22

27.41

20.74

3.70

135

24.43

16.03

27.48

29

3.05

131

Source: After Kaylen et al. (1993: 284).

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

143

residents was a loss of privacy, followed closely by personal liability in case trail users were injured on landowners’ property, trespassing, litter and waste, and the potential for unmaintained corridors near their homes. Other important concerns included intensified noise, harassment of farm animals, hikers leaving gates open, overcrowding, alcohol and drug consumption, vandalism, theft and increases in other crimes (Forsberg, 1995; Hedberg, 1989; Hill, 1997; Hiss, 1997; Hornby & Sheate, 2001; Kaylen et al., 1993; Parker & Moore, 1998; Wright, 1997). Similar concerns have been voiced in other parts of the world as trails have been proposed and developed in various destinations (Reffay, 1980). Kaylen et al. (1993) surmised that part of people’s concerns might derive from their observations of, and experiences with, how vandals and trespassers abused the lines when they functioned as railways, canals or other utilitarian corridors. Many people are apprehensive about supporting trails because of the excess pressures their use might put on the countryside. Hornby and Sheate (2001) note that rural areas are already under considerable pressure to provide food and industrial products for growing urban populations. The added stress of increased recreation and tourism, they suggest, could cross a threshold of sustainability or limits of use. The rural ‘idyll’ dictates that the countryside ought to be used for quieter purposes and that increased use of trails would diminish the favorable vision so many people have of the countryside. Another significant fear voiced by many local residents during the 1980s and 1990s was a perceived decrease in property values as a result of increased visitation, excess crowding, vandalism and crime (Kaylen et al., 1993). Nonetheless, as the economic impact section illustrates later, this concern has since been largely alleviated, and the existence of trails and other greenways has proved the opposite to be true (Crompton, 2001). The reactions of local residents toward footpath and trail development can take many forms, ranging from silent protests to outright physical violence. Among the most common responses is petitioning elected representatives to help curtail planning and development efforts. As well, vocal opponents can be loud enough and numerous enough to frustrate planning efforts with a vote at public hearings or by public protest (Hedberg, 1989; Parker & Moore, 1998). Another tactic, albeit more physical and dangerous, is the blockading of emerging and potential corridors. The Katy Trail in Missouri, USA, sparked a widespread controversy known as the Katy Wars, where protestors constructed fences and dumped mounds of dirt and debris with bulldozers along the right of way to impede progress. Railroad ties were stolen and several old railroad bridges were burned (Mills, 1990: 146). Others have resorted to demolishing trail beds with heavy machinery or dynamite (Hedberg, 1989). Local conservation groups and preservation-minded individuals have also responded with trepidation about the development of routes and trails.

144

Tour ism and Trail s

Their fear has been primarily based on the potential ecological impacts of trails in wilderness and other rural areas. According to Lambrecht (1999: 17), ‘the explosive growth of horseback riding on trails . . . has provoked conservationists, who say their human companions are spoiling lands where people commonly gather and threatening even more sensitive tracks supposedly off limits’. By the same token, the closure of public lands to offroad vehicles and horses often results in confrontations between land management agencies and the local horse industry and mountain bike enthusiasts (Lambrecht, 1999). In spite of their initial concerns, research has shown that once trail development occurs, few of the residents’ apprehensions materialize (Hedberg, 1989; Kaylen et al., 1993). After sufficient time has passed, anxieties begin to alleviate, and they typically begin to support the trails, even using them for their own leisure pursuits. Parker and Moore (1998) found that nearby landowners who had used a trail tended to look at it more favorably, and some of the people who had initially opposed it become trail supporters. As Table 5.5 illustrates, the percentage of people whose concerns have subsided a couple of years after the Katy Trail was established grew considerably, suggesting that the trail was not as negative as some opponents thought it would be. While there was positive change for every issue, there were still some concerns related to safety, noise and animal harassment. Something rarely considered in the research literature but which is nevertheless very important is how people in the less-developed world perceive trails and their use. Although trail-based trekking in Nepal has improved a great deal in recent years from ecological and social perspectives, its incipient stage during the 1980s and 1990s raised some important socio-economic Table 5.5 Changes in landowners’ attitudes

Safety Privacy Noise Theft Animals Vandalism Trespass Litter Liability Maintenance Fire

N

Positive change

Negative change

Significance level

124 126 116 112 89 113 125 123 122 120 117

23 29 27 40 19 41 39 42 24 43 35

20 14 19 14 10 10 12 14 9 12 13

0.38 0.02 0.15 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00

Source: After Kaylen et al. (1993: 287).

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

145

questions that are likely to be faced by other less-developed regions as they begin to build and promote route-based tourism. Stevens (1988) noted that, initially so few people benefited from trekking in the Nepalese Himalaya that the social costs far outweighed the economic benefits tourism brought into villages and rural areas. The disturbances to daily life, food shortages for locals as tourists’ food demands outweighed those of residents, and inflated land values made buying garden plots virtually impossible for people who lived near the trails. While this situation has improved dramatically in Nepal, it still exists in many places throughout the world where trekking tourism still rarely benefits local residents. This is because tourists and their guides frequently bring food and lodging (i.e. tents) with them and therefore no longer rely on local suppliers, or they rely on non-local purveyors. This can effectively emphasize existing social stratification within traditional societies and underscore existing socio-economic disparities (Arellano, 2011; Shackley, 1996).

Trail user perceptions and reactions Chapter 4 examined many of the constraints to trail use perceived by potential users. Some of these can also be seen from the viewpoint of the social impacts of route-based tourism and recreation. Most negative impacts from the perspective of trail users can be attributed to one or more of the following conditions: overcrowding, tranquility disturbed by others, the misbehavior of other corridor consumers, or concerns over physical deterioration. Overcrowding is a common concern among trail enthusiasts and was mentioned in the last chapter as a constraint to outdoor recreation participation. Social carrying capacity is an important factor that many people consider when selecting a path to hike during a leisure outing (Dolesh, 2004b; Lawson et al., 2003). For many people, crowding affects their experience negatively, and no other positive features can counteract the crowding factor (Jones, 2001). In congested situations people might feel claustrophobic, or that seeing too many participants is aesthetically unpleasant (McQuaid-Cook, 1978). Footpaths, bridleways and hiking trails are not the only corridors that suffer from the impacts of crowding. Scenic automobile routes are also very crowded during high season, perhaps more so than nature or cultural trails. This is such a deterrent to some people that they will exhibit avoidance behavior by altering their routes to avoid times and places that are most crowded (Shailes et al., 2001). According to a study by Hallo and Manning (2011), the two most frequently cited responses to what travelers liked least about the Ocean Drive scenic road in Maine, USA, were crowds/ traffic and the related result: a lack of parking. The causes of these perceptions were primarily cars and larger recreational vehicles (RVs), with motorcycles also being a contributor to perceptions of crowding. Kearsley and Coughlan (1999) in their research on crowding on New Zealand’s Great Walks, observed that reactions to too many encounters resulted in people becoming dissatisfied with the trip, deciding to go elsewhere next time,

146

Tour ism and Trail s

revaluating their perceptions of the track or practicing coping strategies such as avoiding other trampers, crowded huts or either camping or actively seeking secluded spots. Closely connected to crowding is the notion of people’s quietude being interrupted by other users (Beeton, 1999a, 1999b; Dolesh, 2004b; Greenleaf et al., 1984). For many people the idyllic settings of ecotrails or other backwoods tracks should be devoid of humans, except for them, and they favor wildland trails because people are more dispersed, resulting in fewer contacts with others (Hammitt & Patterson, 1993). Dolesh (2004b: 59) observed, ‘there are some people who refuse to share the trail . . . a very small percentage thinks their use of the trail is better than yours’. Of horseback riders, Ruff and Mellors (1993: 105) declared ‘walkers and horse riders who come into contact with mountain bikers felt annoyance at the uses of what they regard as their recreation area’. For some people, encountering other parties is severely distracting, but this appears to be especially so at campsites. They are thus better able to deal with crowded trails than they are with overcrowded campsites (Hammitt & Patterson, 1993). When users set out to find solitude in nature, encounters with others can be upsetting or disturbing. This includes incursions with non-humans, as one study from southern Utah noted how seasonal cattle grazing along scenic byways affected drivers’ experiences negatively because they detracted from the natural look of the meadows (Clay & Daniel, 2000). Research shows that path users are typically comfortable meeting their ‘own kind’ on trails (Goeft, 2000; Landsberg et al., 2001), but they tend to feel acrimony toward other users, particularly faster or more mechanized travelers in urban and suburban areas, where trail conflicts are more commonplace (Jacoby, 1990). Hikers often report being annoyed by horses, bikers or ATV (all terrain vehicle) riders (Dolesh, 2004b; Ravenscroft & Long, 1994). The issue of noise and quietude, previously mentioned, is examined in the following case study of the Great Walks of New Zealand, where it is important to be able to determine what percentage of noise noticed is translated into being bothered by that noise, and what social impact that has on recreationist and tourist experience with peripheral wilderness settings.

Case Study: Noise Impact on the Great Walks of New Zealand At the beginning of this case study, it is important to distinguish noise effects from noise impacts; the former are the sounds generated, whereas the latter can be considered any specifically negative outcomes. From a social perspective, social impacts of noise do not relate to the occurrence of noise events, but rather the meanings and associations people attribute

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

147

to those noises. They often go beyond being just annoyed, and are commonly related to perceptions of three things: (1) natural quiet; (2) visitor enjoyment; and (3) safety concerns (Cessford, 2000). First, natural quiet refers to the natural ambient conditions and sounds of nature. Second, visitor enjoyment can often be impeded by noise intrusion, and this is often the case where people value and define their recreation experience differently, and where they may differ in their perceptions of what are acceptable experience conditions. An example of this would be that the motivations and goals of snowmobilers and cross-country skiers differ, and it is more than a difference between motorized and non-motorized forms of recreational activity (Jackson & Wong, 1982). Third, to some (e.g. motorized vehicle to a non-motorized user) noise can relate to the perception of a hazard that impacts their experience, whereas to others (e.g. mountain bikers) the lack of noise can also be a hazard if they do not hear who is coming from behind. Cessford (2000) categorized noise effects that can generate social impacts into four categories: (1) external non-recreational noise intrusions (e.g. machinery use); (2) external recreational noise intrusions (e.g. sightseeing aircraft); (3) onsite interactivity noise intrusions (e.g. people sharing settings for different recreation activities, such as cross-country skiing versus snowmobiling); and (4) onsite intra-activity noise intrusions (e.g. social behavior of some people along trails, at huts, campsites and picnic areas). He applied this typology to multi-case surveys across the Great Walks in New Zealand (see a previous case study in Chapter 3), often recognized as the ‘the front of the backcountry’. Five thousand visitors were sampled and asked about social impacts, including those associated with recreational noise. The extent to which recreational noise effects impacted their level of enjoyment was measured using an awareness/annoyance response scale that measured from one to four as shown in Figure 5.6. Thirty-eight distinct noise-effects were identified; 11 were aircraftrelated, eight were motorboat-related, 10 were related to social noise in

I did not experience this impact (1)

This impact did not bother me (2)

This impact bothered me a little (3)

This impact bothered me a lot (4)

(noticed noise) (bothered by noise)

Figure 5.6 The social effects of recreational noise Source: After Cessford (2000).

(Continued)

148

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Noise Impact on the Great Walks of New Zealand (Continued) huts, and nine were social noise-related at campsites (Cessford, 2000). Awareness (the percentage noticing noise) was plotted against annoyance (percentage bothered) for all 38 cases across the Great Walks and this, not surprisingly, revealed that as awareness of noise increased, the level of annoyance felt by visitors also increased. Cessford’s findings also revealed that the proportion of annoyance among people noticing noise also increased at a faster rate (i.e. when 30% of visitors noticed noise, 10% were also bothered by it; whereas when 80% noticed noise, 40% were bothered by it). Of the 38 cases, nine were reported to have annoyance levels of above 25% and two cases were found in which the annoyance level was above 50%. Table 5.6 charts those nine cases, noting both the issue involved and the noise source.

Table 5.6 Noise impact cases above the 25% threshold Case

Site

Issue

Source

38

Milford Track

35

Abel Tasman Coast

External recreational External recreational

36

Wanganui River Abel Tasman Coast

Aircraft scenic flights bothered 69% of track hikers (91% noticed) Recreation boats on the water or at beaches bothered 53% of sea-kayakers (74% noticed) Recreation boats on the river bothered 34% of canoeists (75% noticed) Recreation boats near huts and campsites bothered 33% of sea-kayakers (55 noticed) Other people in huts bothered 33% of hikers (81% noticed) Aircraft scenic flights bothered 32% of hikers (63% noticed) Recreation boats on the water or at beaches bothered 30% of hikers (58% noticed) Other people in huts bothered 30% of hikers (51% noticed) Other people in huts bothered 25% of walkers (57% noticed)

30

37

Milford Track

34

Routeburn Track Abel Tasman Track

33

26

Kepler Track

31

Abel Tasman Track

Source: Based on Cessford (2000: 74).

External recreational External recreational Intra-activity External recreational External recreational Intra-activity Intra-activity

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

149

Although this chapter does not directly address the management of impacts associated with trails, by plotting awareness over annoyance and identifying cases where annoyance exceeded 25%, managers can institute specific noise management strategies for specific trails, or sections of trails. Cessford (2000) talked of managed separation (move those affected away from the activities that create the noise), reduced noise effect at sites, and improved visitor expectations by informing them of anticipated noises and level of noise at different sites and times.

The third condition is brought on when trail users misbehave or when some users perceive others to misbehave. For the most part, trails, footpaths, and other routes have rules of etiquette, such as yielding to others, leaving no trace, avoiding shortcuts, closing gates, controlling bicycles or horses, and not spooking animals. Following the rules is very important in producing satisfying experiences for everyone (Hendricks et al., 2001; Hornby & Sheate, 2001; Schuett, 1997). Hikers have a tendency to feel more animosity toward mountain bikers than bikers do toward hikers (Chavez, 1997), and research shows the same in the winter context with skiers harboring negative feelings toward snowboarders and snowmobilers (Thapa & Graefe, 2003; Vail & Heldt, 2004). This is a result of hikers and skiers perceiving bikers and snowboarders to be rule breakers, loud, risky and otherwise inconsiderate users (Carothers et al., 2001; Thapa & Graefe, 2003). Likewise, people walking dogs are sometimes viewed unfavorably by other trail users because of concerns over dogs defecating on the trail, running loose or causing accidents (Francis, 1992). Table 5.7 reports the findings of a study by Carothers et al. (2001) on bad behavior and suggests that there was overall less incompatible behavior among hikers than there was among mountain bikers. Hikers claimed to witness far less unscrupulous behavior by other hikers than they did by mountain bikers. Interestingly, however, bikers claimed to observe worse behavior among other cyclists than they did among hikers. The fourth condition occurs when trail consumers perceive the negative physical deterioration of trails and their surrounds. Use impacts have considerable negative effects on recreationists’ experiences and cause a high degree of consternation. These impacts include, but are not limited to, wear and tear and things left behind by visitors, porters and guides, such as litter and other solid waste (e.g. plastic bottles and bags, tin cans, glass and paper), excrement, fire remnants, damaged vegetation, and vandalism to bedrock and heritage structures (Kuniyal, 2005; McQuaid-Cook, 1978). However, in some places, trails are damaged as much by lodges, hotels and food service

150

Tour ism and Trail s

Table 5.7 Observed behavioral events on Jefferson County open space trails Event

Hikers (n = 210)

Dual-sport users (n = 400)

Mountain bikers (n = 163)

Rude and discourteous Not yielding the right of way Passing too closely No warning on approach Evaluation of mountain bikers

30 34 26 45

54 54 47 58

49 53 39 50

Riding out of control Riding too fast Rude and discourteous Not yielding the right of way Passing too closely No warning on approach

58 69 48 60 64 71

71 74 59 68 70 74

60 62 52 64 67 67

Evaluation of hikers

Source: After Carothers et al. (2001: 53).

establishments as they are directly by tourists. While conditions have changed substantially since the early days of trekking in Nepal, in the early years of its growing popularity, it was not uncommon for lodge and food stall owners to dispose of unwanted material near hiking trails (Basnet, 1993). Even today, some areas in the Himalayas suffer from stallkeepers, who sell cold drinks, mineral water and food to tourists, throwing waste around the trailside stalls (Kuniyal & Jain, 1999). All of these factors affect people’s trail experiences by degrading the aesthetic appeal, raising safety concerns and hindering access (Marion & Leung, 2001) Lynn and Brown (2003) studied the effects of various trail impacts on people’s environmental perceptions and experiences. Garbage, damage to vegetation and fire rings led to the most disturbing and uncomfortable footpath experiences, followed distantly by trail widening, erosion and muddiness. These aforementioned conditions can and often do result in avoidance behavior (Kearsley & Coughlan, 1999) or conflict between kinds of trail participants, which is a widespread concern on all sorts of routes and in all locations (Huber, 1994). User-to-user conflicts occur in a variety of circumstances. Walkers and hikers tend to complain the most when they encounter mountain bikes, horses or motorized vehicles, in some cases, as noted above, because it breaks their solitude (Morey et al., 2002). As well, horses are sometimes seen as environmentally careless, especially when non-riders encounter equine dung on or near a pathway (Beeton, 1999a, 1999b). In wilderness and rural settings most studies point to mountain bikes as the main trail

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

151

offenders, overwhelmingly because they are dangerous (Schuett, 1997), but motorized versus non-motorized use is at the core of most user-to-user conflicts (Dolesh, 2004b). Equestrians complain that cyclists are among the rudest and riskiest users, since they often approach riders from behind without courtesy warnings, frightening the horses in the process (Dolesh, 2004b; Schuett, 1997). Interestingly, a study by Beeton (1999b: 211) found that some people who had negative attitudes toward horseback riders had not actually ever encountered any themselves. Similarly, Dolesh (2004b: 58) noted that ‘no actual contact between user needs to occur for conflict to be perceived’.

Social benefits There are many tangible and intangible benefits of trails for their surrounding communities and for out-of-town visitors who make use of them (Lipscombe & Geddis, 2000). Many of these benefits are social in nature, and communities are beginning to understand that the social benefits of pathways and routes can be as important as economic benefits are for communities (Bowers, 2000). Most of the social advantages of trails fit within the broader notion of enhanced quality of life. From a leisure and tourism perspective, quality of life (QOL) is defined in many ways but typically includes elements of health and fitness, aesthetic environments, availability of open space and recreational opportunities, community pride and empowerment, education, freedom to travel, and group cohesion and solidarity (Iles & Wiele, 1993; Phillips & Budruk, 2011). QOL indicators are notably important in the trail context, both for residents and visitors. In a study undertaken by the US National Park Service, the QOL indicators noted above were found to be among the highest benefits of trail use (Iles & Wiele, 1993: 27). For visitors these elements are extremely important, but they are even more so for local residents, because they are characteristic of their home areas. Trails as instruments for QOL enhancement are sometimes used by communities to entice large corporations or other businesses to locate within their boundaries, citing the aesthetic, health and leisure benefits of these linear corridors for potential new employees. The companies then use the same tactics to entice skilled workers to relocate to towns and cities with solid trail networks. With trails often comes the establishment of cycling clubs, birdwatching societies and other such organizations that create a more hometown ambience for places. Thus, trails are assets for attracting newcomers, as they create images of solitude, health, safety and public pride (Betz et al., 2003; Villa, 2001). As noted above and in Chapter 3, physical fitness is a significant outcome of trail use and one of the main motives for people utilizing ecotrails, urban greenbelts and rural footpaths or bridleways (Iles & Wiele, 1993; Moore & Driver, 2005; Moore & Shafer, 2001; Seward, 2001; Sheppard, 2004). Many

152

Tour ism and Trail s

trails promote health directly, such as the Trails for Health Program in the US (Reid, 1983; Dolesh, 2004a), and indirectly via additional outdoor recreation opportunities (Moore & Driver, 2005). Besides their exercise functions, rural and suburban trails can also provide opportunities for participants to breathe cleaner air than they might otherwise do in urban situations (Gibson, 1999). Relatedly, in bypassing city traffic congestion, trails provide safe transportation corridors to work or school, which intensifies the added value of health and safety within a community (Gibson, 1999; Gangewere, 1992; Iles & Wiele, 1993). As noted in Chapter 2, one of the main purposes of cultural corridors is to help build community identity, solidarity and sense of place. This occurs in many forms and is one of the most salient social benefits of trail-based recreation and tourism. Trails can help preserve and celebrate a community’s cultural heritage. Beeton (1999b) noted that for some trail users, seeing horses on Australian trails can be very nostalgic, because the horse and rider are so much a part of the traditional national psyche of Australia’s Outback. Rail-trails help preserve the local history, particularly that of the railroad and industrial past, and the fact that they pass historic buildings (e.g. railway stations, stadiums, factories and monuments) helps congeal local heritage identities (Gangewere, 1992). The conservation elements of paths and trails help visitors appreciate the place they are visiting, but they also help the nearby residents value their own patrimony. They provide educational opportunities and thereby help people appreciate local cultural and natural environments and contribute to their preservation. Pride in local heritage helps unite people for the cause of protection and builds solidarity among people who share a common past (Gonzáles & Medina, 2003; Timothy & Boyd, 2003; Timothy, 2011a). Gangewere (1992: 32) notes that rail-trails have the potential to help people ‘put down local roots in their surrounding landscapes and draw spiritual nourishment from it, helping us to grow into more careful and responsible stewards of the land’. By protecting and emphasizing local heritage, trails, Gangewere argues, can help deepen a sense of place among destination residents. Access is another important social benefit of trails. Not only do trails provide access to gardens and parks, they also afford a right of way to the broader countryside (Hornby & Sheate, 2001). Without paths and trails, the use of archaeological sites, urban parks, national monuments and historic city centers would be nearly impossible. Access is also important for host communities in tourist destinations, not just visitors. Cohen (1982) noted how the development of wilderness trekking paths in Thailand was crucial to opening remote tribal villages to the outside world. While increased access to the tribes has resulted in some negative social repercussions (Dearden & Harron, 1994), it has also created jobs and has had other positive moderating social effects for the ethnic minorities of Thailand (Ishii, 2012).

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

153

A final social benefit is quality time spent with friends and family. People often use greenways and trails with loved ones, reinforcing familial and friendship bonds. Moore and Shafer (2001) found that developing and maintaining social relationships is a cherished social benefit of trail use that fosters a sense of solidarity and creates positive emotional responses.

Economic impacts Routes and trails are important tourism resources, and many communities use them to develop their tourist images and their tourism economies. Numerous commentators over the years have illustrated the positive economic impacts of route-based recreation and tourism (Betz et al., 2003; Gibson, 1999; Lumsdon, 1996; Meschik, 2012; Moore & Shafer, 2001; Notaro & de Salvo, 2009; Rogerson, 2002, 2007; Schutt, 1998; Siderelis & Moore, 1995; Spacil, 1985; Strauss & Lord, 2001; Wandres, 2000). On an individual basis it might seem that the majority of the world’s paths and routes do not generate much economic impact directly, because the majority of trails are remote and their users are so widely dispersed. As well, many trail users spend relatively little money on an individual basis (Wessell, 1997), yet aggregate trail use generates billions of dollars each year for the global economy from direct and indirect expenditures, as well as through related multipliers. Although developing trails is expensive, the return on investment in most cases appears to be worthwhile. Regarding the Path of Progress heritage trail in Pennsylvania (USA), Strauss and Lord (2001) estimated that the return on the $88 million the trail cost to develop had, until that point, returned almost $300 million into the Pennsylvania economy. In the broadest sense, the economics of trail-based tourism and recreation can be understood from two perspectives. First, the establishment and development of trails generates economic benefits in several ways. While the remotest wilderness trails require little capital outlay, urban and suburban trails (including rail-trails), site-specific paths (e.g. at outdoor museums and in parks), less-remote hiking trails and scenic byways have capital investment requirements. These include monies for construction equipment and materials, human resource costs, land purchase and preparation, plan development and interpretation/trail design materials. Second, once a route or trail is established and operational, the expenditures of trail users continue to generate economic impacts in a variety of ways (Ndlovu & Rogerson, 2003). These include regional income and job creation in corridor maintenance, interpretive centers, accessory rentals along the way or near trail heads and shops, eateries and other commercial enterprises along routes and trails. As well, trails and greenways are frequently used as backdrops for wedding photos and television production companies, both of which can bring in additional money to communities and support more jobs (Iles & Wiele, 1993).

154

Tour ism and Trail s

There are four broad types of trail-related income for trail managers and the regions that host them: grants, donations, user fees and ancillary visitor spending. Since the earliest days of purposive trail development, grants and other sources of extramural funding have been available at differing degrees from different agencies and organizations. In the case of the North Sea Cycle Route, funding was granted by the European Union’s Interreg Programme, because the route met the requirements of the program’s aim of inter-regional cooperation with an economic development focus (Lumsdon et al., 2004). Similarly, the establishment of England’s Coast to Coast Cycle Route was funded primarily by grants from the National Lottery (Cope et al., 1998). Most trails are owned and/or operated by public agencies (e.g. parks services or cultural ministries) or non-profit organizations (e.g. Rails-toTrails Conservancy). As such, monetary and in-kind donations are extremely important for day-to-day operations. Endowments, gifts and sponsorships are among the most valuable income sources for trail organizations. Donations by philanthropic individuals and organizations help maintain scenic corridors, employ staff and update interpretive media. As well, volunteer services are highly valued because they help keep staffing and maintenance costs down. In the US, it is common to see sections of highways and trails ‘sponsored’ by certain community groups and families, who agree to keep the waysides clean as part of adopt-a-highway or adopt-a-trail programs (Clark, 1989; de Leon & Rivera, 2010; Wells & White, 1995). Most trails throughout the world are open access and free of charge. However, some corridors require user fees, such as the famous Slickrock Bike Trail in Moab, Utah (USA) (Fix & Loomis, 1997), and others on public and private land. Levied fees are another important income source for agencies to be able to maintain the pathways and improve their education values. Willingness to pay studies are common in the recreational context to determine the latent value of certain recreational experiences (Lee et al., 2013). A fees study of Ridgeway National Trail in England found that pathway users would have been willing to pay on average £1.24 per visit, which at the time of the study translated into an aggregate annual benefit of £186,000, plus an additional benefit of approximately £800,000 to the local economy from visitor spending (Bennett et al., 2003). Rail-trails have also been found to have economic value, with many people being willing to pay user fees to access them (Betz et al., 2003). Ancillary spending by trail recreationists and tourists injects significant sums of money into local economies. They spend money getting to the trailheads, stay in local accommodations, dine in local restaurants or purchase comestibles from supermarkets, and rent equipment along the way. Tourists’ ancillary expenditures will be discussed in greater detail in the sections that follow.

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

155

User expenditures A number of studies have examined different types of trails and their use and how these translate into economic impacts. Different types of trail users have different spending tendencies (Lumsdon et al., 2004; Moore, Gitelson & Graefe, 1994) (see case study of the North Sea Cycle Route below). The most common studies focus on long-distance car routes, rail-trails, cycle routes and sundry others. Mountain bikers are seen as high-value customers who spend a lot of money on equipment at home (hard purchases) and in the destination and trail access, rentals and food and drink (soft purchases) in the destination (Fix & Loomis, 1997). The same is true of winter trail users, who also require considerable capital investments in warm clothing, snow mobiles, ski equipment or snow shoes. According to Bowers’ (2000) study, 15 years ago, snowmobile users in Michigan (USA) bought $235 million of snowmobiling equipment per year. Likewise, serious hikers and equestrians have different economic impacts than casual walkers do (Seward, 2001), but they all contribute to local economic growth. A late 1990s study (Cope et al., 1998) found that users of the Coast to Coast Cycle Bike Route spent twice as much on food and drink as average vacationers and were very inclined to spend the night in serviced accommodations with bed and breakfasts, campsites and youth hostels being the most important. As well, nearly three-quarters of all bed and breakfast owners and hotel managers near the Coast to Coast Bike Route attributed upwards of 25% of their business as coming from route users.

Case Study: Spending Patterns of Cyclists on the North Sea Cycle Route The North Sea Cycle Route (NSCR) is a long-distance cycle trail that circles the North Sea. It is made up of existing national and regional cycle trails in countries bordering the North Sea, including Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, England and Scotland. Launched in 2001, it is one of 12 long-distance biking routes developed across Europe for a combined distance of approximately 6000 km and funded by the European Union INTERREG IIC program. A small section of the trail takes in the coastal region of England between Berwick-uponTweed and Sunderland. Lumsdon et al. (2004) undertook a study of this section of the NSCR to determine levels and patterns of use, as well as user profiles and the level of visitor spending. The latter aspect of their study is of particular interest in this case example. Methods of data capture ranged from installing cycle counters at six survey sites, undertaking intercept (Continued)

156

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Spending Patterns of Cyclists on the North Sea Cycle Route (Continued) surveys at the same six sites and asking interviewees if they were willing to complete a semi-structured travel diary of their journey after the ride was completed. Diaries were used to capture data that allowed an examination of the relationship between duration of travel, type of activity and level of spending in each locality. Three days of intercept surveys were undertaken in August 2001, during which 211 solo riders and groups (410 cyclists combined with a mean group size of 1.99) were interviewed. Findings confirmed that the majority of users (91%) considered themselves recreationists and tourists; only 9% stated that the journey purpose was to travel to work or go shopping. Fifty-eight percent of all journeys are one-day recreational trips, leaving 33% of journeys for tourism purposes, either as short break or touring holidays. Approximately one-third (35%) of the self-completion diaries were mailed back from the 183 participants who agreed to fill in a diary, giving a total of 65 diaries to determine visitor expenditure on the route. The diaries determined that 40 were day trippers only. Spending determinants on the NSCR were found to be duration, income and group size. Table 5.8 reveals that user expenditures were relatively modest, but predictably that average spending was higher the Table 5.8 Spending patterns of cyclists on the north-east England section of the North Sea Cycle Route Mean spending per group (average of 2 per group) Day

Accommodation

Food/ drink

Gifts

Car costs

Cycle costs

Public transport

Other

Day 1 (65 diaries) Day 2 (25 diaries) Day 3 (19 diaries) Day 4 (9 diaries) Day 5 (6 diaries)

£17.12

£14.55

£1.10

£3.20

0.46p

0.21p

£1.80

£22.12

£27.12

0.40p

0.68p

£1.48

£1.76

£4.36

£10.36

£17.56

0.44p

0.40p

0.48p

0.40p

£2.20

£3.00

£5.24

0.40p

0.80p

Nil

Nil

£1.00

£3.68

£4.76

£2.76

Nil

Nil

0.16p

£1.36

Source: Based on Lumsdon et al. (2004).

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

157

longer the duration of the trip. They found that spending was linked to group size, given that increased group sizes were associated with longer trips, and hence more spending. Their study also noted that expenditures are positively dependent on group income.

Car-based route travel is a beneficial form of tourism. Scenic byways and other long-distance routes have salient economic implications because they encompass many nodes, take longer to finish and generally require more enroute expenditures, such as gasoline and food. Sipes et al. (1997) recapped the economic implications of two scenic byways studies. In Oregon, automobilebased scenic corridor travelers spent upwards of $81 million per year in the 1990s. In Iowa, car route parties spent an average of $105.50 per day, with one-third of the expenditures going to shopping, $24.80 spent on lodging, and $24.20 on food and beverages (Sipes et al., 1997). Cycle route-based travel is also a lucrative form of tourism for destination areas and especially important for rural economies (Lumsdon, 1996, 2000). According to a recent study by the European Cyclists’ Federation (2013b), a visiting cyclist spends on average £25 each day on local food and services, compared to only £7.30 for a car-based visitor. The Federation’s analysis suggests cyclists spend more per person per day because they are unable to carry with them all the supplies they will need, whereas car travelers can bring with them the food, snacks and drinks they will consume during the day. The study also suggests that the exercise involved in cycling makes riders hungrier and thirstier than car travelers, resulting in higher expenditures for refreshments. Cope et al. (1998: 211) estimated that the National Cycle Network in the UK had until 1997 contributed £350 million in direct spending and upwards of 5000 jobs in network-related services, with average annual earnings between £1.07 and £1.85 million. When it comes to some larger trails, economic expenditure is considerable (see the case study on the D&L Trail below).

Case Study: Economic Expenditure on the D&L Trail, Pennsylvania, USA The D&L Trail was used in the last chapter as a case study to show some of the demographic trends associated with a rail-trail. It is used again here to illustrate some of the direct economic impacts that can accrue to areas with trails. The D&L, which follows the remnants of the Lehigh and Delaware canals in Pennsylvania (USA), saw an estimated 282,796 (Continued)

158

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Economic Expenditure on the D&L Trail, Pennsylvania, USA (Continued) user visits in 2012. The Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2012) appraised the value of this visitation in direct spending at approximately $19 million, of which $16.4 million was believed to have been injected directly into the local economy (see Table 5.9). Expenditures included hard purchases (e.g. equipment) and soft purchases (e.g. rentals, snacks, food). On average, users spent $425.12 on hard purchases in 2012 and $33.49 in soft items. The hard goods estimate takes into account that equipment might last up to 10 years and not have to be replaced every year. The average life of a hard good was estimated to be six years, which was factored into the annual estimate of hard goods expenditures (Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, 2012). In the same study, the average number of nights spent by overnight visitors was 2.2, with average expenditures per night being $132.36 (see Table 5.9) in a fairly wide variety of lodging facilities (see Table 5.10). Using the D&L Trail influenced three quarters of users to spend money on hard items, particularly equipment that would help them enjoy their experience more. The most often-stated purchase was for Table 5.9 Annual use and expenditure estimates for the D&L Trail Category

% usage

Average expenditure $

Total estimated expenditure $

Hard goods/equipment Soft goods Accommodations

77.4 73.6 11.4

425.12 33.49 132.36

2,171,720 6,970,537 9,387,664

Source: Compiled from Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2012).

Table 5.10 Lodging choice of multi-day users on the D&L Trail If you spent the night during your trail experience, which type of lodging did you use?

One response %

Motel/hotel Bed and breakfast Home of friend or relative Campground Other

29.8 19.4 21.0 20.2 9.7

Source: Compiled from Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2012).

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

159

bicycle supplies, followed by shoes and clothing (Table 5.11). Their main soft purchases consisted of beverages, restaurant meals, snacks and sandwiches (Table 5.12). Table 5.11 Use of the D&L Trail influenced people’s equipment purchases Which of the following has your use of D&L Trail influenced you to purchase?

Check all that apply %

Bicycle Bicycle supplies Auto accessories Running/walking/hiking shoes Clothing Nothing

0.7 20.2 3.9 17.1 15.6 22.6

Source: Compiled from Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2012).

Table 5.12 Purchases of ‘soft goods’ while using the D&L Trail In relation to your most recent visit to the trail, which items did you purchase? Beverages Candy/snacks Sandwiches Ice cream Restaurant meals along the trail Bicycle rental Other None of these

Check all that apply % 21.3 11.8 8.1 5.6 18.2 6.7 2.0 26.4

Source: Compiled from Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2012).

In a study that projected the financial justification for establishing another rail-trail in the US state of Georgia, Betz et al. (2003) approximated that, based on a contingent trip model, rail-trails could earn in excess of $7.5 million per year directly and indirectly with average expenditures being between $18.46 and $29.23 per user. Cook (2008) similarly estimated that the Thorsborne Trail in Australia generates some AUS$300 of regional earnings per user each year. All of these expenditures stimulate entrepreneurialism and job growth in the services sector. Getting people to think outside the normative box and become creative in developing and maintaining small-scale enterprises is a

160

Tour ism and Trail s

significant outcome of trail tourism. The existence of old trails or the creation of new trails stimulates investments in related services, including bed and breakfasts, campgrounds, catering facilities, bicycle repair shops and recreation corridor-related rental enterprises (e.g. skates, skis, snowshoes, canoes) (Bowers, 2000; Cope et al., 1998; Hedberg, 1989; Hill, 1997; Kelemen, 1994; Mills, 1990; Spencer et al., 1999). Bjønness (1982) illustrated how trail trekking in the Himalayas caused local people to conceive of ways to earn a living from the burgeoning tourism industry in Nepal in the 1980s, including selling firewood, food and guiding services. With augmented entrepreneurial activity and increased visitor spending comes employment growth. In a Canadian study, Bowick (2003: 25) found that the Bruce Trail was responsible for generating 1150 jobs directly in the province of Ontario. Some trails were created specifically to generate jobs for local residents. Put together in the late 1980s, the ecotourism trail around Punta Gorda, Belize, was a planned mechanism to create jobs as guides, rangers, artisans and service providers for the indigenous Mayas, who had long been on the economic margins of Belize (Boucher, 1990; Timothy & White, 1999).

Indirect economic effects Aside from the direct effects of trail user expenditures noted above, there are several economics-related benefits that can accrue to a destination in the long term as well. For instance, water trails, hiking trails, nature footpaths, wine routes, bridleways, scenic byways and other linear resources can help diversify local and regional economies by providing additional tourism resources and attractions (Lemberg, 2004) and by enlivening regional images, creating tourism brands and creating marketable networks. Routes and trails link similar sites together into networks of attractions whose collective strength and visibility are larger than the sum of each business location functioning on its own. Brunori and Rossi (2000: 413) call this the synergy effect, wherein businesses ‘simply benefit from the general growth of competitiveness in the area that comes with the creation of the. . . route’. The benefits are particularly unmistakable in the realm of themed cultural and food routes. Wine routes, ale and whiskey trails, food trails and architectural routes require a critical mass of operations to be successful. The linear ‘clustering’ of wineries, museums, food shops, markets and farms into wine circuits strengthens each component enterprise, creating a corpus of sites that appeal to food and wine enthusiasts and which can be marketed together for more impactful promotions (Plummer et al., 2005). At a micro scale, purposive trails help individual businesses diversify their bottom line by increasing profitability on existing operations and unlocking new opportunities for growth as they bring new consumers into a region and increase awareness of customer needs (Brunori & Rossi, 2000: 413).

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

161

For instance, wine and food routes can help wineries and farms increase earnings beyond selling their wines and foodstuffs through traditional distribution channels in two primary ways. First, food trails can help an enterprise increase its income through direct sales (Nowers et al., 2002). People stopping by a cheese plant, a winery or an olive farm are inclined to purchase products on-site for freshness and as markers of having been at the original source (Swanson & Timothy, 2012). Second, participating in a planned route can help farmers or winemakers secure additional economic opportunities, such as u-pick activities, farmstays, picnics and hosting special events and conferences (Brunori & Rossi, 2000; Nowers et al., 2002). These purposive routes are also important because they can result in additional product purchases at a later date. On food and beverage trails, people will sample various regional products and decide to buy them later in their home markets or on the internet (Nowers et al., 2002; Plummer et al., 2005). People utilizing literary trails might end up purchasing more books by a particular author or cinema tickets for movies based upon landscapes they visited. Thus, many trails and routes can be seen as conversion tools to get people to purchase additional products based upon their exposure to destinations and linked corridors. Trail networks are especially important in rural and isolated contexts, where the poorest populations are often located. Because of their linear nature and their abilities to connect urban and rural areas, villages with other villages, or city neighborhoods with one another, their use has considerable potential to distribute tourism earnings and employment to smaller towns and villages, and to the poorer regions of a country (Busby, 1996; Lumsdon et al., 2004; Ndlovu & Rogerson, 2003; Wessell, 1997). Just as route-based tourism can help regenerate the physical fabric of older cities, as noted earlier, it can also help rejuvenate declining economies in industrial and post-industrial cities. Lemberg (2004) highlights the potential for waterways to reinvigorate central city economies in areas where central business districts and industrial centers are located adjacent to rivers and lakeshores. The same is true for greenways and other urban footpaths that run through older industrial areas. The tourism activities associated with trails can stimulate direct and indirect service employment to replace some of the jobs lost to deindustrialization. As noted earlier, some people who live adjacent to disused railways fear that the construction of rail-trails on or near their properties will decrease their real estate values. This has been shown not to be the case in most instances (Lemberg, 2004; Mills, 1990). On the contrary, strong evidence suggests that trails enhance property values for individual landholders and entire communities because of the improved image associated with places that care about the environment, health and heritage. In fact, proximity to trails is frequently used as a valuable selling point in property listings, with trailside positions often being considered the most desirable locations

162

Tour ism and Trail s

(Iles & Wiele, 1993; Kulshreshtha & Gillies, 1993; Wandres, 2000). Home buyers have indicated that having trails in their area was a deciding factor in their home purchase decision (Bowers, 2000: 22). The tranquility, open spaces and scenic views associated with rural and suburban trails have been shown to increase property values dramatically, much the same way proximity to parks and other green spaces has added to property values for years, owing to the notion that designated open spaces ostensibly ‘guarantee’ that no other structures will be built behind or next to the them. Research by Crompton (2001) indicates that while contiguity to trailways can boost real estate values, nearness to trailheads or other access points can augment land rates even more. ‘The enhanced value derives from people’s willingness to pay a larger amount of money for a home located close to these types of areas than they are for a comparable home further away because of the tranquility, peace, and psychological relaxation such vistas often provide’ (Crompton, 2001: 115).

Conclusion This chapter set out to discuss the impacts (costs and benefits) from trail and route recreation and tourism. These impacts can be simply categorized as ecological, social and economic. With respect of ecological outcomes the vast majority of discourse has been on the costs more than the benefits in terms of soil compaction, erosion, vegetation loss, wildlife disturbance and behavior modification, as well as the loss or degradation of parts of the tangible heritage. These negative impacts usually outweigh the positive ecological benefits associated with trails and routes, namely conservation, interpretation and education, urban renewal of brownfield linear space and development of urban greenways. Trails and routes have social costs, both in terms of the perceptions and experiences of residents as well as the views and experiences of visitors. Resident perceptions on trails and routes has often been to take a NIMBY (not in my backyard) approach because of their expectation of loss of privacy, personal liability for recreationists injured on their land, lower property values, crowding, vandalism and crime, perceptions that have often been followed up with overt and deliberate actions against trail and route planning and construction. As for trail consumers (residents and tourists), research reveals that social impacts result from conditions along trails and routes of overcrowding, unacceptable levels of noise and inappropriate behavior, all of which in turn often lead to avoidance behavior. In contrast, trails and routes offer residents and visitors alike many benefits, such as enhancing their quality of life and providing opportunities for bettering their health. Linear spaces can help build community identity and create a sense of place,

Tour ism, Recreat ion and Trail Impac t s

163

preserve local cultural heritage and provide at times a necessary means of access and egress for communities in remote environments. Lastly, the economic costs and benefits of trails have been an area of some discourse which has served as the third element of this chapter, addressing the initial costs of developing trails and routes and the subsequent returns that accrue once they are designed. Much of the latter research has examined user expenditures on trails that vary in both scale and type. Purposive routes have been shown to be indirectly economically valuable, in terms of offering regions a new attraction, themed experiences and linear or circuitous space around which a critical mass can be established to enable the success of local businesses. Two significant results of urban tourism and city heritage routes have been the rejuvenation or gentrification of the built environment and increased property prices in neighborhoods adjacent to trail development. With respect to all three types of impact, the authors have provided detailed case studies throughout this chapter as a way of helping readers to understand the nature of trail-based tourism impacts, both positive and negative. Some of the case studies have alluded to the need for management responses to these impacts, and so it is to the topic of planning and managing trails and routes that attention now turns in the chapter that follows.

6

Planning and Developing Trails and Routes

Introduction This chapter examines the planning and development of trails. Planning and development have received considerable attention in the tourism scholarly literature, the former addressing tourism planning in general (Inskeep, 1991; Hall, 2008; Dredge & Jenkins, 2007), the latter often focused on types of tourism (e.g. Hall & Boyd, 2005) or broad geographic regions (e.g. Sharpley & Telfer, 2008). Much of the literature on trails and routes focuses on how they have been planned and subsequently developed. This chapter provides a critical review of a rather disparate literature on this topic, categorizing the extant literature within three broad areas. First, the chapter addresses how a number of route programs have been planned and developed as a result of government policies, including related legislation. The examples cited are dominated by developed countries. The relative absence of policy analysis and planning documentation within the developing world is perhaps more a reflection that their wider policy actions do not consider routes and trails as part of their wider tourism planning and development strategies. This does not suggest that there are no trail programs in less-developed nations, it simply reflects the dearth of knowledge about such actions and a need to address trail development policies and planning actions more broadly throughout the world. Second, planning and development concepts related to trails and routes are addressed, including planning models and processes, the issue of trail funding, the importance of using volunteers in trail operations and the need to acquire land-use rights. Development thinking that is both participatory and collaborative is addressed. The important issue of ‘theming’ trails is also examined with use of an empirical case study. The third dimension of this chapter is understanding how trails are designed. Here attention is given to the relevance of aspects such as location, 164

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

165

trail hardening/softening, slope consideration/gradient, signage, trail amenities, access and accessibility. A number of case studies are provided to illustrate complexities involved with many of the above trail/route features. Given the geography of many trails, it should not be surprising that most of these trail design aspects take on greater prominence for nature-based as opposed to heritage and culture-based routes, purposive and organic routes.

Route Designation and Related Policies There are hundreds, if not thousands, of trail programs throughout the world that aim to designate, establish, promote and preserve routes and trails. The origins of official trail designation are found in the United States (US), but other parts of the world have rapidly joined the cause. Although trails have always existed since the earliest times of hominid socio-economic activity (e.g. hunting, gathering, transhumance), as noted in the introductory chapter, the world has undergone a significant renaissance since the mid-1900s in developing many trails for many uses. Countless municipal, county, state and national governments, as well as supranational alliances, have begun to develop and promote nature- and culture-based trails by establishing legal mechanisms and programs to facilitate and encourage their development (Antonson & Jacobsen, 2014). This section describes some of the legislative actions, policies and legal implications of trail development in several countries.

European Cultural Routes Programme With the primary aim of exhibiting and protecting Europe’s cultural heritage, the Cultural Routes Programme of the Council of Europe was introduced in 1987 under the auspices of the 1954 European Cultural Convention. The Way of St James to Santiago de Compostela was designated the first European Cultural Route under this program. There are four primary goals of the agenda. The first is to raise awareness of a European cultural identity based on shared values through cultural routes that connect sites that have shaped European identities. Second, the program promotes intercultural dialogue by means of a better understanding of European heritage. Third, it aims to protect European heritage and improve Europeans’ quality of life and socioeconomic development. Finally, it facilitates the development of heritage tourism and enhances its role in sustainable development (Hammond, 2004; Timothy & Saarinen, 2013). Any signatory country of the European Cultural Convention can propose a new trail, but any new proposal must fulfill four main criteria: • •

focus on a theme that represents European values common to several European countries; follow a historical route or propose a newly created route;

166

• •

Tour ism and Trail s

encourage long-term, cross-border cooperation in research, conservation, cultural or education exchanges, contemporary artistic or cultural practices and sustainable tourism; and be managed by at least one independent association or organized network. (Hammond, 2004: 13)

To help the Council of Europe coordinate the development of the routes, the European Institute of Cultural Routes was established in 1998 in Luxembourg. The institute’s primary duties include coordinating and providing technical assistance to existing routes, managing a trails database, developing new proposals and disseminating information about the program (Council of Europe, 2013; Timothy & Saarinen, 2013). At the time of writing there were 33 European Cultural Routes (Table 6.1).

The National Trails System (USA) In 1968, the US Congress passed the National Trails System Act, which aimed to promote preservation, access, travel and enjoyment within the outdoors and heritage resources of the US. While this law opened the gateway for the development of many linear parks and trail types, it specifically permitted the founding of three types of trails: National Scenic Trails, National Historic Trails and National Connecting and Side Trails. The law was later changed to allow the founding of a National Geologic Trail in 2009. As of early 2014, there are 19 National Historic Trails, 11 National Scenic Trails, two National and Connecting Side Trails and one National Geologic Trail. Several federal land management agencies have been charged with the designation, development and oversight of natural and cultural trails. These include the Bureau of Land Management, the National Forest Service, and the National Park Service (Kimball, 1997; Seher, 1991). In addition to the historic, scenic and geologic trails, the National Trails System Act has also enabled the more recent creation of more than 1100 National Recreation Trails and a growing number of National Water Trails (Dolesh, 2003), as well as the overlapping notion of the commemorative Millennium Trails (Olson, 2001).

Canadian Heritage Rivers System A linear landscape that has received less attention in this book, but which is still an important recreation and tourism space is rivers (Prideaux et al., 2009). Canada is one of a handful of countries that has recognized the importance of preserving heritage rivers. They were integral as transport and trading routes in the past, and at present they are deemed to have high natural and human heritage value, as well as being recreation and tourism spaces for Canadians and foreigners. When it was established in 1984, the Canadian

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

167

Table 6.1 European Cultural Routes Route

Year established

The Santiago de Compostela Pilgrim Routes

1987

The Hansa

1991

Parks and Gardens, Landscape

1992

The Schickhardt Route

1992

The Vikings Route, Vikings and Normans

1992

The Phoenicians’ Routes

1994

Via Francigena

1994

The Wenzel and Vauban Routes

1995

The Legacy of al-Andalus

1997

The Mozart Route

2002

The Route of the Castilian Language

2002

Jewish Heritage Route

2004

The European Routes of Migration Heritage

2004

The Iron Route in the Pyrenees

2004

Saint Martin of Tours

2005

The Network of Cluniac Sites

2005

The Routes of the Olive Tree

2005

Via Regia

2005

Don Quixote Route

2007

The Iron Road in Central Europe

2007

The Saint Michael’s Way

2007

Transromanica

2007

Via Carolingia

2007

Iter Vitis – The Ways of the Vineyards of Europe

2009

European Route of Historical Thermal Towns

2010

Route of Prehistoric Rock Art

2010

The European Cemeteries Route

2010

The European Route of Cistercian Abbeys

2010

The Route of Saint Olav Ways

2010

The Casadean Sites

2012

The European Route of Ceramics

2012

The European Megalithic Culture

2013

The Huguenot and Waldensian Trail

2013

Source: Council of Europe (2013); European Institute of Cultural Routes (2011).

168

Tour ism and Trail s

Heritage Rivers System (CHRS) involved the federal, provincial and territorial governments collectively to conserve rivers that were regarded as demonstrating outstanding natural, cultural and recreational heritage. To date there are 42 Canadian Heritage Rivers (38 designated, and another Four nominated), totaling approximately 10,000 km in length, across all provinces and territories (Figure 6.1). Several jurisdictions are responsible for the CHRS. At the national level, Parks Canada provides leadership and support to the CHRS; the agency is also directly responsible for six of the rivers as they are either within national parks (Alsek, Kluane NP; Athabasca, Jasper NP; Kicking Horse, Yoho NP; North Saskatchewan, Banff NP; South Nahanni, Nahanni National Park Reserve) or part of a National Historic Site (e.g. the Rideau Waterway). For river nominations and designations in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, approval is required from Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). Myriad provincial and territorial agencies also share responsibility for the CHRS, focusing on the environment, parks, natural areas and tourism (Canadian Heritage Rivers Board, 2007). Consideration for inclusion requires the nominated river to possess outstanding natural, cultural and/or recreational value, a high level of public

Figure 6.1 The Canadian Heritage Rivers System Source: Parks Canada (2014).

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

169

support and an assurance that measures are in place to protect the values for which the river was nominated. For a river to become part of the CHRS, a two-level process must be completed. First, the nomination process involves five steps: inquiry, research, background study, production of nomination documents, and review and approval. The second level is the designation process, which requires a drafted heritage strategy/management plan and a final review and approval. The CHRS has gone from the designation of six rivers between 1986 and 1989, totaling 793 km (predominantly in the north and west within provincial and federal protected areas), adding an additional 18 rivers and 5699 km to the system (the majority of these outside of designated protected landscapes) by the end of 1999. Since 2000, 13 more rivers have been adjoined to the system, with 2540 km of new riverine length, again with most of these lying outside officially protected and designated landscapes. With four rivers further nominated, the system comprises 41 rivers with a combined length of approximately 11,000 km (see Table 6.2). When the first three rivers were authorized in 1986, there were early discussions about building a system with heritage rivers in each province and territory. This was expressed in the First Strategic Plan of the CHRS, which covered the period 1984–1994. Unlike the development of a systems approach to Canada’s national parks, which was at first ad hoc and later followed some strategic representation across all of Canada’s regions (Boyd & Butler, 2000, 2009), there was a much clearer vision behind the development of a ‘system’ of heritage rivers. In the second strategic plan (1995–2006) the focus was building value and recognition in the system as well as sustaining river heritage. A report by Canadian Heritage Rivers Board (1997) observed that the CHRS board expected benefits and economic impacts associated with heritage rivers to contribute more than CAD$32 million to the economy each year. The current strategic plan (2008–2018) views the system as a clear expression of Canada’s history, landscapes and way of living by Canadians in all parts of the nation. This model of stewardship engages Canadian society in valuing the heritage of rivers and river communities as essential to their identity, health and quality of life. In achieving this vision, the board is guided by seven principles, including recognition, respect, voluntary participation, leadership, collaboration and partnerships, integrity and sustainability. Four overriding goals were established for the 2008–2018 timeframe: • •

achieving a comprehensive system that represents the full range of natural, cultural and recreational values important to Canadians by addressing gaps in the current system that are either thematic or geographic; conserving the natural, cultural and recreational values and integrity of designated Canadian Heritage Rivers by ensuring that by 2018 all designated rivers will be monitored and effectively managed by empowering communities living along each river’s course;

Table 6.2 Chronological development of the Canadian Heritage Rivers System Province/Territory [Park/Protected Area] Ontario [French River Provincial Park] Yukon [Kluane National Park] Northwest Territories [Natianni National Park Reserve] Ontario [Mattawa PP and Samuel de Champlain PP] Alberta [Jasper National Park] Alberta [Banff National Park] British Columbia [Yoho National Park] Nunavut Nunavut [Thelon Wildlife Sanctuary] New Brunswick Yukon Manitoba Nunavut [Katannilik Territorial Park] Northwest Territories Ontario Ontario [La Verendrye/Quetico/Pigeon River [Provincial Parks] Prince Edward Island Nova Scotia Yukon New Brunswick Manitoba/Ontario [Atikaki/Woodland Caribou [Provincial Parks] Nova Scotia

Designated Rivers

French Alsek South Nahanni Mattawa Athabasca North Saskatchewan Kicking Horse Kazan Thelon St. Croix Yukon – The Thirty Mile Seal Soper Arctic Red Grand Boundary Waters/Voyageur Waterway Hillsborough Shelburne Bonnet Plume Upper Restigouche Bloodvein Margaree

February 1986 February 1986 January 1987 January 1988 January 1989 January 1989 January 1990 July 1990 July 1990 January 1991 January 1992 June 1992 June 1992 September 1993 January 1994 September 1996 January 1997 June 1997 February 1998 February 1998 June 1998 June 1998

110 90 300 76 168 49 67 615 545 185 48 260 248 450 627 250 45 53 350 55 306 120

Length [km]

Tour ism and Trail s

Designated

170

June 1998 February 1999 February 2000 February 2000 February 2000 February 2001 February 2001 October 2003 October 2003 May 2004 May 2004 May 2004 August 2005 August 2005 June 2007 Total 37 Designated Rivers Province/Territory [Park/Protected Area] Nominated Nunavut June 2010 Ontario June 2010 New Brunswick May 2012 Saskatchewan June 2014 Total 4 Nominated Rivers Total 37 Dasignated and 4 Nominated Rivers

British Columbia Ontario Ontario [Rideau Waterway] Ontario Ontario Ontario Newfoundland and Labrador Alberta. Saskatchewan [Clearwater River Provincial Park] British Columbia Ontario [Missinaibi Provincial Park] Yukon Prince Edward Island Newfoundland [Bay du Nord Wilderness Park Reserve] Manitoba Manitoba

Source: Parks Canada (n.d.) www.chrs.ca (accessed 5 December 2013).

Nominated Rivers Coppermine Ottawa St. John Churchill

Fraser Humber Rideau Thames St. Mary’s Detroit Main Clearwater Cowichan Missinaibi Tatshenshini The Three Rivers Bay du Nord Hayes Red

1375 100 202 273 125 51 57 326 47 501 45 73 75 590 175 9032 Length [km] 450 590 400 487 1927 10,959

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes 171

172

• •

Tour ism and Trail s

engaging communities and partners in maximizing the full range of benefits associated with the CHR program to be achieved by supporting a range of formal and informal partnerships; and fostering excellence in river management with the CHRS becoming an exemplar international model of cooperative rivers and an essential component of sustainable living. (Parks Canada, 1997)

There has been some scholarly attention devoted to heritage rivers in Canada, less so from a recreational use and heritage tourism perspective, having more to do with water management instead. Some exceptions include early research by Butler et al. (1995), who developed the POLAR model as a system of managing the recreational capacity of Canadian Heritage Rivers. They applied the model on the Churchill River in northern Saskatchewan, a river whose watercourse within Saskatchewan would not be officially designated with heritage status until 1998. One of the rivers in Ontario, the Grand River, was researched by Krause et al. (2001), who examined the Grand River Conservation Authority as an example of broad-based management, involving innovative partnerships. Examining the system at a national scale, Boyd (2002) assessed the role that the CHRS plays within the broader context of Canada’s other systems of protected heritage places, including national parks, historic sites and canals. Over a decade ago, he stressed that these linear heritage and recreational spaces deserved more academic attention, repeating this call for research as the rivers offered unique opportunities to market new tourism and recreation attractions (Boyd, 2008). It is therefore fitting that heritage rivers are included in this book, as many of them have been nominated predominantly for their recreational use, attracting many kayakers and canoeists on the water and providing walking, hiking and sightseeing trails along their banks. For instance, the Humber Valley, home of the Humber River, has 175 km of trails. The entire Humber watershed region is home to many trails, including the Humber Valley Heritage Trail, the world-renowned Bruce Trail, the Great Pine Ridge Equestrian Trail, the Caledon Trailway/Trans Canada Trail, the Oak Ridges Moraine Trail and the Lake Ontario Waterfront Trail. This example demonstrates the high degree of connectedness between both water trails (rivers) and walking and multi-use trails within a wider fluvial catchment area.

Rails-to-Trails The chapters of this book have so far already discussed many issues related to rail-trails in the US. However, the establishment and purpose of this program are worth noting again in this section. In the late 1800s, US states enacted laws that granted railroads full authority to seize land for railway development. Landowners could either sell the land to the railroad or have it forcefully appropriated via eminent

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

173

domain. This resulted in many property owners grudgingly accepting whatever price the railroad companies offered (Wright, 1997: 725). Eventually more than 400,000 km of railroads were built in the US for transporting products and people. Owing to the increasing popularity of air travel and the advantages of transporting freight by large trucks on the burgeoning interstate highway system, by the end of the 1960s rail transportation had declined severely in North America (Drumm, 1999; Gibson, 1999; Morgan, 1994). The US rail network had decreased from more than 435,000 km at its early 20th-century zenith to 227,000 km by 1990. During the 1970s, the rail system continued to lose more than 3200 km of tracks annually. However, the number of kilometers abandoned each year increased to 6400–12,900 in the 1990s as a result of a 1980 law that severely deregulated railway abandonment (Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, 1996). Many rail corridors reverted back to previous landowners or were abandoned to become derelict eyesores on the landscape. Given the US government’s interest in developing trails, many observers saw the value of converting these environmental blemishes into hiking and biking trails that would help protect both the culture and nature of places (Bowers, 2000; Forsberg, 1995; Hedberg, 1989; Hill, 1997; Mills, 1990). Deriving from a concern over what to do with disused railway lines, government policy support for trail development, and increased demand for leisure experiences, the railsto-trails movement began in the 1970s in the US and Canada (Leisure Information Network, 2003; Wandres, 2000). Turning old railways into trails was potentially more efficient than developing trails in other contexts, for ‘the beauty of these . . . trails is that they’ve already been built’ (Mills, 1990: 135). In 1976, the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act was passed by the US federal government to preserve inactive railway rights-ofway for public use, so that they could be reactivated for train transportation at a later time if necessary (Morgan, 1994; Wright, 1997). This law qualified the use of inoperative railways for leisure purposes. In 1983, Congress revised the 1968 National Trails System Act to authorize the development of trails on abandoned railroad easements (Cain, 1991; Drumm, 1999; Vance, 1991; Welsh, 1998). The modified law ‘encourages state and local agencies and private organizations to establish appropriate trails’ to safeguard, or ‘railbank’, railroad corridors for possible future reactivation (Wright, 1997: 724). Many land owners have fought this legislation, because they feel the end of rail services terminated the railroad’s entitlement to the rights-of-way and they are therefore entitled to re-obtain the lands confiscated years earlier (Wright, 1997). The process of developing a rail-trail is lengthy, cumbersome and expensive (Hedberg, 1989). First a railroad company must request permission from the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to abandon a railway line. If the ICC determines that the right-of-way could be usable for another purpose (e.g. recreation, utilities or a roadway), it may postpone the abandonment for 180 days with a certificate of interim trail use or notice of interim trail use

174

Tour ism and Trail s

(CITU/NITU), allowing a transfer of the corridor to an appropriate entity for use of another purpose before relinquishment (Cain, 1991: 65). In some cases, the disused corridor is owned by the railroad company. In that case, it is often sold to other investors or organizations. In this case, Welsh (1998: 56) noted that the ‘rail lines are worth a whole lot more abandoned under the rails-totrails scheme than operating as a rail line’. However, if the line was part of a longstanding easement, rail enterprises will often agree to the right-of-way for interim trail use, especially if the trail operators are willing to take responsibility for fixing, beautifying and maintaining the property. If a CITU is issued for a line by the ICC, the property owner’s recrudescent rights are suspended ad infinitum (Cain, 1991: 66). As noted earlier in the book, rail-trails are extremely popular recreation and tourism resources, as well as legitimate transportation corridors, in the US where, according to one former Rails-to-Trails program director, ‘With rails-to-trails, we’re building a second national park system, usable by cyclists of all ages and skill levels . . . It will interconnect trails and parks coast to coast. There are no more Yosemites and Yellowstones to be developed, but we do have this wonderful network of trails’ (quoted by Pena, 1991: 92). Similar sentiments about these ‘linear parks’ have been expressed by MacDonald (1987), Mills (1990), Vance (1991) and Wandres (2000). In many cases, rail-trails are operated and maintained by government agencies, although some are organized and managed by various land trusts, community foundations or other community-based non-profit groups (Gibson, 1999). To help in the process of expanding and developing, the non-profit Rails-to-Trails Conservancy was established in 1985. It assists local associations to begin the trail conversion process, lobbies in Washington, DC, for trails and publishes guides, newsletters and websites (Mills, 1990). The extensive US rail-trail system has strongly influenced, and has been intensely influenced by, similar programs in other countries, particularly Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom (UK) and Canada (Graham, 2004; John Grimshaw and Associates, 1982; Lipscombe & Geddis, 2000; Watkins, 1984). Although each of these countries has its own policies and practices as regards the use of abandoned railway lines for recreation and tourism, they share many similarities. The 150 km Otago Central Rail Trail in New Zealand has become a very popular attraction for equestrians, hikers and bikers in recent years. As highlighted in Chapter 3, that trail is overseen by a collaborative body consisting of the Department of Conservation and the Otago Central Rail Trail Charitable Trust (Graham, 2004: 33).

National Scenic Byways Program As noted in Chapter 3, the National Scenic Byways Program began in 1991 with the passing of the Scenic Byways Act under the administration of the US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

175

Its aim was to encourage grass-roots cooperation to recognize, establish, preserve and enhance particular roads in the US owing to their historic or natural values (Cordes, 2001; US Department of Transportation, 2013). Under this legislation, each individual state determines the criteria for establishing scenic byways. Sipes et al. (1997: 100) outlined the designation criteria of several states. In Kansas, four criteria are used: scenic quality, scenic diversity, outstanding quality and route impressions. In the case of Kansas, a scenic road must be visually pleasing and provide an enjoyable experience. Oregon’s criteria include visible landforms, outstanding diversity of vegetation, water as a dominant feature in the landscape, rich and contrasting color combinations (rock, soil, vegetation, etc.), human modifications do not detract from visual harmony, and rare or unique elements of the regional landscape. In Ohio, scenic byways must represent heightened visual experiences and demonstrate exceptional landscapes, landforms, water features, vegetation or human-created elements that contribute to a route’s visual environment (Sipes et al., 1997: 100). In addition to the federal programs, each state can create its own scenic corridor programs, many of which have and include designations such as parkways, historic roads and heritage highways, each with its own specific criteria and guiding principles (Lew, 1991). There are many varieties of scenic routes and byways programs throughout the world. However, most of them are simply designated by national regional tourism organizations as marketing tools to highlight certain tour circuits that visitors can travel by car, bicycle or motorcycle. Examples include the Royal Dutch Tourist Association’s (now the Netherlands Board of Tourism and Conventions) designated scenic car routes (de Kok, 1991), much like the Northern Ireland Tourist Board is setting apart the Causeway Coastal Route (as previously discussed in Chapter 3). The US is one of relatively few countries that have officially designated scenic byways by national legislation.

Countryside access laws in the UK and Europe Europe and the UK have many acts of legislation that enable freedom of access to the countryside. These laws have been extremely instrumental in the development of short- and long-distance footpaths (Scott, 1990). The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 in England and Wales (discussed earlier in the book) was critical to opening millions of acres of rural and wilderness Britain to increased hiking and walking activities (Mansley, 2000). This has seen the growth of many trails and footpaths throughout the country. Until the Act was passed, ramblers were severely limited in the areas they could hike, including on private land (Ferris, 1996; Scott, 1986), but the legislation opened up even some private property, in particular uncultivated areas (e.g. heathlands, mountains, some forests), for public access via footpath development. Although naturally there were concerns among landowners,

176

Tour ism and Trail s

research has shown that relatively few countryside recreationists have any desire to leave designated trails (Mansley, 2000), and most landowners have been placated since 2000. The Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 made legal the age-old right to free public access to the lands of Scotland. Preceding that, the Countryside (Scotland) Act 1967 was the primary legal mechanism that oversaw outdoor recreation in Scotland. The 2003 Act allows universal non-motorized access (e.g. swimming, camping, rowing, canoeing, hiking, cycling and horseback riding) to land for recreation, education and various other purposes, as well as individual rights to traverse someone’s property if done respectfully and responsibly (Flegg, 2004; Mackay, 2007; Morrow, 2005). Like the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 has encouraged more people to appreciate the outdoors and has been instrumental in the development of more official trails and footpaths – often designated as Long Distance Routes (LDRs), throughout rural Scotland. Most of the Nordic countries of Europe have ancient ‘freedom to roam’ traditions that recognize countryside use as a universal right, although in some cases it has been codified into law to protect access to rural areas (Axelsson-Lindgren & Sorte, 1987). In Finland, Iceland, Sweden and Norway (much less so in Denmark), these rights of access provide considerable opportunities to ramble on trails or off trails, to harvest berries and mushrooms, fish, pick wildflowers, and even camp on someone else’s property (Hall, 2013; Müller & Pettersson, 2001; Sandell & Fredman, 2010). Although there are some local restrictions, such as the limited number of nights a person can camp on someone else’s land or commercially harvesting berries and mushrooms, much of the access remains unfettered. It is common knowledge that access does not include gardens, houses, or other built-up areas. In Finland, the principle of jokamiehenoikeus (every man’s rights) allows people to walk, cycle or ski in the countryside anywhere that these activities do not harm the environment or encroach upon people’s homes, gardens, crops or yards. Recreationists are permitted to harvest mushrooms, flowers and berries or fish in lakes and ponds; swim, row or sail on waterways; and ski in the winter (Nylander, 2001; Pouta et al., 2006). Some of these activities are restricted by the government, particularly in national parks or other protected areas. Burning campfires, cutting trees or collecting wood are generally not permitted on other people’s property. Many other countries in Europe have varying degrees of the freedom to roam, affecting the development of trail-based recreation and tourism in many different ways.

Other related programs There are many programs throughout the world that have policy and legal backing to help establish various trail systems. For example, the Queensland Heritage Trails Network was initiated in 2000 through the

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

177

Cultural Tourism Incentive Programme. Its main objective was to revitalize Queensland’s economy by creating a sustainable tourism infrastructure and additional jobs (Cohen et al., 2001; Pearce et al., 2002; Prideaux, 2002). To do this, the project was designed to develop a system of routes and networks based upon various regional themes, which would stimulate additional route-based tourism (Briedenhann & Wickens, 2004). In South Africa, the National Hiking Trail Council was established in the 1980s to facilitate and encourage the creation of a trails system throughout the country (Hugo, 1987). In Northern Ireland, a similar council known as the Northern Ireland Countryside Access and Activities Network was founded to instigate five major trail initiatives. These included the development of a network of long-distance walking routes known as the Waymarked Ways, an off-road cycling network, an off-road equestrian initiative, a canoeing initiative and an ecotrails initiative (Ferris, 2003). There are many instances of similar legislative actions and policy initiatives that aim to provide access to the countryside, preserve culture and nature, and afford people plentiful recreation opportunities. Within the UK, heritage trails have been deliberately shaped by local government cultural policy. Conceptually Hall and Jenkins (1995) noted that there is very limited agreement as to what public policy is, how it is identified or even clarified. They use Dye’s (1992) definition of public policy, namely, whatever governments, at all levels, choose to do or not to do. The case study below demonstrates the role of local government policy in heritage trail development.

Case Study: Heritage Trails in the United Kingdom Shaped by Local Government Policies In the development of tourism trails in the UK, there has been a general absence of strategic thinking. Instead, as Hayes and MacLeod (2008) comment, development has been very fragmented and ad hoc. They observed that across the UK there have been over 1200 trails developed by local governments as part of wider cultural policy objectives, often driven by civic and historical groups. This type of development ties in to concepts already discussed in the book, such as nostalgia, health benefits and improved quality of life, economic development, urban renewal, social cohesion and stronger cultural identity. Nonetheless, Hayes and MacLeod (2008: 59) note that ‘there is no overall strategy for planning, development and evaluation of trails’. The cultural remit of local government in the UK has been shaped by wider issues of increasing access for all, and ensuring greater social (Continued)

178

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Heritage Trails in the United Kingdom Shaped by Local Government Policies (Continued) integration and inclusion. A popular vehicle for this remit has been trails and routes. Hayes and MacLeod (2008) examined 33 local cultural strategies (LCS) and found four major policy drivers shaping the development of trails by local authorities, namely social, economic, environmental and cultural. They also used this categorization to group the rationales of trail development as part of local government policy thinking (see Table 6.3). Table 6.3 reveals a high degree of complexity in setting objectives when mapped against the social, cultural, economic and environmental rationales. Hayes and MacLeod (2008) used one LCS (South Gloucestershire Council) to outline the overlapping rationales used to justify the development of the Thornbury Millennium Trail (see Table 6.4). An audit of the LCSs revealed that heritage trails, as part of cultural policy making, varied in terms of scale, purpose, governance, development, usage, partnerships and management. Hayes and MacLeod (2008) suggested that a useful typology of trail development to evaluate the above criteria was to classify trails as simple, standard or sophisticated. This 3-S categorization is a useful way of further understanding small and medium-scale trails and routes, as they were presented in Chapter 1.

Table 6.3 Trail objectives and rationale within UK local cultural strategies Social

Cultural

Economic

Environmental

Life-long learning

Preservation and memory

Rural renaissance and sustainability

Community engagement Social inclusion

Celebration

Funding and stakeholder network Destination image

Widening access

Linking cultural attractions

Health/safety benefits

Display of public art Story telling

Identity

Source: After Hayes and MacLeod (2008: 62).

New visitor attractions and recreational opportunities Branding/ marketing diverse attractions Regeneration

Spatial planning and monitoring

Conservation built and natural heritage Protection

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

179

Table 6.4 Rationale behind the development of the Thornbury Millennium Trail, UK Social

Cultural

Economic

Environmental

To explore, understand, record and celebrate character and diversity

To contribute to the perception of South Gloucestershire as being a good place To ensure that links between heritage and tourism are exploited

To encourage sustainable tourism

To encourage, promote and provide sustainable physical and intellectual access to the heritage To develop a sense of cohesion and community identity To value everyone’s heritage To support and build on heritage activities undertaken by voluntary organization To celebrate and promote heritage in new and imaginative ways Source: Modified after Hayes and MacLeod (2008).

Planning and Developing Trails and Routes There are two overarching goals associated with planning and developing all types of trails. These are to provide access to outdoor resouurces and to protect those resources, including the trails themselves, from the negative impacts of nature and visitor overuse. Although some observers throughout the years have noted the difficulty of carrying out this seemingly opposing

180

Tour ism and Trail s

and dichotomous mandate, it has been shown time and again to be possible. Providing access includes many different duties and responsibilities. Foremost among these are enabling entrance to as wide a market as possible, including local residents and tourists from afar, and non-traditional users, such as people with physical disabilities. Generally speaking, the duty to afford access also includes promoting the use of trails via marketing efforts and building public awareness, seeking funding for trail development and maintenance, and helping benefit the communities involved by encouraging visitor spending. Some of these issues will be addressed in more detail in the following chapter. The responsibility to protect trails and their associated resources is often facilitated by trail design, public education and other efforts to mitigate the effects of overuse or careless use. This section of the chapter is structured around the following planning and development aspects: models and planning processes, trail funding, the use of volunteers, acquiring trail/ land-use rights, participatory development, cooperation and collaboration, and theming.

Planning models and processes Planning and developing trails is a complex undertaking. Good planning usually equals good trails with fewer conflicts and more durability (Baud-Bovy & Lawson, 1998; Bergsma, 1988; Dolesh, 2004b; Nowers et al., 2002). Several scholars have outlined various planning processes for the creation of routes and trails, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. Hugo (1999: 141–152) summarized a succinct ecotrail planning process composed of five phases: assessment, planning, evaluation, implementation and monitoring (Figure 6.2).

ASSESSMENT STAGE

Goals & Objectives

Trail Infrastructure

PLANNING STAGE

EVALUATION STAGE

IMPLEMENTATION STAGE

Proposal Planning of trail corridor & phases involved

Evaluate Construction Decision Route established

Accreditation

Figure 6.2 Comprehensive trail development model Source: Modified from Hugo (1999)

Community involvement

Opening of trail

MONITOR/ AUDIT

Maintenance Monitoring Auditing

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

181

While he developed this model for the context of ecotrails, the general pattern can be used in a variety of contexts and on a wide range of trail types. Once a decision has been made to develop or upgrade a trail or route, the assessment phase begins. This includes setting goals and objectives for the trail in a clear and concise manner and an evaluation of trail requirements in terms of environment, facilities and services. Decisions regarding not only the type of corridor to be developed (e.g. hiking, horseback riding, cycling) but also the format (e.g. self-guided, marked), purpose (e.g. education, relaxation, exercise) and market (e.g. families, nature enthusiasts) must be established at the outset. These variables will determine much about how the trail should be designed, managed, marketed and monitored (Hugo, 1999). Planning is the second phase in the process and comprises at least four sub-phases that fulfill the ecological, psychological and physical requirements of trails and their consumers. First among these is the collection of ad hoc data. Maps, literature about the place and interviews with landowners are all important in helping to develop the social and physical aspects of trail corridors. Proximity to water, distances from population centers, microclimates and access to roads and highways should be assessed through ad hoc data. Second, terrain and resource (trail parameters) evaluation will help determine the best and most sustainable location for a nature trail or which sites to include within a cultural circuit or water trail. For ecotrails and other nature-based routes, it is critical to understand the area’s physical geography, natural vegetation, slope stability, potential for erosion and native wildlife. Maps are crucial in these inventory exercises. Heritage trails must take into account the local cultures, past and present, and the material remains of past and present cultures and how they might be prioritized and linked into a single, linear corridor. Third, for a trail to be truly sustainable, sensitive areas must be identified. Swamps, steep gradients, endangered species habitats, sand dunes, remnants of material culture and other fragile ecosystems and potential resources must be identified. Finally, the trail corridor should be set. The knowledge gained from the previous three planning sub-phases will help determine the physical course of the trail, the required amenities (e.g. rest areas, overnight huts, drinking water sources, shaded areas, toilets, benches, interpretive tools) and trail steepness and level of difficulty (Hugo, 1999). The third stage is evaluation. In this phase, the developer undertakes a cost–benefit analysis and feasibility analyses to resolve whether or not to proceed with the plan, to re-plan or to abandon the idea outright. At this time it is still not too late to make changes or even to forego the idea of a trail altogether if the results of the planning exercises justify this sort of action (Hugo, 1999). Stage four is the plan implementation. Once the decision has been made to proceed, the physical elements of development begin to occur, which should ideally involve the local community at great length. At this point, the trail needs to be marked on the ground, surfaced, bridges built and amenities

182

Tour ism and Trail s

provided. It also entails the establishment of the day-to-day management, including publicity, administration, maps and guidebooks (Hugo, 1999). Once the route is opened and functioning, monitoring processes (stage five) must be put in place to assure that the impacts of tourism and recreation are minimized and the positive outcomes (economic, social and psychological) are maximized (Hugo, 1999). McNamara and Prideaux (2011: 293) provide a similar trail planning framework that emphasizes many of the same sustainability needs and actions that Hugo’s (1999) model addresses, although there are some notable differences (Figure 6.3). McNamara and Prideaux suggest seven steps in the planning process, particularly as regards hiking trails, but again many of their ideas can be broadened to include many recreation and tourism corridors. The first stage, study preparation, establishes physical carrying capacities and creates understanding of the demand for a proposed trail. It also establishes the role of the management authority, considers private and public sector investments and requires input from indigenous peoples and other community residents who have a stake in the project. Once these have been addressed, the process, according to McNamara and Prideaux (2011), commences. Phases two to seven include setting goals and objectives, analyzing the potential trail environment (situation analysis), formulating the plan, offering recommendations based upon the situation analysis, implementing the trail design, and finally monitoring and adjusting the plan as needed, considering ecological, commercial and quality of visitor experiences. INPUTS

OUTPUTS

PLANNING PROCESS STAGES

Science Inputs

Involving stakeholders

Study preparation

Aims & objectives

Analysis & plan design

Options & implement

Social Science Inputs Profits

Figure 6.3 Hiking trail planning framework Source: Modified from McNamara and Prideaux (2011)

Ecosystem impact

Monitor & adjust

Satisfaction & experience

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

183

While both of these normative planning approaches address critical elements of route and trail planning and development, there are many aspects they do not tackle, including funding, land acquisition, collaborative planning and participatory development, although McNamara and Prideaux (2011) do suggest that stakeholder involvement is critical throughout the entire planning process, just as Timothy and Tosun (2003) did in their analysis of community-based tourism development.

Trail funding There are essentially three categories of funding associated with trails: acquisition, development and operations (Fiala, 1999: 67). In contemporary society, funding for trails is scarce and unpredictable (Paine, 2001). Even more concerning in some cases is the ebb and flow of funding. For example, there may be funding available under some administrations but not under others. During times of economic crises, public lands and trails are sometimes the first to be cut from public budgets, so managers have to be creative in finding ways not only to fund new trails, but also to renovate existing ones and keep them operating. In the UK, lottery funds have been very important in establishing longdistance trails such as the C2C Cycle Route in England. In the US, there is some limited funding from the federal government through the Transportation Equity Act and through various federal highway grants as long as the proposed corridors are somehow connected to the goals of the Department of Transportation (Jones, 1994; Thompson, 2000). Other sources include bond measures, state and county grants, habitat conservation grants, air-quality grants and transportation measure funds (Fiala, 1999). For the most part, the success of getting funding in the US at least relies on the recreational or tourism element being downplayed while the air quality, transportation and congestion management goals are highlighted (Jones, 1994; Wright, 1995). Jones (1994: 52–53) offered several recommendations that will help trail organizations increase their chances of funding success in getting money from the US federal government: • • •

Communicate with other agencies, because transportation funding often comes through planning, transit or public works departments. Interdepartmental and inter-sectoral strategies are important. Develop a multi-use or single-use plan. Federal grants are competitive, so a master plan with clearly stated priorities and goals is essential to show the rationale and justification for the trail and its funding. Demonstrate local commitment and involvement. Most national funding programs want to see local commitments to a project beyond the organization putting it forward. Here, too, collaborative efforts are essential.

184

•

•

• •

Tour ism and Trail s

Letters of support from city leaders, corporations, influential individuals and schools are essential. Emphasize the highest priority segments and projects. Perhaps only certain parts of a trail can be funded at any given time. This is better than no funding at all. Such a focus will show granting agencies that construction or improvements have been well thought out and focused on the most urgent needs at hand. Identify and address any obstacles or problems. The funding proposal needs to be truthful in showing any issues that might thwart the project efforts or raise challenges, including land acquisition problems, for instance. Find appropriate funding sources and apply. Quantifiable and projected data are very useful in helping to identify funding sources and in justifying the monetary need. Communicate with planning and funding agencies to understand how the application might be strengthened. Involve local officials in lobbying the funding agencies on the trail developers’ behalf.

In most trail destinations, it is crucial for organizations and agencies to be as financially independent as possible, especially in lean times with public budgets. Weaver (1995: 602) suggested four ways for trails to try to be as fiscally independent as possible: • • • •

encourage local schools, community groups, and businesses to ‘adopt’ a section of trail over which they are responsible for its maintenance for a specified period of time; permit visitors and long-term ‘residential tourists’ to sponsor a segment of the trail to help with its upkeep; foster financial donations from non-local trail supporters; and encourage the use of local building materials and labor whenever possible.

Use of volunteers Closely aligned with the issue of funding is the use of volunteers, as already noted by Weaver (1995). Volunteers are crucial to the sustainability of most paths, routes and trails, especially for budget-conscious agencies. Unpaid staff can mean the difference between meeting conservation and consumer service goals and allowing trails to suffer the consequences of mismanagement. Community residents and the tourists and recreationists themselves can all become involved in volunteer efforts to construct trails or keep them functioning properly (Rhoden et al., 2009). Bristow (1998) describes three major advantages of citizens becoming involved in the management of trails. First, volunteers save public funds or organizational capital in a number of

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

185

budgetary line items, not least of which are personnel costs and maintenance, a sentiment echoed by Rasor (1988). Second, volunteer efforts strengthen the connection between residents (or visitors) and their local environments. Finally, the volunteers experience a great deal of satisfaction associated with spending time in nature, on a historic railway or in a cultural setting and in knowing they are helping to protect vital cultural and natural resources (Ralston & Rhoden, 2005). Residents are often eager to help reopen trails that are on the verge of being closed (Brown & Barter, 2004). This happened in 2010 in Arizona. That year huge state budget cuts were enacted, and one of the first agencies to be hit was Arizona State Parks. For many communities the state parks and their associated trails are among their most prized points of pride and major sources of income. Several communities stepped up to the plate and agreed to staff, maintain and monitor some of the parks that were slotted for closure. Likewise, the Appalachian Trail is one of the only National Park system areas founded and managed by volunteers (Bristow, 1998). Volunteers are useful in route monitoring and repairs, especially on wilderness and long-distance trails where limited paid personnel might not be able to get to all points and nodes when necessary (Bristow, 1998). Volunteer hiking patrols are enthusiastic about their efforts and maintaining the goals of the trail. They also play critical roles in rescue and injury situations (Fiala, 1999). There are many other ways that people are known to volunteer on routes and trails as well. The Adopt-a-Highway program in the US saves millions of dollars in cleanup costs every year, as organizations (e.g. church and youth groups, families, schools) ‘sponsor’ sections of highways to clean and maintain. Similar programs have been implemented on rail-trails and other hiking routes throughout the world (Holland, 2013). These corridor adoption programs allow people to provide altruistic service to their community, benefit the trail and highway management agencies, and can provide exposure (the sections are signed with lists of sponsors) for sponsoring organizations (Clark, 1989).

Acquiring trail/land-use rights One of the most arduous, time-consuming and expensive aspects of trail development is the acquisition of trail rights or land-use rights. For the majority of long-distance trails, byways and other circuits, the real estate itself is typically not purchased, but agreements must still be made between land owners and land agencies. For some footpaths and hiking trails, however, the best option is to purchase the land outright so that it can be managed by a single agency. There are several ways in which rights can be acquired for trail development. The first way is known as ‘fee title’ (in the US), wherein open spaces that have been legally set aside for protecting nature are used as trail

186

Tour ism and Trail s

corridors. This is very common and is often associated with publically held parklands or community greenbelts. Second, easement rights, such as the railbeds noted earlier or utility right-of-ways, are commonly used to allow trail development across private property. A third method is the license agreement, which is negotiated between public agencies to allow multiple uses of utility infrastructure (e.g. canal access or tow paths) (Figure 6.4). This advantageous arrangement usually includes minimized right-of-way and construction costs, and requires that long-term agreements are in place and liability and maintenance are shared responsibilities. Fourth is land leasing. This tactic affords the least degree of control for the trail-sponsoring organization in terms of infrastructure improvements, but it is sometimes the only option available. It can also be quite costly, as it involves an ongoing monthly or annual expense (Fiala, 1999: 67–68). The final option is land purchase. While this is the most expensive and least common for tracks that cross multiple land uses and ownerships, it can be a useful acquisition approach for short trails in urban or suburban areas, rural zones or within and around national parks.

Participatory development As McNamara and Prideaux (2011) and others (e.g. Briedenhann & Wickens, 2004) have implied, building community support for a trail is essential, particularly in areas where there has been a lot of contention and apprehension about a proposed project. Participatory development is a crucial precursor of sustainable tourism. While it acknowledges the importance of ecological conservation, it takes tourism planning and development beyond

Figure 6.4 Trail use of utility infrastructure (water works) in Gilbert, Arizona

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

187

the natural realm, emphasizing the socio-economic and cultural aspects of sustainability as well (Timothy, 2002; Tosun, 2005; Wang et al., 2010). Community-based development is essential in espousing the principles of sustainability within the context of tourism (Butler, 1999; Hampton, 2005; Kontogeorgopoulos, 2005). Community-based, or participatory, planning advocates for holistic development that allows destination residents to partake fully of the benefits of tourism. This includes job opportunities, encouragement and support for entrepreneurial activities, tourism training, health care and education, and improved quality of life in general (Timothy, 1999b). Equally important is that residents of the destination are politically, psychologically and socially empowered not only to be involved meaningfully in decision-making but also to generate ideas and drive their success without external interference (Scheyvens, 2002; Timothy, 1999b, 2007). An important part of this approach is grass-roots control of resources and social spaces. One common manifestation of the concern about grass-roots development in recent years is the academic and industry recognition of the value of indigenous knowledge and power. Planners and administrators are more readily recognizing the value of aboriginal peoples, their knowledge (Butler & Hinch, 2007), and their property rights over their own cultural heritage (Johnston, 2003). This has empowered native communities in countries such as the US and New Zealand to develop their own tourism programs that are culturally sensitive, financially stable, and desirable for residents and visitors (Amoamo & Thompson, 2010; McIntosh et al., 2004; Swanson & DeVereaux, 2012). Public participation in decision-making and in the planning process can help alleviate many fears, build support for trail development, and empower communities in ways that will help them build a sense of pride and attachment to place. These are important considerations in trail development, especially since it is, as Fiala (1999: 65) noted, ‘hear it now or hear it later’ as regards the concerns of stakeholders. Participatory development is also crucial in assuring that the public understands the role of certain routes, and that there are multiple uses beyond just recreation (e.g. transportation). A critical principle that has only recently come to the fore in trail planning is the involvement of native peoples in decision-making. This is especially important when routes pass over tribal lands or when a trail theme is somehow linked to indigenous cultures. In the past, many elements of native cultures, including land, were appropriated by non-natives for tourism purposes. Many recreation and tourism routes have also been developed across indigenous-controlled lands, and some have been themed according to indigenous heritage. Recent legal debates have focused on intellectual property rights and the aboriginal ownership rights of local culture (Johnston, 2003). Indigenous rights are an extremely important part of participatory sustainable trail development, and the natives’ voices must be heard in the

188

Tour ism and Trail s

planning and development of footpaths, cultural heritage routes and nature trails (Blair, 2003). Based on the success of other trails, MacDonald (1987: 28–30) provided several recommendations that can help make the process more democratic, alleviate public concerns and help build community and political support for a proposed trail: • • • • • • •

• •

Use an existing non-profit organization to help in developing the trail. Such an organization might already have developed clout in the area and can help provide leadership and support. Have a clearly defined goal. This helps people feel more involved in a project, particularly as goals and objectives are met throughout the process. Connecting with extant, larger projects can help save money and smooth the process. Utilize existing trail plans, as these will have already been vetted and accepted at least to some degree. Dividing a project into manageable parts helps lighten the burden. Sometimes it is easier to secure funding for smaller projects, particularly if they are tied to other strategies. Actively seek cooperation with developers. There may be opportunities for sponsorships, grants or other funding, as well as support for the trail from private investors. Familiarizing key players with the proposed corridor and its resources can help elected officials realize the importance of the project, not only for funding but for general support as well. Providing a sense of continuous progress and significant accomplishments is vital to building public relations. Forming a citizens’ committee will provide a sense of empowerment for community members and allow them to feel their voices are being heard. Using publicity for the project’s advantage helps build support and political kudos. Newsletters, speakers and media releases are good investments.

Cooperation and collaboration Cooperation and collaboration are another important principle in any tourism planning endeavor, including trail development. Partnerships are essential in making routes happen. Without them any trail development project is doomed to fail. Collaboration among national trusts, park services, history associations, clubs, hotels and other tourism services is needed to support trail-based tourism (Cheung, 1999; Mahoney, 1999). Timothy (1998b) and Timothy and Tosun (2003) have identified five types of collaboration that should exist in destinations for tourism to develop sustainably.

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

189

These include cooperation between and among government agencies, levels of administration, same-level polities across political boundaries, public and private sectors, and private-sector organizations. A comprehensive collaborative approach to tourism development utilizing these modes of cooperation and involving as many different stakeholder cohorts as possible in decisionmaking and implementation has a better chance of assuring a greater degree of sustainable outcomes (Beritelli, 2011; Chhabra, 2010; Erkus-Öztürk & Eraydin, 2010; Jamal & Getz, 1995; Settina & Kauffman, 2001). Collaboration among these various players has the potential to increase fiscal stability, adopt more grass-roots knowledge, reduce redundancies, strengthen marketing efforts, protect cultural and natural environments, manage and mitigate overuse of resources, enhance resident quality of life, and diminish cross-border socio-economic and ecological imbalances (Timothy, 1998b, 1999a). Together these help uphold the basic principles of sustainable tourism development: maintenance of ecological and cultural integrity, efficiency, equity, participatory community growth, holistic growth, harmony and balance (Bramwell & Lane, 2011; Hall & Lew, 1998; Timothy, 1999b). The very act of developing themed, purposive routes is an exercise of collaboration and networking because each site, or node, on the route agrees to participate (Cope et al., 1998). In short routes or tracks within a single public landholding this is less important, but for long-distance trails it is imperative. Because medium- and long-distance tracks so frequently traverse different landscapes and properties owned by different people, agencies and organizations, cooperation is especially important in trail development when it comes to land use and route planning (Boyd & Timothy, 1999; Paine, 2001). Without closely correlated partnerships, many trail ideas would never come to fruition, not least because of the need to consolidate various properties, landlords and agencies (Mahoney, 1999; Ottman, 1989). Some of the most popular long-distance heritage routes in the US, such as the Oregon National Historic Trail or the Santa Fe National Historic Trail, extend over privatelyowned ranchland, municipal holdings (e.g. city parks), county or state lands, federal government lands (e.g. Bureau of Land Management, National Forest Service, or the National Park Service), Native American tribal lands, and acreage managed by various non-profit organizations (Fiala, 1999; Payne, 1997). As well, some lengthy trails pass through a variety of ecosystems or cultural landscapes, including urban areas, farmland, deserts, rainforests or mountains, each of which might require different management techniques to preserve their core integrity (Means, 1999). Cross-border routes are gaining popularity all over the world, such as the European Cultural Routes noted earlier, as well as a variety of nature trails and hiking footpaths. Cross-boundary cooperation is critical to ensure that corresponding trail resources on either side of a political divide are

190

Tour ism and Trail s

sustainably managed and coherent in the message portrayed to visitors (Briedenhann & Wickens, 2004; Moulin & Boniface, 2001; Timothy & Martens, 2012; Wachowiak, 1994; Wie˛ckowski, 2010). In some cases, conservation laws differ on opposite sides of a border. Perhaps an animal species is protected in one country but vigorously hunted just over the border in another country, for example. Good trans-frontier alliances can help mitigate the potentially calamitous implications of these contradictory policies for the greater good of recreation and tourism trails (Timothy, 1999a). Another very important area of collaboration is the formation of nonprofit support groups that establish and manage trails and pathways, facilitate collaboration between stakeholders and help raise funds for route maintenance (Brown & Barter, 2004; Jones, 1994). Such collaborative efforts are often fraught with stewardship dissonance between land agencies, landowners, transportation bureaus, tourism offices and commercial interests (Cope et al., 1998: 220). Thus, cooperation between various stakeholders is crucial in the success of a trail or route, and Cope et al. (1998: 221) suggest that the establishment of a formal management group that is endowed with accountability and authority for marketing, coordinating infrastructure and preservation is the best way to manage a multi-use and long-distance trail. These cooperative efforts are necessary in providing access links to paths and routes. Local authorities and trail organizations can also work together to provide public transportation links to trailheads and access points. If urban or suburban trails are better connected to public transportation (e.g. buses), it is likely that more people will use the trails (Walker, 1996). Collaborative efforts between trail organizations and community groups may be instrumental in correcting erroneous perceptions and smoothing negative resident attitudes about route development. As noted in Chapter 5, there is often public resistance and anxiety associated with initiating trails. As time passes and through cooperative efforts, however, most of these concerns usually give way to a greater appreciation for the resource (Fiala, 1999: 68). Acquiring volunteer help for trail development and maintenance is also an important aim of stakeholder networking. Trail organizations, whether public agencies or non-profit organizations, should identify and involve potential partners who can help provide equipment, volunteer labor and maintenance. Private outfitters and guides can make their boats or canoes available on water routes, horses on equestrian trails or bikes on cycle courses (Settina & Kauffman, 2001: 100).

Theming Theming is another critical consideration when developing a route from scratch. For purposive route and path development, decisions must be made about what theme or themes will be the focus of the trail. While trails may

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

191

have more than one subject focus, most successful routes emphasize a specific cultural or natural theme, such as wine, food, urban heritage, heavy industry, an endemic animal, or a plant species. Compelling themes should be chosen that will appeal to a wide market segment and provide memorable and pleasant experiences. For themed trails, a coherent story and a wide range of linked points are essential (Hayes & MacLeod, 2007). Shorter nature routes can even be themed, such as wildlife viewing, leading to a scenic viewpoint, general exercise, visiting archaeological sites or emphasizing a form of geology (Bell, 2008). As for urban routes, the theme is often based on history, significant individuals and architectural forms.

Case Study: Themed Urban Walking Heritage Trails in New Zealand Cities offer diverse attractions, including interesting street patterns, architectural styles of various periods of history, unique buildings and historic core areas (Boyd & Tham, 2004). It is becoming more common for urban places to design trails, either formal or informal, for recreation and tourism. This case study reports research that was undertaken on urban heritage walking trails in Dunedin and Napier, New Zealand. The research developed a typology of urban trail development and examined issues associated with trail development and management from the perspective of businesses located close to or on the trails. Dunedin was not always linked to tourism. In the 1980s the city had problems similar to those of other cities: failing infrastructure, lack of investment and poor perception of liveability. The city had the option of transforming itself into a post-industrial economy or suffer a slow and painful death. In 1993 the strategy ‘Dunedin 2000’ was conceived. It focused on marketing and promoting the city in four ways: business, tourism, education and flagship development, the latter relating to heritage and conservation. Dunedin 2000 aimed to reposition the city around a number of propositions, including an enterprising innovative place, a cost-effective location, a better place to live and work, a physically attractive city and one that had much to offer as a tourist destination. The strategy was successful and became the benchmark for other New Zealand cities to follow; Dunedin was branded as the place where it’s all right here, including excellence in education, culture and natural heritage. The city offers a unique blend of interesting historic buildings, comprising a mix of architectural styles (Baroque, Victorian, Edwardian) and a strong Scottish identity, but at the time of research (2003) no formal trail had been developed. The city council often battled with the (Continued)

192

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Themed Urban Walking Heritage Trails in New Zealand (Continued) local Historic Places Trust (HPT), whose focus was to identify key buildings that would be formally registered and ‘branded’ with historic markers/plaques. The council, however, produced a brochure showing architectural ‘gems’ within the city center area, but with no formal trail to connect them. In contrast, Napier is well known as New Zealand’s Art Deco city. It was destroyed by an earthquake in 1931 and a subsequent fire, and was rebuilt in the architectural style of the times: Art Deco. In the early 1980s it was recognized as ‘the most complete and significant group of Art Deco buildings in the world’, with almost 150 structures situated within Napier’s central business district (CBD). An Art Deco Trust was formed in February 1985 as a preservation movement, operating predominantly with volunteer guides. It was legally incorporated in 1987. By 1992, the Art Deco Trust had become central to the promotion of Napier as a tourist destination and was contracted by the city council to promote domestic and international tourism, focusing on Art Deco. The Trust runs an Art Deco shop and offers a combination of guided walks, bus tours, vintage car tours, cycle tours, as well as tours for cruise ship passengers. Their website (www.artdeconapier.com, accessed 1 December 2013) states that approximately 25,000 people have taken an Art Deco walk, either as part of a guided walk provided by the Trust’s volunteers, or a self-guided stroll using Trust brochures along the formalized route. After 25 years, the Trust has succeeded in attracting domestic and international visitors to Napier, persuading owners of Art Deco premises that it is worthwhile to preserve the unique architecture, engendering local pride among residents and making Napier famous for its architecture. The city has built on its Art Deco appeal, hosting the Art Deco festival each year, where people dress up in the style of the 1930s and the heritage and culture of that era are on display. Boyd and Tham (2004) developed a conceptual model to illustrate four possible scenarios for urban trail development along the dimensions of being marked or unmarked, guided or unguided. Figure 6.5 (part (i)) outlines some of the characteristics of trails as found within this twoby-two matrix model. According to the model, the lowest level of trail development are the routes that are both unmarked and have no guides and where there is no clear authority or official body responsible for their development and management. The next level of trail development is the routes that, while still unmarked, have some guiding associated with them. This activity is often restricted to special events (including

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

193

Figure 6.5 Urban heritage trail formalization: Options and development process Source: After Boyd and Tham (2004).

industry familiarization trips, conference field trips) and is reliant exclusively on volunteers and/or local history and heritage experts to offer limited guiding. Trails that start to demonstrate some level of formalization have a marked route both on the ground (often color-coded such as the Boston Freedom Trail) as well as displayed within a brochure. These (Continued)

194

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Themed Urban Walking Heritage Trails in New Zealand (Continued) are, however, usually self-guided tours with the route clearly delineated on the brochure and clearly marked on the ground. The highest level of trail formalization is those routes that are both marked and guided, where they are an integral aspect of the wider urban tourism attraction mix and are under the jurisdiction of an established body or trust that has the responsibility for trail development, maintenance and management. Figure 6.5 sets out the path of increased trail formalization from the unmarked/ unguided to marked/guided. It also depicts possible changes in trail development over time. For example, change A may result from increased volunteers, or the commitment for a heritage body or trust to provide guided tours on a more regular basis. Change B may occur when increased funds are spent on a formally marked trail with direction signs, markers and a consistent marked look. Change C is a likely outcome where political and philosophical change results in a formerly marked heritage spot that is no longer appropriate to display publicly, an action that was taken in many former Soviet controlled cities in Eastern Europe. Change D, where guided, unmarked trails become marked and guided, may arise when the route becomes so popular that it is necessary to set out the route formally to facilitate the option of guided or self-guided. Other scenario changes are illustrated by the remaining arrows in the figure. Research in both cities took place in 2003 (Dunedin) and 2004 (Napier). A questionnaire was developed for business owners, focusing on trail awareness, planning and development, and management. In Dunedin, 75 businesses were surveyed in the historic core and the CBD; businesses perceived not to benefit directly from visitors (i.e. investment houses, banks, large retail chains) were excluded from the survey. A 67% response rate was obtained. Eighty-two percent of the businesses were not aware that an informal trail existed. The top reasons given for this were no signage or makers and no printed materials to indicate the presence of a trail. For the minority who were aware of an informal trail, the best features of the trail were the churches, followed by the Victorian and Edwardian buildings. Landmarks that connected the city to its Scottish heritage were ranked lowest in features best reflecting key sites and attributes of the trail. When businesses were informed that an informal trail existed, almost all (96%) supported the development of a formal trail. Virtually the same percentage (92%) did not perceive a formal trail being a distraction for their business, with 62% expressing that the trail would be good for business. When asked what aspects of trail development the business would like to see, they named route markers as a top priority, followed

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

195

by historic signboards about attractions, street signs and wall plaques. Guided tours, but at specific times of the year, were ranked fifth, with their businesses as a recognized stop being prioritized least. Individual businesses were asked what activity and/or functions they could offer. For those who responded to this question, the top response was they could display unique products (53%), followed by their business was a food and beverage stop along the route (40%). Lower responses included that visitors could be told about the history of their premises (23%), followed by any historical character or specific event linked to their premises (17%). The least favored option was a description of the architecture of their premises (7%). The final aspect of the survey focused on the trail management regime. The majority of businesses (45%) thought it best for the Dunedin city council to be the responsible authority for trail maintenance, rather than the Historic Places Trust (23%). Few (8%) supported a public– private arrangement, with the remainder of participants not providing an answer. Issues that would require ongoing development and maintenance once the trail was formalized included maintaining markers, publicizing the trail, maintaining signs, locating signs, content of historic signs as well as reviewing the feedback received from visitors. Least important issues were determining group size and the length of stops along the trail. The survey demonstrated that the informal trail ought to be formally developed and that the business community was very supportive of action taken by Dunedin city council to ensure that the trail would receive proper maintenance. So what lessons could Dunedin learn from Napier where a formalized trail existed along with a clear agency responsible for trail planning, development and management, namely the Art Deco Trust? Fifty businesses were surveyed within the Art Deco precinct of Napier in February 2004. A 92% response rate was obtained. Most businesses (67%) were retail or food and beverage-related (17%), where the majority were either set up in the last five years (32%) or were wellestablished (24%) over 15 years in business. Virtually all enterprises (98%) saw their client base as residents and visitors, some 37% said they were reliant on upwards of 40% of their income from visitors alone. Another 30% stated their income from visitors was between 41% and 50%, and another 26% declared reliance on visitors of between 51% and 70%. Location is important for every business. The Napier firms were asked about this and, not surprisingly, 79% stated it was important to have their business location either within the Art Deco precinct or, even better, to be located along the guided tour route. For enterprises already (Continued)

196

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Themed Urban Walking Heritage Trails in New Zealand (Continued) on the route, Table 6.5 reveals a mixed response, but the majority benefit either by being part of the organized walking tour or because their location boosts general visitor-based business. This comparative study revealed the benefits of formalized trail development and maintenance, along with having a clear agency responsible for trail planning, development and management. At the time of the research, Dunedin was in the process of developing a marked trail. A decade on there is no formal recognition of a marked trail similar to the one in Napier. This is perhaps an acceptance by the council that visitors to Dunedin do not come for the city’s built heritage, but rather they use Dunedin as a gateway to the ecotourism opportunities of the Otago Peninsula. The reality of place marketing and branding of places as offering a certain experience necessitates creativity on the part of promoters of tourism in cities. The development of walking trails in urban areas, especially themed ones as demonstrated in this case study, caters to an attentive audience if only for a few hours, displaying the assets of historic city centers. Urban trails with strong architectural themes are one means of showcasing and linking attractions, thereby creating an enhanced experience for visitors and economic benefits for the local community. Table 6.5 Business responses to association with the Art Deco Trail, Napier Scenario Visitors choose to come into the building, but it is not part of the organized walking tour Visitors come into the building as it is part of the organized tour Business is connected to the Art Deco label, but it is not part of the walking tour Business is not connected with the Art Deco label or the walking trail and receives few visitors

Percentage response 55.2 21.7 8.7 17.4

Source: Boyd and Tham (2004).

Trail Design The design and physical development of trails is extremely important in providing safe and secure environments for tourists and recreationists, access for people with or without physical disabilities, protection of natural and

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

197

cultural resources, and educational and enjoyable experiences for users. Many books and manuals have been published to assist non-profit agencies, public lands managers and private organizations in designing and constructing walkways, footpaths, trails and routes (e.g. Albrecht, 1996; Ashbaugh & Kordish, 1971; Baud-Bovy & Lawson, 1998; Bell, 2008; Binks et al., 1978; Briganti & Hoel, 1994; Countryside Commission, 1990; Federal Highway Administration, 1997, 2005; Flink et al., 2001; Foti et al., 2006; Kirschbaum et al., 1999; Morris, 1972; Rathke & Baughman, 1994). These have been carefully written with detailed design instructions related to path location, width, gradient, servicescapes and surface material. Given the availability of this information, this section does not attempt to provide detailed design and construction directions. Rather, it highlights some of the more pertinent issues facing route planners today as regards design and physical development of linear recreation and tourism corridors.

Location When trails are purpose-built, location is vital, and the exact locality of the route must be identified (Nowers et al., 2002). When a trail is placed in close proximity to parks or other attractions, it is more likely to be utilized by a wider range of consumers (Settina & Kauffman, 2001). The same can be said of their connections with other important transportation links, such as railway stations or roads (Watkins, 1984). Rural bikeways have a better chance of succeeding if they are connected to, or near, larger centers of transportation such as train depots, bus stations or highways. By the same token, though, walking, hiking and commuter trails should be protected, and separated, from traffic and have interesting surroundings, including greenery (Baud-Bovy & Lawson, 1998; Fiala, 1999). Trail location is also key in avoiding the most sensitive eco-zones, such as bird nesting areas or the most susceptible vegetation (Baud-Bovy & Lawson, 1998; Farrell & Marion, 2001; Price, 1983). Paths can be directed away from these places but kept within a reasonable distance to allow sightseers to enjoy wildlife habitats or unique plant species. Where possible, interpretive trails should pass through a variety of landscapes and exude a diversity of sensory stimuli. Gustke and Hodgson (1980) found that the more monotonous a trail is in terms of its landscape variance and aesthetic variety, the less enjoyment it emanates and the less its users will learn. ‘Sensory experience of the environment is characterized by periods of sameness punctuated by abrupt differences . . . aesthetic pleasure is triggered principally where there is an important discontinuity in the environment such as where the trail leaves a meadow and enters a wood’ (Gustke & Hodgson, 1980: 54). Scenic byways use existing roads and highways, and they often pass through many kilometers of landforms, land uses and land ownerships. This

198

Tour ism and Trail s

means that relatively little control can be exerted by agencies and individuals in charge of these long-distance routes in terms of route changes, vegetation along the way, the adequacy of facilities and services, or quality of road maintenance. In an ideal situation, however, planning and designing a scenic corridor should take into account roadside development, viewpoints, parking areas, picnic and rest areas, and landscaping (Baud-Bovy & Lawson, 1998) (see also the case study in Chapter 3 on the development of the Causeway Coastal Route in Northern Ireland).

Trail structure The types of trails and their design will depend on the primary market being targeted and the main purpose of the development. For instance, different consumers sometimes prefer different surfaces, gradients and lengths (Aguirre, 2009; Bell, 2008; Fiala, 1999; Lieber & Allton, 1983). The use of urban bicycle paths for rural access will require special consideration while they are being designed (Watkins, 1984). There are three main components of hiking trails and footpaths: the trailhead, the corridor and other elements. All of these need to be considered together, because all of them are important in the recreation experience. Design elements of recreation trails typically include destination attractions (e.g. waterfall, canyon), campsites and picnic areas, scenic overlooks, restrooms, bike racks, interpretive displays and water supplies (Kirschbaum et al., 1999). Trail design must also take into consideration elements of slope, tread, surface, protruding objects and vertical clearances (Kirschbaum et al., 1999). Shallow gradients tend to be more desirable for cyclists and runners (Dowson & Doxford, 1997; Mudway, 2004), whereas walkers, hikers and horseback riders are more content with steeper gradients. There are also gradient rules to consider regarding disability access, which must be followed if access for all is part of a trail’s mandate. Slope considerations have a bearing on the sustainability of nature tracks that are being developed from scratch in that they can be planned and executed in ways that help prevent the ecological impacts of hikers and natural processes. Trails that include steep slopes should be designed with switchbacks and drainage pipes to help minimize the flow of water runoff and subsequently avert the effects of erosion on and near the trail. Utilizing existing natural earth contours can also help inhibit wear on track surfaces (Wallin & Hardin, 1996: 521). In areas of heavy runoff potential, there should also be a substantial buffer zone to help absorb water. As well, the choice of surface material and hardening techniques, if chosen, can help preserve the path itself and its surrounding environment. Bell (2008: 106) suggests that route layouts and surface material should depend on the degree of unspoiled nature desired or how much wear and tear is expected. The type of surface materials has been shown to have a direct

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

199

relationship with the satisfaction and safety of trail use by cyclists, crosscountry skiers, hikers and joggers (Allton & Lieber, 1983). In general, hikers and joggers prefer a woodchip or dirt surface, while bicyclists prefer paved trails (Lieber & Allton, 1983). Likewise, existing trails that are being revamped or newly-built trails can use ‘hardening’ to minimize the effect both of natural deterioration and visitor-induced wear and tear on archaeological artifacts, material culture and natural landscapes (Cubit & McArthur, 1995; Johanson & Olsen, 2010). Even though such efforts can be prohibitively expensive in some cases, the long-term protection of the trails and their adjacent soils is very important in ensuring the longevity of the resource (Brown & Barter, 2004; Chavez, 1996; Farrell & Marion, 2001; Revitt & Sanders, 2002; Wallin & Harden, 1996). Trail hardening or softening can also act as a deliberate management response to address impacts occurring on more sensitive landscapes (see Hall & Lew, 2009). As noted above it can take many forms, ranging from where the natural surface features are temporarily altered by putting down gravel, to more dramatic measures where surfaces are permanently changed and made artificial through the use of tarmac. A common approach has also been to put down boardwalks, often over sensitive ecological areas such as wetlands, thereby keeping the physical pressure off the natural environment, reducing the threat of trampling, soil compaction as a result of congestion and avoiding possible vegetation loss. The danger is that sacrificial sites, or, in this case, trails are designed to take on more impact than others. Further to this is the possibility that the hardened site/trail is used to market the area strategically, thereby increasing the likelihood of higher levels of use. Hardening has often been favored over shifting use to other less frequented areas (Marion & Leung, 2004). While acknowledging the ‘management’ response to using hardening as a supply-driven technique, it is highlighted in this chapter as a key aspect in how a trail or route is deliberately designed in anticipation of high levels of use and impact. The case study below outlines the extent to which trail hardening is a deliberate action in the design of nature trails within areas of Acadia National Park, USA.

Case Study: Trail Hardening in Acadia National Park One consequence of site hardening that has received limited attention is the impact that changes to natural settings have on the overall visitor experience (Manning, 1999; Bullock & Lawson, 2007). To what extent do visitors accept altered settings, where the trails are less natural in appearance and where they see the changes as artificial or visually obtrusive? Cahill et al. (2008) studied visitor acceptance of trail hardening (Continued)

200

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Trail Hardening in Acadia National Park (Continued) within two sites (Jordan Pond (JP) on Mount Desert Island (MDI) and Little Moose Island (LMI) off Schoodic Peninsula) within Acadia National Park, USA. The park’s trail system is popular among hikers and cyclists. MDI has a long history of path development with 160 km of trails, hardened rock steps, gravel, paving, bridges and wood planks. Parts of MDI are recognized as high-intensity visitor spaces. In contrast, LMI is a small, remote island that receives fewer visitors. There has been little done there by way of visitor support facilities or other related developments. There are no designated or signed trails, only informal visitor-created trails. Cahill et al. (2008: 234) examined the opinions of visitors on ‘acceptable trail development options in divergent recreation settings when faced with concomitant trade-offs for differing levels of environmental quality, visitation and encounters with others’. They undertook a stated choice survey at both sites in 2002, in which some 400 respondents were offered different hypothetical recreation conditions and encounter levels (see Table 6.6) along with possible levels of management regimentation. Combined, there were 256 different options that respondents could evaluate. The study found that the most visitors preferred little to no restrictions on public access with fewer encounters with other recreationists, trails that have not been widened and no secondary trails. There was some variation in responses between the two sites. Respondents at JP (extensive trail developments) were more amenable to trail development, including slight widening with the uses of wood planking, or no widening but hardening with gravel. In comparison, respondents at LMI preferred more natural hardening measures such as the use of stepping stones, or keeping trails in more primitive conditions. Two management scenarios were suggested: (1) maximizing solitude and naturalness along the trail system by restricting access and having minimal levels of trail development; and (2) maximizing resource protection and ensuring access for all types of visitors, by linking unlimited access opportunities with the highest level of trail development (hardening). Table 6.7 shows a summary of the preferences of visitors at both sites with respect to both scenarios. Respondents at LMI, a low-use and low-development setting, favored the scenario that emphasizes solitude and keeping the setting as natural as is possible by employing minimalist management strategies: restricted access and few amendments. In contrast, respondents at JP, a high-use and well-developed trail environment, favor the second scenario because it offers access for all abilities by allowing the highest level of trail development possible. They accept tolerance for higher levels of physical trail

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

201

Table 6.6 Acadia recreation setting attributes and encounter levels Social conditions Level of encounters 1. Visitors encounter no other groups during a hike 2. Visitors encounter up to 5 other groups during a hike 3. Visitors encounter up to 10 other groups during a hike 4. Visitors encounter up to 20 other groups during a hike Resource conditions Ecological condition of official trail 1. Trails show no signs of widening or secondary trails 2. Visitor use on trails with wet soils has caused a slight amount of trail widening 3. Visitor use on trails with wet soils has caused a moderate amount of trail widening 4. Visitor use on trails with wet soils has caused extensive trail widening and formation of secondary trails around wet areas Management conditions Public access 1. The number of people allowed to hike in this area is not limited 2. The number of people allowed to hike in this area is limited – around 75–80% of interested visitors are able to gain access 3. The number of people allowed to hike in this area is limited – about half of interested visitors are able to gain access 4. The number of people allowed to hike in this area is limited – around 25–30% of interested visitors are able to gain access Trail development 1. There are no management-constructed features along trails (e.g. stepping stones, wood planking, gravel) 2. Stepping stones are placed along sections of trails 3. Wood planking is placed on sections of trails 4. Gravel is placed on sections of trails Source: After Cahill et al. (2008: 236).

development, including wood planking and gravel, to address ecological impacts on the network. This example demonstrates the challenge managers face when considering two competing objectives – to maximize trail development and minimize the ecological impacts of recreation. In deciding what action to take, managers need to consider the impact their actions may have on the overall visitor experience, especially since hardening and other infrastructural changes have a certain degree of permanence (Cahill et al., 2008). (Continued)

202

Tour ism and Trail s

Table 6.7 Little Moose Island (LMI) and Jordan Pond (JP) respondent preferences regarding management of use and trail hardening measures Attributes

Maximize solitude and naturalness using access restrictions and stepping stones

Maximize access for all abilities using gravel

Access level Encounter level

25–30% gain access No other groups encountered

Ecological level

Slight amount of trail widening Stepping stones on sections of trails

Use is not limited Encounter up to 20 other groups No widening or secondary trails Gravel on sections of trails

79% 33%

21% 67%

Development level Preferences – LMI scenario – JP scenario

Source: After Cahill et al. (2008: 242).

Signage There is more to trail design than the on-the-ground corridor; there are many associated infrastructure elements that must be considered in developing and designing any sort of route. One example is the production of highquality and environmentally sound signs and waymarks (Carabelli, 2002; Finke, 1997). Well-marked trails are important in assuring resource protection and user safety. Signs and trail markers fulfill several important purposes. The most important role of waymarks is to indicate the course of a trail, byway or other linear corridor. These are especially important for firsttime users and for all users at confusing intersections or where the prescribed way might be difficult to discern. Good signs help people avoid becoming lost (Dowson & Doxford, 1997). This in turn helps them feel more confident about where they are going. Because people can enter most long-distance routes at a variety of locations, signs and colored maps to show people’s location on the trail can be useful in helping them decide if they want to continue or where they would like to go next (Finke, 1997: 77). On long-distance, road-based routes, highway signs are commonly used to illustrate and confirm the byway one is traveling (Payne, 1997). In most cases these signs simply project the name of the route with little additional information so as not to become a distraction for drivers (Figure 6.6). Heritage walks or backwoods hiking tracks are sometimes marked with signs or blazes that indicate the course of the corridor. Blazes take many forms, including painted symbols on trees or rocks, stone cairns, flags on trees, or affixed metal

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

203

Figure 6.6 Highway sign designating a long-distance heritage route

or plastic signs (Figure 6.7). These are important parts of the design of longand short-distance paths. In cities, trail markings are often embedded in sidewalks and streets, and comprise medallions, brick or cobblestone stripes, or painted waymarks (Goodey, 1975) (Figure 6.8). Similarly, markers can also be instrumental in marking distances from one site on a route to another. The second purpose of trail signage is to warn people of difficult conditions, dangerous slopes or drop-offs, or to beware of wildlife or poisonous plants. Caution signs are especially crucial for helping visitors avoid

Figure 6.7 Blazes marking the Pyrenean Way trail along the French-Spanish border

204

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 6.8 Boston‘s Freedom Trail embedded in the sidewalks to guide tourists along the path

accidents, reduce injuries and lessen the liability of the trail owners (Figure 6.9). Trailhead signs that show gradients, paving material and levels of difficulty of various parts of the trail help users determine for themselves whether or not they will be able to utilize the trail or which portions they can visit (Cook, 1988). This is critical in helping to alleviate frustrations or potentially risky situations (Kirschbaum et al., 1999). Interpretation is the third goal of signage. Interpretive signage (discussed later) is important for providing information and education about the route being visited and the salience of specific sites along the way. Fourth, good signs can help steer people away from sensitive spots (e.g. bird colonies) or crowded areas into more resilient locations and less-crowded zones. Logos and signs may also be used to disperse heavy traffic on scenic or access routes during high season. Less obvious ways to important destinations can be signposted to alleviate traffic, provide a wider variety of landscapes and to spread the benefits of tourists’ expenditures to other communities off the normal route (Scottish Tourist Board, 1986). Finally, a unique sort of sign is public message boards. These are valuable information sources when those who passed before are able to leave messages for people they know or for lagging hikers about conditions ahead. They are also useful for park and path managers to post daily conditions or announcements for trail users – information that may change on a daily basis (e.g. fire danger, aggressive animal sightings or severe weather warnings). Despite the

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

205

Figure 6.9 A warning sign for trail users

proliferation of mobile telephones and global positioning systems, these message boards are worthwhile communications links in wilderness and remote areas with little or no cellular or internet service. Although signs, waymarkers and message boards serve important functions, they should be designed in ways that do not detract from the natural or cultural resources on display (Carabelli, 2002). As noted earlier in this book, many wilderness trail users prefer to remain in wilderness settings, with the sight of features of ‘civilization’ diminishing the environmental experience. This is often the case on remote water and wilderness trails, where people commonly seek solitude or spiritual encounters with nature, or when they are trying to test their navigational skills. Keeping human-made distractions to a minimum can help enhance the experience for water trail and other ecotrail users (Settina & Kauffman, 2001). For the majority of route and path users, however, warning, interpretive and directional signs are central to the outdoor experience.

Trail amenities Areas set aside for rest and relaxation along a footpath or trail are important. These allow weary travelers to rest their feet, have a drink, enjoy a picnic and take a break from the rigors of walking, cycling, skating or canoeing. These are especially important for older trail consumers and children.

206

Tour ism and Trail s

On trails with relatively steep inclines these respite locations are particularly important and may encourage even the less-fit population to participate in outdoor activities. Along most hiking and cycling pathways, except those with a strong backwoods theme where users desire to be isolated from signs of humanity, amenities are an important part of rest areas (Settina & Kauffman, 2001). In most natural settings, rest-related amenities are built with environmental aesthetics in mind, so that they do not detract from the encounter with nature. As well, construction materials should remain as authentic as possible in relation to the natural or historical features of the trail (Brown & Barter, 2004). Trail agencies must make important decisions about which types of amenities to provide and at what scale. Where possible, drinking fountains can provide rejuvenating water. Benches provide opportunities to relax and socialize. Shade, either from trees or constructed canopies, affords a cool respite from the sun (Hall, 1991). Again, the degree of amenity provision and the types offered will depend on the target audience and the goals of the trail itself.

Physical access and accessibility Accessibility is another element of design that requires careful consideration and planning. Access can be seen from at least two perspectives: physical access to the route by the general public and accessibility for all, including people with physical disabilities. According to Settina and Kauffman (2001: 96), the locations and designs of ‘put-in’ and ‘take-out’ points on water trails can influence not only the visitor experience but can also help mitigate user conflicts and environmental impacts. According to their assessment, fewer access points and greater distances between them cater more to long-term expedition seekers, whereas numerous and closer entry and exit sites encourage day use and less-experienced water- and land-based users. It is also important to consider different sorts of consumers. Motorboats and sailboats have different access needs than do canoes and rowboats. Paddlers typically require closer distances between put-in and take-out points than powerboats do. Water trail landing and launching sites for canoes and kayaks need softer landing surfaces (e.g. grass or sand) with moderate slopes into the water, whereas other boaters may be able to handle concrete or rocks better than canoes can. Ideally, the incorporation of these special launch and landing positions can be integrated into extant launching areas (Settina & Kauffman, 2001: 96). At a larger scale, scenic byways and themed routes also require careful design but at a different level and in different ways. Nowers et al. (2002: 203) identified several guidelines that can help the success of wine routes and other themed cultural itineraries. First, the route ought to be accessible from all directions. This will help create a wider market base and reduce the

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

207

distances that people must travel to participate. Second, good quality road signs direct visitors to attraction nodes along the way, to assure drivers that they are still on the correct path and to provide information. Third, at specific attractions (e.g. wineries, distilleries, museums, historic sites) certain design features are also important for the routes’ success. Facilities should be large enough to manage tour groups, in addition to individuals and small crowds. Each site should have adequate parking with ample room for motorcoaches to park and turn around. Toilet facilities are essential for route visitors, and facilities (e.g. wine-tasting rooms, shops and reception areas) need to be tourist-friendly and accessible, including for wheelchair users. Providing access for people with physical disabilities is a major concern among public agencies that operate hiking trails, beach access routes and other linear recreation resources (Malibu Parks, 2006; Nisbett & Hinton, 2005; Trójnara, 1997; Watson, 1982; Wessell, 1997). Many countries have laws that require agencies and organizations to provide opportunities to participate for all people who want to participate. This includes people with limited mobility, hearing and vision. The 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in the US and the 1995 Disabilities Discrimination Act in the UK prohibit public agencies and private organizations from discriminating against people with physical disabilities. In most cases, under Titles II and III of the ADA, this includes the context of tourism and recreation, requiring buildings constructed after 1992 to be structurally accessible for everyone. It also requires barriers to be removed from most public buildings and other public spaces that existed prior to 1992, inasmuch as these compliance measures can be reasonably achieved to the extent that it will provide the ‘greatest degree of accessibility for the widest range of abilities’ (Malibu Parks, 2006: 1). Exceptions to the ADA guidelines from the perspective of trails include cases: • • • • • •

where compliance would cause considerable damage to cultural, historic, religious or significant natural features or characteristics; where compliance substantially alters the nature of the setting or the purpose of the trail; where trail work is limited to routine, periodic maintenance, such as erosion control; where incorporating accessibility features would require reconstructing or altering the trail; where compliance requires building materials or methods that are illegal; or where compliance would not be feasible owing to terrain or prevailing construction practices. (Kirschbaum et al., 1999; Malibu Parks, 2006: 8)

There has been considerable debate in recent years about the constraints to complying with the tenets of the ADA and similar legislation in other countries. Two of the most common concerns relate to the cost of compliance

208

Tour ism and Trail s

and the ways in which compliance might affect the overall visitor experience (Moore & Shafer, 2001: 10), suggesting that some modifications would diminish the experience for many people. By the same token, research has shown that perceived obstacles, such as a lack of ramps, appropriate surfaces and the right kinds of interpretive media, keep many people with disabilities from using trails (Bell, 2008; Haynes & Cope, 1998; Young, 1998). Short paths in national parks, outdoor museums, historic cities or archaeological parks are the easiest to modify for access. Portions of rail-trails, smoothsurface footpaths, equestrian tracks and even water trails can be modified to become at least partially compliant with access laws. Where new trail tread surfaces are installed, adding new infrastructure elements (e.g. bridges, boardwalks, railings, signs), remodeling built features (e.g. toilets, picnic areas, benches, gates, steps), hardening trail surfaces, or rerouting or widening an existing trail are all instances where accessibility guidelines and compliance can be met (Kirschbaum et al., 1999). The primary difficulty comes with mountain hiking trails, particularly those on acute slopes, where access for all is difficult at best. However, even in this instance, limited accommodations can be made at trailheads and visitor centers (Trójnara, 1997), where less-mobile visitors can view interpretive displays, watch videos about the trail, or participate in hands-on nature activities related to the local environment. Typically, compliance with access legislation entails physical changes to existing routes and their infrastructures, as well as planned adaptations to newly developed trails. Each country’s laws will determine the exact specifications required for trails to be compliant, but several key recommendations can be highlighted based upon the ADA Accessibility Guidelines for parks and protected areas. These compliances are not as simple as ramps and handrails but entail much more by way of passage width, gradient, surface stability, sign and drinking fountain height, toilet facilities and interpretive media. To facilitate wheelchairs or service animals, trails should be designed to minimum width specifications which will allow pedestrians or cyclists to bypass wheelchairs or service animals, or vice versa. Common guidelines suggest that, where physically possible, hiking trails should be a minimum of 900 mm wide with adequate passing spaces every 200–300 meters (Figure 6.10). For multi-use trails, the width should be greater, in the range of 2.5–3.0 meters (Malibu Parks, 2006). On purposely developed hiking trails, slope or grade is also an important consideration for universal access. Multi-use trails typically require more moderate grades than hiking trails do, usually within the range of 10–20%, although there are usually rules pertaining to how much of a trail (length) is allowed to be designed at various grades to be compliant (Malibu Parks, 2006). According to Watson (1982), for convenient access by wheelchair, trail slopes should be 5% or less.

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

209

Figure 6.10 An accessible beach trail in Denmark

Besides the important ecological role of hardening as discussed earlier, surface material and design also play a salient role in allowing access for older recreationists or people with disabilities (Mudway, 2004). For example, although they may be aesthetically pleasing, wood chips are difficult and sometimes dangerous for people who use wheelchairs or prosthetics (Laufenberg, 2004). They can also present hazards for the elderly or visually impaired. Engineered wood fiber, concrete, asphalt or wooden planks have found considerable success on many trails, as these are firm and stable and facilitate more inclusive access. Edge protection can increase safety and help mitigate negative ecological consequences of trail use (Watson, 1982). Trail edges should be at least 75 mm high to be obvious and detectable for people with impaired vision who might use a cane (Malibu Parks, 2006). Another means of advancing the accessibility of trails is having employees devoted specifically to adaptive experiences. While most of the world’s routes and footpaths are not able to offer this option, it is fairly commonplace on publicly managed trails where inclusive accommodations are usually required by law. Most national parks and other public lands agencies in the US and the UK have accessibility coordinators on staff, whose job is to facilitate disability access and oversee legal compliance (Haynes & Cope, 1998). Other organizations and associations have trained volunteers who accompany people with disabilities along a trail. Despite the difficulties associated with unpaved and steep trails, one person with limited mobility noted ‘I want the challenge of hills and sand’ (quoted in Bork, 1989: 23). These sorts of adapted recreational programs that allow people with disabilities to go beyond the ‘easy’ sections of a trail illustrate the importance of providing

210

Tour ism and Trail s

access to as broad a spectrum of consumers as possible. Bork (1989) even suggested that limiting the spatial range of people with disabilities to ramps, adapted toilets, paved trails and visitor centers may limit public and individual perceptions about the capabilities of this special needs population and how they decide which activities to undertake. Hall (1991) rightfully noted that walking trails are becoming more popular fitness options for seniors. He also suggested that senior-oriented fitness trails require different amenities than those that cater to a more general population. For example, toilets spaced more closely together, benches, flower pots and birdfeeders, distance markers and plenty of shade are important to meet some of the physical and social needs of the senior market. In the design and construction process, obstacles that can endanger or inhibit use by people with disabilities should always be minimized. Among these are openings in trail surfaces (e.g. abrupt changes in surface and wide gaps between planks), protruding objects (e.g. overhead signposts) and tread obstacles (e.g. raised pavers or planks embedded within level surfaces) (Malibu Parks, 2006: 10). These design considerations are crucial in delivering accessible footpath and trail experiences for people with disabilities. Although not directly design-related, maintaining trails for disability access is also extremely important and should be mentioned here in this context. In the autumn, during heavy leaf fall, it is important to keep trails clear of leaf buildup and overhanging tree branches. Heavy layers of leaves can make navigating wheelchairs difficult and create slippery conditions (Haynes & Cope, 1998; Watson, 1982). For people with visual limitations, a trail can be made more accessible with a guide rope, although there has been some criticism of this method because the ropes can cause abrasions on the hands, they can create perceived artificial situations, they lack subtlety and a rope of the length needed might invite vandalism (Watson, 1982: 292). For blind or partially sighted visitors, the nature trail experience can be enhanced by the use of other senses. Braille or audio devices satiate only a portion of the multisensory outdoor experience. Young (1998) highlighted the need to involve sounds and smells for the blind, incorporating the effects of light and shade, wind, moisture, plant growth, birds chirping, running water and wildflower fragrances. Management practices that benefit certain species should be adopted whenever possible. ‘A self-guided trail designed for the sighted visitor which is merely “translated” into Braille or audio facility can be a very boring and limited experience for a visually impaired person’ (Young, 1998: 50). The edging mentioned earlier is also beneficial for blind visitors who use canes. These click rails can be easily identified with a sweeping cane. As well, surface material can be employed to help the visually impaired, for when the texture changes, the visitor will know he/she has wandered off the main trail. Differently textured surfaces at nodes along the trail can also help alert blind visitors to stop for a recorded message (Watson, 1982).

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

211

Substitution A final design consideration is the deliberate strategy of developing a trail to deflect visitor pressure from more popular areas and landscapes. This is extremely hard to achieve in the context of nature trails as the setting itself is often a major raison d’être as to why users are on a particular path, track or trail, and denying them the vistas they can enjoy is not an option; instead development strategies such as trail hardening, already discussed, are the preferred option of trail designers. Walkers interested in one of the Great Walks in New Zealand (previously discussed in an earlier chapter) are unlikely to choose a less similar trail unless they adopt that action as a deliberate coping response to over-use and crowding (Kearsley & Coughlan, 1999). It is perhaps a design strategy that is easier to deploy on routes within an urban landscape. Of course, the authors are cognizant that substituting one location or trail for another is equally a management action, and not solely a design aspect. In this chapter, we look at substitution as part of deliberate design for some urban walking routes within tourist-historic cities to spread the attraction space away from popular key features and sites, as the following case study about Budapest demonstrates.

Case Study: The Cultural Avenue Project, Budapest Routes are an important feature within tourist-historic cities (Ashworth & Tunbridge, 2000), defined as a particular area within a city where architectural forms and morphological patterns together with their artifacts and edifices have been consciously used to create a place-bound heritage product. In modeling the evolution of the tourist-historic city, Ashworth and Tunbridge (2000) argued that over time there would be a high degree of connectedness between what they saw as the ‘historic city’ and the ‘tourist city’, where most of the popular tourism spaces and attractions would be clustered within the historic core. The end phase of their model is the development of a newer periphery that also features heritage attractions and spaces. The extent to which this has taken place has varied considerably. In the case of Prague, the majority of heritage has remained in the city core; an exception is the walking tour to the castle outside the city center and on the other side of the river, whereas Rome has many heritage features and attractions throughout the city that are commonly experienced by visitors on sightseeing tours that follow a set itinerary and route where they enter or exit from the route using a hop-on and hop-off system. Urban walking/touring routes, as previously noted, are popular ways to link individual heritage and cultural point attractions and (Continued)

212

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: The Cultural Avenue Project, Budapest (Continued) spaces. They can also be important management strategies to deflect a portion of the visitor pressure away from traditional and more popular spaces and attractions. Thus, they can act as a form of substitution for more popular and traditional visitor attractions, stops and spaces. Rátz et al. (2008) wrote about the transformation of Budapest since 1989 and how tourism and cultural regeneration have helped transform old spaces into new places of interest. Budapest, often regarded as ‘the most Western of the East European capitals’, has a well-visited central area that includes the banks of the Danube and the Buda Castle Quarter (a World Heritage Site (WHS) since 1987), and World Heritage-listed Andrássy Avenue (inscribed in 2002) dominated by 19th-century architecture and elegant residential buildings. The majority of tourists visit the WHS-laden center of Budapest, with less attention devoted to newer tourism spaces on the urban periphery, such as the Statue Park (an open-air museum of socialist statues removed from the streets after the collapse of communism in 1989–1990) (Smith & Puczkó, 2011), representing a political heritage attraction. Even within the popular historic core/WHS zone there are sites and attractions of lesser renown. To address this, the idea of creating a Cultural Avenue was initiated in 2000, with actual development of a route occurring in 2002. Tourist resources were re-packed in the form of a route that linked museums, churches, cafes, historical buildings and even a spa, offering visitors the opportunity to immerse themselves in the history, culture and traditions of Budapest. The Cultural Avenue encompasses 59 stops, the majority of these being within the boundary of the WHS area. According to Rátz et al. (2008: 445), the development of this urban cultural route was designed to ‘encourage visits to less popular or not too-well known areas, to divert traditional tourist flows and to provide an alternative itinerary’. In other words, the route acts as a substitute for visits to the most popular stops/attractions on the beaten tourist path of Budapest. Its goal is to demonstrate that experiencing Budapest’s cultural heritage assets can involve multiple sightseeing circuits.

Conclusion This chapter has examined an integral part of our discussion on trails and routes, namely how they have been planned and developed. Part of this discussion has been tied to the wider policy environment that exists between

Pl anning and Developing Trail s and Routes

213

countries, and the willingness to put in place the necessary legislation to facilitate a range of specific types of trail programs that offer users a mix of trails and routes in terms of the types of activities they can participate in when accessing each. The importance of the policy arena ties back to the conceptual model in Chapter 1 (Figure 1.1) that placed the wider macro policy environment as the foundation to which other aspects relate, including obviously supply, but also scale, demand, type of impact and, which is the attention of the next chapter, how they are managed. We have been deliberate in our effort to balance discussion on planning and development processes against the practical elements that go into designing trails and routes, cognizant that the nuances of design must take into consideration the uniqueness of place and time. Not all trails will garner the same degree of interest and therefore have to endure similar levels of pressure. Over time, many trails and routes will experience ebbs and flows in use levels and the specifics of how trails continue to be planned and developed will take into account these basic geographic aspects. Use levels obviously will vary between nature trails or those that have a deliberate cultural heritage focus to them and this should not deter the development of the former; instead, how environments respond to varying levels of pressure is in essence in the end an essential management problem. It has become more fashionable today to discount the numbers involved in recreation and tourism within environments, in this case, trails and routes, and stress that it is not a numbers problem but rather a management one. Page (2012) recently introduced the concept of ‘managed tourism’ in reference to the overly-used concept of ‘sustainable tourism’. And so it is to how we effectively manage trails and routes that attention shifts in the next chapter, examining how we protect, maintain and monitor their usage and impacts.

7

Managing Routes and Trails

Introduction The last chapter focused primarily on designing trails to minimize physical impacts (e.g. hardening, slope) from erosion and visitor use and how best to enhance the visitor experience. The legislative actions described provide much of the legal framework in which trail and route development has thrived. Trail management, however, is a complex phenomenon. Routes and pathways of different lengths, locations and attraction types require different management approaches and decision-making. Nonetheless, there is a fairly standard issue that is important for managing linear routes regardless of the type of trail or its location, and that is principally to manage their users. This is an imperative element of social and ecological sustainability, as it involves community members, trail users and the natural or cultural settings. The majority of negative impacts result from conditions of overcrowding, wear and tear, and unacceptable behavior. Managing visitors is a complicated endeavor that involves effective interpretation, sound conservation methods, good marketing and skilled leadership (Timothy, 2011a). There are many ways in which trail administrators can manage consumers and their impacts, and these are often seen as supply-driven, demand-centered approaches as well as a range of visitor procedures and frameworks. This chapter comprises two clear and distinct sections. First, current and established knowledge of supply and demand approaches, as well as visitor and heritage management, are examined to evaluate which of these approaches is the most appropriate with respect to linear spaces and attractions. The second section explores visitor management frameworks and procedures, including stakeholder approaches that focus on maximizing opportunities, limiting use or engaging with all stakeholders. Again, while all three, in particular the latter, are commonly cited in the wider tourism literature, the authors critique their applicability as effective management tools for trails and routes. Combined, the two strands of thinking in this chapter provide an ‘enhanced tool kit’ for managers. 214

Managing Routes and Trail s

215

Supply Versus Demand Techniques Management can sometimes focus on supply and demand techniques. It is common for any discussion of visitor attractions, heritage management and managing tourism impacts to provide a list of actions managers can adopt. Hall and McArthur (1998) provided an extensive list of visitor management techniques (Table 7.1) – those that are supply-driven or demand-focused. Hall and Lew (2009: 271) later simplified this approach, noting that supply perspectives include: • • • •

increasing or decreasing the number of attractions and supporting facilities; increasing or reducing accessibility to sites and facilities; hardening, softening, protecting or modifying attractions sites; spatially concentrating or dispersing sites and facilities.

Demand perspectives include marketing enhancements and educational campaigns, human resource and service development, and behavioral guidelines and regulations. While these are all familiar tactics mostly adopted by Table 7.1 Visitor management techniques Supply techniques

Demand techniques

Regulating access by: • area (zoning) • transport

Regulating behavior

Regulating visitation by: • numbers and group size • type of visitor Regulating equipment Modifying the site by: • hardening • softening

Implementing entry or user fees Undertaking research on • the market • visitor monitoring Undertaking marketing on: • promotions • strategic information Providing programs for: • interpretation • education Using accredited organizations to bring visitors to a site Encouraging and assisting alternative providers: • the tourist industry • volunteers

Source: Modified from Hall and MacArthur (1998: 108–110).

216

Tour ism and Trail s

managers of public lands, they have been devised more for spatial points and areas rather than line attractions. The challenge here is to tease out the elements that have higher utility as administrative tools for trails and routes.

Supply perspectives Controlling visitor flows One of the most common management tools is to close certain trails or parts of them (Cubit & McArthur, 1995). This has several functions. First, it allows impacted vegetation areas to recover and regenerate without visitors trampling on them (Lee et al., 1999). Second, trails can be closed at certain times of the year to divert large crowds during high season into other areas that are less prone to ecological or social impacts and to avoid negative consumer experiences by overcrowding. Third, certain trails can be made impassable to certain types of users. For instance, motorized users can be banned from using footpaths or hiking trails either by rules against them or by physical barriers through which motorized vehicles would find it difficult to pass. On water trails, limiting the use of human-powered vessels can be effective in mitigating some impacts (Settina & Kauffman, 2001). While this has the potential to create conflict between users, it has long been an effective management tool (Rasor, 1988). A related principle is the notion of dispersal. Overcrowded trails can be injurious to fragile habitats because they tend to concentrate people in one area. Disproportionate concentrations of tourists and recreationists should be avoided (Bell, 2008). Setups that encourage dispersed visitation help reduce environmental stresses and help make the experience more satisfying for visitors. This can be done in several ways, such as the closures noted above, but one of the most essential options is to offer a variety of networks that expand through various biomes, agricultural areas or cultural zones. A self-policing system that encourages trail consumers to register allows their patterns and activities to be monitored better. As well, certificates of completion or ‘club’ memberships for individuals who utilize an entire trail system might encourage people to use less-trodden parts of the circuit and may generate return visitation as well (Weaver, 1995: 602). In some cases, imposing a one night stay at a hut or campground, as is the case on many of New Zealand’s Great Walks (Kearsley & Coughlan, 1999), reduces the likelihood of congestion at certain key stops along these routes, but then the question of congestion is determined by carrying capacities – an issue discussed later in the chapter. Limiting numbers of users and activities can also be effective in natural and cultural corridors, albeit often an unpopular move. In some backwoods areas, permits may be required, which is a good way to limit volumes of consumers, especially during more vulnerable times of the year. Pricing has been an effective tool in various heritage areas (e.g. archaeological sites) to reduce the number of visitors by pricing entrance fees high enough to

Managing Routes and Trail s

217

preclude many segments of society (Timothy & Boyd, 2003), although this has been highly criticized as an elitist approach to managing visitors. As most trails and routes are accessible without entrance fees, such a policy is only feasible on very short pathways in parks, museums and archaeological sites. Limiting certain activities completely or seasonally may be an option, as is allowing certain activities only under the supervision of qualified personnel (e.g. rangers) (Beeton, 2006). Another way of controlling visitor flows and contact with resources in heritage site management has been the development of replicas that beckon the focus of visitors rather than the originals themselves (Timothy & Boyd, 2003). This is harder to do in the context of routes and trails, but it has been done where parallel trails were built to bypass sensitive trail features that would have been damaged by direct hiking, cycling and horseback riding. For example, on the Santa Fe Trail, where many of the original wagon ruts are still visible in the landscape, the United States (US) Forest Service created a Santa Fe Trail ‘companion trail’ adjacent to the original trail to avoid contact with and encroachment on the original tracks (Gaines, 1997).

Regulating access Another common approach that resource managers have used is zoning, popular within area-type spaces such as national parks and other protected lands. A tiered approach to regulating access is often followed where regions can be zoned from special preservation to high levels of access. This tiered system in situ differs by country. In Canada, the most protected zones are called special preservation areas, followed by wilderness, natural environments, recreation areas and finally parks. Nature trails traverse wilderness and human landscapes but predominantly natural environments, and these managers are able to control access by area or zone. An interesting example of trails within a national park with zonal alignments is the Lower Saxon Wadden Sea on the north coast of Germany. Established as a National Park in 1986, it was inscribed as a World Heritage Site (WHS) in 2009 because of its valuable mudflats and estuarine features. It has a unique zoning system that determines where trails and guided walks can occur. The national park has three zones: a quiet zone that comprises 69% of the park and where only guided walks take place on the mudflats and an intermediate zone (31% of the park) where access is by way of a marked trail that can be entered year round, with the exception of the bird sanctuary where admission is restricted to certain times of the year. The third zone is the recreation zone used for recreation only; it comprises less than 1% of the park. Access to trails can also be imposed by way of direct legislation and/or wider government policies that stipulate what types of users or activities are permitted. These are often used to combat conflicts that may arise between quiet and noisy visitors, or between walkers and motorized users. For example, mountain bikes are typically not permitted on walking trails within

218

Tour ism and Trail s

national parks, and if they are utilized, conflicts may arise. Likewise, conflicts frequently occur between walkers and horse riders, depending on whether or not trails are designated multi-use or single use. The case study below illustrates how access is often governed by direct regulation that permits or denies certain uses or users, in this case equestrians.

Case Study: State Regulation of Horseback Tours in National Parks in Australia Beeton (1999a) examined state regulations regarding commercial horseback tours in the Australian states and territories and found a range of viewpoints about how horseback riding on trails in national parks is perceived in relation to protecting the natural environment and conserving Australian heritage (Table 7.2). Queensland viewed horse riding as incompatible with preserving the natural environment. In contrast, Victoria viewed the management of Table 7.2 State regulation on commercial horseback tours in National Parks, Australia Horses on

State

Permitted

Victoria

Yes

New South Wales Australian Capital Territory Queensland

Yes

Walking tracks

Management tracks

Four-wheel drive roads

Back-up vehicles

No, except where nominated –

Yes

Yes

Some areas

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

–

No – grazing leases only

–

South Australia Western Australia

No – only on roads Yes

Tasmania

Yes

Source: After Beeton (1999a: 217).

No No – designated horse trails only –

–

No –

Yes

Gazetted roads or stock roads Gazetted

–

Yes

Gazetted roads –

Yes

–

Managing Routes and Trail s

219

national parks as multi-use areas that should include preservation, protection and access for enjoyment, recreation and education. Horseback riding is permitted within the provision of enjoyment and recreation clause in many of Victoria’s national parks. Beeton (1999a) also points to the historical association of the state’s past with a settler society that has always honored horses and The Outback as part of why the state has pursued and allowed multi-use trails, including horseback riding, in its national parks. There are, however, clear codes of conduct among horse riders as regards the ecological and social environment, including other travelers. These were established by a horse riding code that was written by the Australian Alps National Parks in the early 1990s for the Capital Territory and the states of Victoria and New South Wales. The code addresses planning, safety, keeping horses, feeding, numbers of horses, riding areas, camping areas and guidelines, huts, bushfires and campfires, ways to avoid gastroenteritis, and environmental protection (Beeton, 1999a: 218). In compliance with the code, equestrians should be courteous and avoid conflict situations with others. This behavioral self-regulation is designed to facilitate horse riding as an appropriate means of appreciating and enjoying the outdoors, where impacts on trails are kept at acceptable levels.

Hardening and softening measures A third approach managers can adopt is to alter the physical fabric of the trail or route itself. This is known as either hardening, when the surface is changed to a less natural state to withstand increased pressure and footfall, or softening, when information messages and signs are used to explain trail conditions and levels of fitness needed to deflect a certain amount of use. Hardening and softening were addressed in the previous chapter as part of overall trail design; they are examined here but from the perspective of management. Hardening takes many forms. The more conventional approaches are to make the trail surface durable by putting down planking or erecting boardwalks (Figure 7.1), or in some cases even using electric trams to traverse part or all of the route (Boyd, 2013). For instance, access to the Giant’s Causeway WHS is possible in three ways, all of which involve some degree of hardening both to the coastal way and the cliff-top paths. First, a permanently surfaced access route was provided to the central causeway (location of the basalt columns), that allows a shuttle to operate from the visitor center. The remaining section of the path is a mix of gravel, or a hardened surface with walking access only. Second, a permanent footpath/sidewalk was installed alongside the access road from the visitor center to the main attraction with designated information signs/audio-interpretation stops along the way.

220

Tour ism and Trail s

Figure 7.1 A ‘hardened’ trail creates a more durable and protective trail surface at this Greek archaeological site

Finally, steps were built to connect the coastal path with the cliff-top path. All these hardening measures allow a circuit route to be followed. Using information messages (softening), visitors have a choice about which way to walk the circular path; preference is often to take the cliff path, descend the steps, explore the coastal path to the central Causeway, returning to the visitor center by walking up the footpath/sidewalk, or taking the shuttle bus. The latter choice, however, prevents visitors from being able to stop at designated vistas and making use of recorded audio-messages. In the case of boardwalks, the more conventional method of wooden walkways has been used to harden the short routes within the estuarine section of Point Pelee National Park, Canada’s southernmost point on the shore of Lake Erie. Wood walkways on short paths such as these within area attractions (i.e. national parks) reduce the physical pressures on the flora of these unique aquatic ecosystems. As part of this hardening measure, Parks Canada has erected timber lookout towers for birdwatching at this tactical location where birds nest and pass through on their southward migratory route. Other examples use technology in designing boardwalks as part of a trail system. For example, administrators in the Valley of the Giants section of Walpole-Nornalup National Park, Western Australia, have erected 60-meterlong, 40-meter-high steel boardwalks through the treetops to reduce compaction on trails that would otherwise traverse the valley floor. At the same time this form of hardening provides views that are rarely seen on terrestrial footpaths (Hughes & Morrison-Saunders, 2002). Softening measures can be more difficult to implement as they may function to restrict certain users. However, from a safety and health

Managing Routes and Trail s

221

perspective, these are often essential. Perhaps one of the most famous examples of trail softening is the information visitors receive at Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. On the South Rim, message boards advise people not to hike to the river and back in one day, especially between the months of May and September, noting ‘there are no easy trails into or out of the Grand Canyon’ and that they should ‘hike smart’. Information is also clearly posted at the trailhead leading into the canyon about the physical distance involved, estimated time needed, and there are signs warning people with serious health issues not walk the trail. As regards people with disabilities, managers have the right and responsibility to give advice on the appropriateness of trails and safety concerns. Hardening and softening are therefore effective forms of trail management.

Tracking visitor numbers Finally, from a supply perspective, keeping track of visitor numbers and their patterns of use is an important part of trail management. This is often achieved by way of registration stations at various entry points along a trail. These allow managers to enumerate visitation rates and visitor characteristics, collect user fees when necessary and glean information about people’s whereabouts for safety and security reasons. Scotter (1981) studied trail registration boxes and discovered several reasons people failed to use them, some of which have to do with structural issues: they did not see the register box or sign, they did not bother to read the sign, they did not understand its purpose or importance, or other people were standing at the box so they felt it would take too long to wait. Research has shown how design actions can help increase (or decrease) registration rates. For instance, Petersen’s (1985) study found that sign visibility, sign message, the condition of registry stations, registration card design and station locations influence registration rates. Of these influential factors, location was the most impactful in getting people to record their trail use. Petersen found that moving the control sign from the trailhead to a point further along the route nearly doubled the percentage of people complying. Several basic principles were outlined by Petersen (1985) for creating more successful registration efforts. Signs and registration boxes should be visible from reasonably far distances. Sites should afford equestrians safe and sizeable places to stop and dismount. And, registration spots will be most effective if placed where people naturally stop to drink, take pictures, rest or view a scenic attraction.

Demand perspectives This section now examines management techniques that are demanddriven, as shown in Table 7.1, including education, interpretation, visitor monitoring, developing targeted marketing and implementing fees/funding arrangements to enable trail development and administration.

222

Tour ism and Trail s

Education A number of educational approaches can be employed by trail managers, including educational campaigns, requiring users to follow codes of conduct, as well as making use of promotional literature. Educational campaigns have been recognized as a popular demand approach among recreation and tourism managers, often linked to ethics and appropriate behavior of users (Hall & Lew, 2009). Bissix et al. (2009) noted that natural resource managers are increasingly turning to indirect environmental management strategies over the more common demand approach of enforcement by imposing regulations on users, their activities and behavior. Early research by Hampton and Cole (1995) suggested that many user impacts in backcountry and wilderness landscapes result from a lack of education, and if properly informed, educational campaigns have the potential to be effective. A popular educational campaign, particularly in the American outdoor recreation community, has been the Leave No Trace (LNT) program, which helps develop an environmental ethic, promotes stewardship thinking and asks consumers to make their own judgment about appropriate behavior and use instead of imposing regulations and rules of behavior. As a not-for-profit organization, LNT has been successful in formally training users of backcountry and wilderness areas. The organization’s seven LNT principles have gained the attention of millions of Americans through exposure to their logo, brochures, website and awareness-building campaigns (see Table 7.3). Understanding LNT ethics can also be achieved in a variety of ways, including through the assistance of trained and certified guides and outfitters who can assure their customers are aware of proper behavior towards the environment, other recreationists and managers and guides (Schuett, 1997; Zeller, 2004). The case study below uses LNT to discuss the extent of knowledge and ethics needed to promote acceptable behavior to minimize impacts. Second, trail managers should adopt a code of conduct that consumers must abide by while using the resource. This makes the way safer and

Table 7.3 The seven principles of Leave No Trace Leave No Trace (LNT) principles Plan ahead and prepare Travel and camp on durable surfaces Respect wildlife Minimize campfire impacts Leave what you find Be considerate of others Dispose of waste properly Source: Center for Outdoor Ethics (2014)

Managing Routes and Trail s

223

Case Study: Education to Encourage Minimal Impact in Cape Split Trail, Nova Scotia Bissix et al. (2009) studied the key messages needed for trail users to recognize minimal impact knowledge. Their study was done in the Cape Split trail network on the Blomindon Peninsula, Nova Scotia, Canada. Cape Split is known to be home to the world’s highest tides where the Bay of Fundy meets the Minas Basin. As such, the area has enjoyed a long history of backcountry recreation. Bissix et al. (2009) examined the LNT principles among current and potential users of the Cape Split Trail, determining their knowledge of LNT, their ethics and their selfreporting behavior. The study concluded that resource managers must design concise interpretive messages that are well displayed at trailheads, popular camping sites and at times along the trails. They identified six key messages that need to be emphasized to trail users (see Table 7.4), including the types of knowledge needed, ethics and behavior elements. The Cape Split study shows how a low-cost approach can effectively improve minimal impact behavior in trail consumers. Table 7.4 On-site key messages to encourage minimal impact on the Cape Split Trail Key messages to emphasize Knowledge What ‘travelling and camping on durable surfaces’ means in practice How to properly dispose of human waste How to properly dispose of dirty dishwater How to minimize campfire impact Behavior and ethics Behaviors that show respect for other wilderness visitors What to consider when planning ahead and preparing to use the Cape Split Trail Source: Modified from Bissex et al. (2009).

more sustainable and enjoyable for everyone. In an Australian study, Landsberg et al. (2001: 44) identified several guiding principles that would ensure safer and more pleasant experiences on equestrian trails: • • •

no dogs allowed because of the potential for disturbance, injury or accidents; equestrian trails are for recreational riding. Racing or rigorous training are not allowed; trails ought to be located near the perimeter of reserves and in zones that have already been extensively modified to avoid undesirable impacts;

224

• •

Tour ism and Trail s

horse riding will be excluded from ecologically or culturally significant and sensitive areas; a high degree of rider compliance and a code of conduct should be developed for the equestrian community.

Some of these apply to all trail contexts and could be supplemented by various other rules. Take out all the human waste and garbage brought in, no littering, do not touch or remove cultural or geological artifacts, stay on the trail, park in designated areas only, slow down when approaching a blind turn, move aside to allow others to pass, obey the posted speed limits and do not feed wildlife are only a few examples of important codes of conduct that can be implemented on trails, depending on their type and purpose. In some countries, usually in the tropics, there are efforts to certify eco-guides in tourist codes of conduct, which entails them training their customers and assuring they ‘leave no trace’ or do no harm during their trail experience. This has become the contemporary norm, because trail outfitters and tour companies now see the ecological and economic value in making these ethics a way of doing business (Settina & Kauffman, 2001: 97). This is often accompanied by using promotional literature to educate consumers further about good and bad behavior and the possible physical impacts of their visit (Beeton, 2006; Farrell & Marion, 2001).

Interpretation Interpretation is one of the most vital tools at the disposal of managers. It can enhance the visitor experience by making it more informative and enjoyable (Rennie, 1980). Interpretive programs usually add extra appeal to an interesting pathway by providing knowledge about the place being visited and adding to the appeal of the trail setting (Hanley, 1994; Timothy & Boyd, 2003) (Figure 7.2). According to a study at the Valley of the Giants Tree Top Walk in Western Australia, many visitors were disappointed there was not more interpretive signage on the walkway itself, leading the authors to conclude that ‘interpretive signs also provided a point of interest for repeat visitors already familiar with the unique experience of the Tree Top Walk’ (Hughes & Morrison-Saunders, 2002: 122). Interpretation also provides information and education, and it can instill in visitors a sense of pride, ownership and respect (Gustke & Hodgson, 1980; Tilden, 1977). It is a long-held belief among managers and researchers that the education gained from interpretive experiences will be effective in reducing impacts by encouraging low-impact behavior on trails and routes (Farrell & Marion, 2001). Because of this central role of interpretation, the information presented should be balanced, accurate and authentic. One of the main factors of success of the Civil War Discovery Trail in the US was maintaining an authoritative Civil War database that provided accurate sites and experts, and

Managing Routes and Trail s

225

Figure 7.2 An interpretive panel on Hadrian’s Wall Path, England

presented authentic information (Christ, 2002; Mahoney, 1999). Despite the ongoing academic debate about objectivity or subjectivity of authenticity in heritage contexts (Timothy, 2011a), to be as authentic as possible so that people understand the real stories behind the trails or sites along them it is crucial to present dependable and accurate history. Thus, the human tragedies associated with some routes (e.g. the Trail of Tears and the Slave Route) should also be presented, not just the rosy pictures of the past. Maps and guides For many people, maps and trail guides are an integral part of using a trail. Today, this includes technology-based maps and global positioning systems (GPS). Whether provided digitally for technology-savvy trail users or in traditional paper form, maps and guides can help communicate rules and regulations, encourage good codes of conduct, provide warnings and hazards information, describe the levels of difficulty associated with certain sections of the path, and help tourists and recreationists find places of interest along the way (Settina & Kauffman, 2001). Guides and maps are key interpretive media for all route types and scales. Where nature is the primary attraction, these media can help identify flora and fauna. In the context of culture, they may be a principal means of disseminating knowledge about historic buildings, archaeological digs or other cultural sites along the way. Interpretive panels The importance of wayside interpretive panels has long been recognized for providing information and directions to tourists and other hikers (Belan,

226

Tour ism and Trail s

2000; Walker, 1996). As well, trail interpretive centers at the beginning, end and at key places along the way in the case of long-distance routes are important in disseminating information and creating a conservation ethos in these linear environments. Interpretive centers are extremely important for routes that are operated and maintained by public agencies (Lindley, 2000; Mudway, 2004). They allow data collection, donations collection and dissemination of information. They also provide rest areas and sometimes even other travel services: souvenirs, snacks and lodging reservations. Not all interpretive centers have to be staffed, however. Unstaffed interpretive facilities along routes and byways can be key in disseminating information and providing directions (Figure 7.3). Interpretation for all is an important part of the ‘access for all’ concept noted in the previous chapter. Legal obligations, as well as good public relations and customer service, require interpretive programs to cater to the needs of visitors with physical disabilities and hearing and visual impairments. Services such as large-print brochures, guides and Braille signs enhance many people’s interpretive center experiences. Alternatives to print, such as subtitles on videos and touch-screen technology expand the independence of visitors with disabilities (Haynes & Cope, 1998; Young, 1998). Other special populations might also exist, especially when a route or corridor is world famous. In this instance, it will attract tourists from all around the globe, and depending on the results of various market analyses, it may be important to provide bilingual or multilingual interpretation (Carabelli, 2002; Timothy & Boyd, 2003).

Figure 7.3 An unstaffed interpretive center on a scenic byway in Australia

Managing Routes and Trail s

227

Re-enactments One means of interpretation that has been ill-researched in the context of routes and corridors is re-enactments or participatory activities. Re-enactments along some famous trails, such as the Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trail where participants don pioneer clothing and pull handcarts for sometimes days on end, has become an extremely effective instrument for building solidarity and community pride. These often provide a deep experience that is meaningful to participants and enhances attachment to place and regional identity (Hill, 1998; Langelo, 2006). Similarly, getting children out of the classroom and onto historic trails and participating in living history demonstrations is argued to be a much more effective way of helping them learn about history than watching movies or reading books (Jones, 1997). All of these elements of interpretation are believed to engrain within participants a stronger desire to protect their natural and cultural resources and live by an established code of conduct. Good trail interpretation, according to Payne (1997: 36), ‘links people and places, tells stories, inspires, and ideally provokes passions’.

Visitor monitoring While monitoring is usually recognized as the final step in any planning and development process, it is also an effective tool from a management perspective. Monitoring allows route managers to assess not only natural and human-induced impacts on recreation and tourism corridors far into the future and be able to take appropriate corrective actions when needed, but also any action they take will have obvious implications for trail preservation as well as ensure visitor satisfaction. For monitoring purposes, efficiency can be achieved better when managers divide trails into ranked classifications based upon the level of threat. The highest priority areas are likely to be those with easiest public access, while the lower priority areas are typically the sections that are more remote and inaccessible. On the Appalachian Trail, Bristow (1998: 74) suggested the following ‘hotspots’ as the most vulnerable areas and therefore as having the highest priority for monitoring: • • • • • • • • •

easements; special-use permit areas; ungated powerline crossings; ungated dirt roads; National Park Service-owned structures; areas with adjacent developments (e.g. cabins, mines); areas with adjacent all-terrain vehicle activity, rifle ranges or car parks; areas of conflicting land use; areas of high trespass, including dump sites, unauthorized camping or timber theft.

228

Tour ism and Trail s

These sorts of locations should be inspected frequently, sometimes as often as once or twice a month, depending on the potential impacts. Less impact-prone areas can be inspected once a year, while the most remote areas might be monitored once a year or every two years (Bristow, 1998). Regardless of timeframe, physical monitoring is very important. Many different trail monitoring tools and approaches have been developed over the years to assess human impacts on route and pathway environments with varying degrees of success (Potter & Manning, 1984; Wolfe et al., 2012). One of the earliest and most effective has been field visits for inventories and point sampling. These involve checklists, calculators, surveying devices and measuring instruments. On wilderness paths and hiking tracks the most common activity undertaken during site visits is systematic point sampling to quantify soil movement, trail width and vegetation changes (Leonard & Whitney, 1977; Leung & Marion, 1999b). Inventories are needed to measure spontaneous trail development occurring with unorganized trampling. Inventories show levels of use and help managers evaluate the need for vegetation recover, where repairs are needed and where new side-trails might need to be built (Sievänen, 1991). Site visits can also involve first-hand observations of user activities and behaviors in relation to visitors’ use of the trail and its various elements (Keirle & Stephens, 2004; Wolfe et al., 2012). Photographs are a pivotal part of trail monitoring, both satellite/aerial imagery and on-ground photos. Before and after photos of trails and campsites are beneficial in evaluating use impacts and can aid in making carrying capacity and access decisions (Settina & Kauffman, 2001). A study by Kim et al. (2003) found that photo survey methods explained variation in acceptable changes better than written survey methods did. Aerial photographs and GIS are constructive tools for measuring the spatiality of human impacts and natural deterioration (Leung & Marion, 1998). Even when these images are used, onsite field visits are still important to corroborate the photographic data. Relatedly, visitor-employed photography has been used successfully in the past to understand people’s landscape experiences. In a study of forest walks in Japan, visitors were given single-use cameras and asked to photograph what they perceived to be positive landscapes (Oku & Fukamachi, 2003). The data gleaned from this exercise were useful in determining walkers’ appreciation of the landscape and their connections to the natural environment while at the same time providing information about what parts of a trail were acceptable versus those which were not. A similar study was conducted in a Korean national park, where participants were invited to rate the acceptability of worn trail areas (areas of bare soil) shown in 10 photographs (Kim & Shelby, 2005). This exercise helped the researchers appreciate the largest percentage of bare soil acceptable to recreational trail users. User surveys are another way of getting information about visitors’ activities and satisfaction (Settina & Kauffman, 2001; Wearing & Nelson, 2000).

Managing Routes and Trail s

229

These are important for monitoring trail behavior and finding out what elements of a trail, or the level of degradation, are most and least acceptable to the visitor. However, Wolfe et al. (2012) argue that visitor surveys should be considered a supplementary data source to first-hand observations, given that consumers often do not recognize the spatial aspects of trails as portrayed on maps and photographs. Additional monitoring mechanisms have been introduced in recent years that are helpful in keeping track of visitors and their route-based activities. Digital tracking technologies, such as satellite navigation devices, land-based tracking mechanisms and other global positioning systems (GPS)-based tools can be extremely expedient in identifying how tourists or recreationists use networks of trails spatially and temporally, such as in historic cities or national parks (Shoval & Isaacson, 2007, 2009; Wolfe et al., 2012). Even other electronic media, such as digital guides (Bohlin & Brandt, 2014) at museums, historic sites and natural settings, have the potential to assist managers in analyzing the spatial behavior of visitors. Cameras have long been useful in assessing trail impacts, and, with improved technology in recent years, they are becoming more capable of providing better-detailed images for analysis. For example, Timothy and Groves (2001) demonstrated how webcam images can be applied to trail settings to capture numbers of users at certain times of the day, their activities and their behaviors.

Targeted marketing Heritage trails and routes represent new marketing opportunities that have been less promoted in destinations compared to other cultural ‘attractions’, such as sites of thanatourism or pilgrimage (Timothy & Boyd, 2006). While promoting trails is an important part of management, it has long been met with trepidation on the part of some public lands agencies given the potential negative ecological impact of overuse. Nevertheless, since one of the primary goals of trail managers is to provide public access to outdoor experiences, as opposed to some land management premises that are geared more toward preservation, this is less of an issue in the context of recreation and tourism corridors. It is important for managers also to realize that trails can be marketed in ways that strike a balance between use and conservation. Most of the promotion for routes, footpaths and other trails is done by word of mouth and the media. Their popularity inspires users to share their experiences with other potential consumers, who then also become involved in trail encounters. Mass marketing is rarely done for short-distance and nature-based routes, but it is fairly common for heritage trails, especially in the developing world. Boosterist approaches to mass marketing, where increased tourist numbers and expenditures are the primary goal, rarely succeed in the trails context, for as other sections of this book have noted, crowded conditions on routeways severely diminish the cultural or natural experience for visitors.

230

Tour ism and Trail s

Since many routes become famous by media coverage and word of mouth, promotional efforts tend to be relatively scarce. In some cases, management might need to establish demarketing policies that encourage certain consumers and behaviors while discouraging others. Beeton (2006) proposes that ‘desirable’ markets can be encouraged through the information provided in promotional materials, while less-desirable markets may be discouraged from visiting in the same manner. As well, re-imaging efforts can help attract a certain visitor type and repel others. Although there are intentional efforts in many places to encourage path use, as noted above, most exposure comes from word of mouth. There are several ways in which this occurs that go beyond the traditional advertisingcentered approaches used by most destinations and tourism agencies. These include media exposure, social media and advanced technology, and place branding (Hankinson, 2010; Thevenot, 2007). Media images and portrayals of trail life and recreation have made an indelible impact on public perceptions of long-distance routes. Hollywood motion pictures about the Oregon Trail, the Trail of Tears, Route 66, the Appalachian Trail and many others have provided considerable visibility for many long-distance trails in the US and have intensified their recognition (Eyerman & Löfgren, 1995; Kelly, 1988). Beeton (2006: 48) notes how the 1980s Man from Snowy River movies have increased the popularity of horseback riding on some of Australia’s most important equestrian trails. Another fact of modern life is technology and its far-reaching effects on global tourism (Lee et al., 2012; Thevenot, 2007). Social media, including Facebook, blogs, photo sharing sites, YouTube, Google Earth, and other ‘neogeographic’ spaces (Johnson et al., 2012; Turner, 2006) are teeming with volunteered geographic information (Elwood et al.; Goodchild, 2007; Ricker et al., 2013) regarding trail use and people’s route-based travel experiences. This form of unintentional promotion is critical exposure for most modern routes and trails. Likewise, advanced technology has enabled more trail-based recreation and tourism, particularly as regards the growing popularity of geocaching (Ihamäki, 2012, 2013), wherein GPS allow people to navigate the earth in search of places and ‘caches’ at even the smallest scale. This has become a highly competitive endeavor, and enthusiasts often spend their entire holidays and many weekends seeking the next location to mark on their map. This adheres to a larger phenomenon that Timothy (1998a) refers to as ‘collecting places’ – a trend also evident in ‘peak bagging’ where people ‘collect’ the most challenging trails or hike the highest mountains in a region, or ‘highpointing’, which entails hikers climbing the highest points in every region (Kuby et al., 2001: 456). Branding While destinations can make deliberate efforts to brand themselves in the tourism world (Ashworth & Kavaratzis, 2012; Govers & Go, 2009;

Managing Routes and Trail s

231

Morgan et al., 2004) to create a desired image or attract the most sought-after visitors, businesses, new residents or investments, most ‘branded’ places have evolved organically and their brand identities formulated through time and via spontaneous growth. For intended branding exercises, the name of a tourist route or recreation trail is extremely important (MacLeod, 2004; Mahoney, 1999; Nowers et al., 2002) (Figure 7.4). Catchy names that will draw consumers are important and need to reflect the purpose and theme associated with the corridor. Each route should offer something unique. For instance, if there are several wine routes, food trails or cultural routes in a region, the special characteristics and themes that differentiate them should be highlighted (Nowers et al., 2002). Some destinations use their branded trails to create marketable images abroad. For example, the Inca Trail and Machu Picchu are decisive ‘brands’ for Peru’s tourism industry. The same is true of the Galician region of Spain as regards the key role of the Route of Santiago de Compostela in Galicia’s tourism brand. Likewise the prestige associated with certain heritage or eco ‘brands’ is believed by some destination promoters to lend significant appeal to certain routes. Some prominent brands include UNESCO, the International Ecotourism Society and the Scenic Byways program or the National Register of Historic Places in the United States (Tellez, 1994). The Route of Santiago de Compostela was designated a UNESCO WHS from the Spanish border to Santiago in 1993. This has brought increased visibility to the trail, and while additional research is needed to verify it, there appears to have been an increase in visitation on the trail since its inscription (eturbo News, 2008; Gonzáles, 2006). Many communities and trail management organizations strive to ‘brand’ their trails with national and international labels in the hope that this

Figure 7.4 A ‘branded’ National Recreation Trail in Puerto Rico

232

Tour ism and Trail s

will help increase prominence and visitation to their linear corridors. Examples include the Boston Freedom Trail, and to a certain extent the Titanic Trail in Belfast, Northern Ireland, which Boyd (2008) noted was equally important as the visitor attraction (Titanic Belfast) itself in marketing the fateful ship’s links to Belfast and to position the city as a maritime heritage destination.

Implementing fees/funding arrangements User fees have been a common pricing technique employed by resource managers, often involving introducing an entrance fee or elevating an existing price (Garrod, 2008). The former is used to mitigate impacts occurring from high levels of use, the latter often becomes a strategy to moderate levels of demand. Garrod sees the latter approach being similar to the ‘user-pays’ principle, where the expectation is that users also have an obligation toward the costs of maintaining places. This can, however, be unpopular among managers when user demand is usually low, and equally unpopular with visitors who may question why they have to pay to use what they essentially see as part of their own heritage to begin with. The strengths and weaknesses of entrance fees have been well debated in the literature but more so for heritage visitor attractions, often of an area focus, such as parks and gardens (Garrod & Fyall, 2000; Timothy & Boyd, 2003), as opposed to linear spaces where there is often some element of recreational activity involved. Willingness to pay (WtP) has received considerably more research attention in the recreation literature (e.g. Binkley & Mendelsohn, 1987; Ferris, 1996; Snyder & Smail, 2009) than in the tourism literature (e.g. Garrod & Fyall, 2000; Timothy & Boyd, 2003). There has been some research on WtP within trails settings, both for recreation and tourism consumers. Bennett et al. (2003) employed a contingent valuation survey for the Ridgeway National Trail in England and found that users had a mean willingness to pay for access, a modest sum of £1.24 per visit. When considered against the number of users, this level of willingness helped to offset the costs of trail maintenance. The next case study explores the potential of WtP by tourists to offset the cost of water trail management.

Case Study: Willingness to Pay and Paddle Trail Development, North Carolina, USA Kline et al. (2012) examined WtP as a management measure for kayakers and canoeists on paddle trails in North Carolina, USA. North Carolina has over 6000 km of estuarine and oceanic shoreline, 61,000 km of rivers and creeks, offering users 150 paddle trails throughout the state. They examined a number of funding options, including user fees, vessel registration, paddling licenses, sales tax on equipment, other fees or no fees

Managing Routes and Trail s

233

at all. An online survey captured the responses of 1851 North Carolina residents who made use of the state’s water trails. The survey focused on other aspects beyond WtP, such as respondents’ perception of paddling as an economic development tool, but only the WtP element is discussed in this example. Tables 7.5 and 7.6 show the profile of paddlers who were supportive of various funding sources, and those who were generally unsupportive, respectively. According to Table 7.5, user fees had more support from women and paddlers with a mean household income above $100,000. There was also greater support for craft registration compared to an equipment tax. Fewer people supported the idea of paddling licenses. With regard to funding preferences of paddlers who were less likely to support fundraising mechanisms, Table 7.6 shows these to be predominantly male, employed in the private sector, avid paddlers with high skill levels and who own a boat. As for paddling as an economic development tool, some funding mechanisms were supported. For instance, user fees were supported by paddlers where household income exceeded $100,000, and equipment tax was the preferred funding preference among men. Craft registration elicited the support of recreational paddlers, and among those who rent kayaks or canoes, the latter also supporting a paddling license fee (see Table 7.7). There is still, however, a strong lack of support across the board for fundraising, even though people recognize paddle trails as an economic development tool for North Carolina. Kline et al. (2012) concluded that the optimal funding strategy could be a combination of boat registration and user fees for those who rent

Table 7.5 Summary of funding preferences of North Carolina paddlers more likely to support funding mechanisms Variable Women paddlers Public sector employees Non-profit sector employees Recreational paddlers Paddlers who rent kayak Paddlers with household income of $100k–$149k

User fees

Equipment tax

Craft registration

 

  

License



 



Source: After Kline et al. (2012: 249).

(Continued)

234

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Willingness to Pay and Paddle Trail Development, North Carolina, USA (Continued) kayaks or canoes. They noted that people who rent kayaks and were predominantly recreational paddlers were more amenable to user fees, and thus suggested a ‘pay to play’ charge be implemented on rentals.

Table 7.6 Summary of funding preferences of North Carolina paddlers less likely to support funding mechanisms Variable

User fees

Men Private sector employees Avid paddlers Paddlers who own canoe Paddlers who own kayak

Equipment tax

Craft registration





License

Does not support any mechanism  

 

  

Source: After Kline et al. (2012: 249).

Table 7.7 Summary of preferences of North Carolina paddlers who view paddle trails as an economic development tool Variable

Men Household income higher than $100,000 Recreational paddlers Avid paddlers Paddlers who rent kayak/canoe

User fees

Equipment tax

Craft registration

License



Does not support any mechanism 



Source: After Kline et al. (2012: 250).







 

Managing Routes and Trail s

235

Visitor Management Frameworks and Procedures Visitor management of public spaces by agencies responsible for them has changed over time, from a ‘leave us alone’ approach, where managing the resource took precedence over users, to a new mode of thinking where visitors are considered stakeholders, who are recognized as co-owning the resource and are valued guests (Hall & McArthur, 1998; Hall & Lew, 2009). A favorite approach was to estimate an area’s carrying capacity, a concept that came from wildlife management and was effectively adopted by recreation and tourism researchers. The concept essentially was not about establishing numbers but rather thresholds of use to determine limits before any negative effects would occur. It has evoked considerable research since Wagar’s (1964) pioneering study and remains to this day a popular managerial concept. It is, however, flawed as it is not about numbers, but understanding that levels of use will vary from location to location and that variables such as the season, the type of activity involved and the physical and social characteristics of the setting must all be understood collectively to establish levels of use that are acceptable to the majority. Managers still recognize the need to oversee the risks associated with recreation and tourism, and that requires them to manage their users. Alternative ways to govern users have emerged over the past three and half decades, ranging from visitor frameworks that emphasize the ‘opportunities’ sites offer, as well as those that focus on imposing ‘limits of use’. This section presents a brief synopsis of some of these visitor management frameworks and examines the extent to which they have utility in managing linear recreation and tourism spaces.

Managing opportunity Opportunity spectrums have been around for more than three decades, but they have received more attention from scholars than managers. The first one developed was the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) by researchers at the US Forest Service who were exploring alternative uses of forest lands for wilderness recreation (Clark & Stankey, 1979). The ROS was based on three principles. First, they adopted a behavioral approach in defining the recreation setting through a combination of physical, biological, social and managerial attributes. Second, they developed a spectrum of what they termed ‘opportunity setting classes’, which ranged from primitive, semi-primitive and semi-modern, to modern. Third, they identified a set of management factors (access, non-recreational resource uses, onsite management, social interaction, acceptability of visitor impacts and acceptable regimentation) against which they identified acceptable combinations for opportunities for each setting class within their spectrum range. The ROS proved attractive to managers of natural heritage resources (i.e. parks) because the framework offered a high degree of flexibility where

236

Tour ism and Trail s

opportunities were available to users by integrating the setting with visitor/ user priorities and preferences. The ROS has served as an additional tool combined with management plans where regions that are capable of withstanding high traffic are earmarked for more intensive forms of visitor use. The ROS framework was adopted and modified by tourism scholars, creating first a generic tourism one (TOS) (Butler & Waldbrook, 1991). It was partially applied to adventure travel in the Canadian Arctic, then ecotourism (ECOS) (Boyd & Butler, 1996), in forest-based ecotourism in Northern Ontario, indigenous peoples’ cultural tourism (IPCOST) (Sofield & Birtles, 1996) and urban tourism (UTOS) (Jansen-Verbeke & Lievois, 1999). Given the relative similarities of possible settings for ROS, TOS and ECOS, it is not surprising that the TOS and ECOS adopted in broad terms the management factors designed by Clark & Stankey (1979). The frameworks for IPCOST and UTOS deviated from the original ROS, opting instead to follow a phased approach and establish ‘opportunity sets’, respectively (Timothy & Boyd, 2003). Table 7.8 highlights how the original ROS has been modified to suit the TOS given its focus on levels of adventure and the ECOS as it examines opportunity for ecotourists. The extent to which these models have been adopted by resource managers has been somewhat disappointing, with some exceptions with ROS within wilderness and protected spaces in the US, New Zealand (Driver et al., 1987) and more recently Japan, where ROS was deliberately used to improve trail classifications in national parks (cf. Oishi, 2013). This limited adoption should not be surprising given government agencies’ preference for management through traditional approaches, such as management plans. These approaches tend to be more popular with academics in discussions of visitor management or planning and managing tourism impacts (cf. Timothy & Boyd, 2003; Hall & McArthur, 1998; Hall & Lew, 2009). Of most relevance here is the value of these opportunity frameworks in assisting with administering linear spaces, given that the tools were designed to help cope with wilderness regions, national parks and other protected areas. All three frameworks were designed within a North American context of isolated and relatively large publicly-managed conservation, recreation and tourism spaces, and the direct link to enabling trail and route managers is that these linear corridors are recognized as key ways visitors can access the different opportunities. The access system and its various components within ROS (roads and trails) when further broken down for TOS (rivers, game trails, gravel and paved roads) and ECOS (waterways, trails, loose surface, logging and paved roads) (see Butler & Waldbrook, 1991; Boyd & Butler, 1996), form part of the wider space that is under agency management, and should therefore be managed as part of users’ opportunities to experience their route-based settings. UTOS did not follow the rubric of the ROS. Jansen-Verbeke and Lievois (1999) viewed the opportunity classes in ROS as ‘opportunity sets’ when

Managing Routes and Trail s

237

Table 7.8 Comparison of the opportunity setting classes and management factors for the ROS, TOS and ECOS frameworks Factors

ROS

TOS

ECOS

Opportunity setting classes

Primitive Semi primitive Semi modern Modern

Hard adventure Medium adventure Soft adventure

Eco specialist Intermediate Eco generalist

Access

Difficulty Access system – Roads – Trails Means of conveyance

Difficulty Access system – Transportation – Market place Means of conveyance – Information channels

Difficulty Access system – Transportation – Market place – Information channels Means of conveyance – Transportation

Non-recreational resource uses

No subdivision

Modified to: Other non-adventure uses

Modified to: Other resource-related activities

Onsite management (modification)

Extent Apparentness Complexity Facilities

Modified to tourism Plant – Extent – Visibility – Complexity – Facilities

Modified to existing infrastructure – Extent – Visibility – Complexity – Facilities

Social interaction

No subdivision

Social interaction – Hosts/guests – Guests

Acceptability of visitor impacts

Degree of impacts Prevalence of impacts

Degree of impact Prevalence of impact

Degree of impact Prevalence of impact Level of control

Acceptable regimentation

Acceptable regimentation

Acceptability of regimentation

Separate stakeholders and decision-making framework

None

Attractions offered

Additions to management factors in ROS Additional factors

Social interaction – Other ecotourists – Hosts (local population)

Level of skill and knowledge

238

Tour ism and Trail s

applied to cities. Opportunity was viewed from the perspective of how accessible the core elements of urban attraction spaces were to visitors, addressing influencing factors that included the spatial arrangement of interesting places. Jansen-Verbeke and Lievois (1999) saw networks and urban trails as a means to connect the key cultural elements within urban areas (e.g. heritage buildings, museums) to secondary elements that added value to the tourist experience (e.g. places to eat and shop). This latter variable creates a direct link between UTOS as a framework for urban managers and the role that trails and routes play in achieving both accessibility and valuable tourist experiences. They applied their thinking to the historic city of Leuven, Belgium, and found that UTOS had three relevant dimensions as a development model: clustering (spatial concentration of complementary tourist products), synergy (between tourism and other urban functions: shops and food outlets) and themed trails (that offered intervening opportunities that connect key tourism products with other ancillary services). Disappointing is the lack of adoption of this systems thinking by other urban tourism scholars, and the UTOS remains, like the adaptations of ROS, another exploratory tool and possible marketing instrument.

Imposing limits This section examines visitor frameworks and procedures that focus on limits of use, either in terms of carrying capacities or limits of acceptable change. In most cases one follows the other, as the issue of carrying capacity was likely to be found and instituted by resource managers because a process to identify acceptable levels of use was required.

Determining carrying capacities Research on this notion is now 40 years old (Wager, 1964, is the seminal paper). The idea of being concerned over numbers in an area is not new; it just became an issue when levels of use started to pose a threat to the quality of both the resource and the activity taking place. Early literature from the 1960s and 1970s came from the fields of range management, wildlife research and eventually recreation. It only started to be explored in depth by tourism scholars in the 1980s (e.g. Mathieson & Wall, 1982; O’Reilly, 1986). Tourism and recreation planners have always been concerned about carrying capacities, or thresholds that when exceeded will result in negative repercussions. While there are no magical formulas for determining carrying capacities, many planning and environmental management practitioners have undertaken efforts to devise ways of determining these thresholds (Gunn & Var, 2002). Capacities vary from ecosystem to ecosystem and by type of activity, but many route managers find them useful in understanding limits of acceptable change and managing visitor crowding (Beeton, 2006; Dolesh, 2004b). Carrying capacities have multiple uses, including social and ecological dimensions. They can be useful for determining what stabilization

Managing Routes and Trail s

239

efforts might need to be employed along a trail, or to determine how much freedom to roam to give to visitors (Gaines, 1997). Baud-Bovy and Lawson (1998: 55) provided some concrete indicators for carrying capacity by way of example for trail management. They suggest that for scenic walking trails that are well hidden by trees and other vegetation, a density of five persons per day per kilometer of trail ‘allows a feeling of wilderness and closeness with nature, whilst 50 persons per day per km . . . gives a sense of crowding’. Hall and Lew (2009) see carrying capacity being similar to rational tourism planning involving the following steps: • • • • • • • •

Consulting to specify objectives. Identifying current levels of use. Identifying indicators. Measuring the current state of each indicator. Identifying relationships between the state of each indicator and level of use. Making value judgments about the acceptability of impacts. Determining threshold limits (more, less, current). Implementing management strategies to ensure threshold limits are not breeched.

Understanding that there is a degree of rational planning thinking in the carrying capacity concept, it is surprising that there is a virtual absence of capacity models for routes and trails. Instead, managers insist on looking for a number or density values and researchers seem set to try to provide them with practical use levels, when this is impossible, as capacity levels vary between ecological, social and physical settings and between facilities and institutions. In most studies, discussions of capacity are limited to ecological and social aspects. Managers are therefore left having to choose between emphasizing recreation/use (social carrying capacity) or protection of the resource (ecological carrying capacity). With respect to the former, much of the recreation literature in the 1980s and 1990s examined norms, what type of encounter compatibility was acceptable (Shelby, 1981; Noe et al., 1982; Patterson & Hammitt, 1990; Williams et al., 1991). Some of this research was on linear spaces, including rivers and seashores. This earlier research established an understanding of social carrying capacity according to trail users where their perceptions are dependent on the degree to which stated norms and reported encounters influence their senses of crowding, avoidance of others and overall trip satisfaction. Butler et al. (1995) developed the POLAR model (Procedure for Operationalizing Limits for the Administration of Rivers) to determine the recreational carrying capacity for rivers, specifically Canadian Heritage Rivers, and so its wider applicability to other rivers (and other linear recreation and tourism resources) is limited. Nevertheless, given the context of

240

Tour ism and Trail s

this book the POLAR model still warrants mentioning. The procedure follows a rational planning sequence where the stages are designed to suit a river setting. It is arranged in nine stages with some involving a series of procedural steps (Figure 7.5). The sequencing of stages is illustrated in Figure 7.5 where management decisions are required at stage three. The model suggests that if the level and type of use, both present and in the immediate future, are both of such a

Policy Identification Overall goals of the system Needs and constraints of the whole system Identify compatible activities

Site-specific Objectives Goals of each river Needs and constrains of each river Compatible activities of each river Prioritize each river based on activities, scarcity, alternatives

Determine Need for Limits Identify any conflicts between activities and users/environments

Yes

Units

No

Access

Prioritize Thresholds

Integration & Implementation

Monitor

Figure 7.5 The POLAR model Source: Modified from Butler et al. (1995: 104).

Managing Routes and Trail s

241

nature that no such conflicts are apparent, then no action needs to be taken other than to monitor the use and the effects of use. If conflicts or incompatibilities are identified or anticipated, then it is appropriate to proceed with stage four. The process of stages four through to seven are shown in the schema in Figure 7.6. The model was applied in a 1994 pilot study to a short section of the Churchill River in northern Saskatchewan, Canada, to understand better its applicability and usefulness in a real situation and to provide provincial government managers with useful information to determine what actions should be taken regarding recreational use of the river. It is important to note

Units

Access

Identify River Units Physical

Type

Social

Wild flow Pool ripple flow Steady flow

Urban Village/rural Backcountry

Intensity

Nonmotorized-land & water

Single-high or low number of users

Motorized-land, water & air

Double-high or low numbers of users Multiple-high or low numbers of users

Integrated Access

Integrated Units

Prioritize Activities by units, zones and access Key indicators of impact, use and experience

Thresholds Identify Inventories and Indicators for Each Unit

Individual Group Group size User group conflicts Number of users Satisfaction/ disatisfaction etc.

Physical

Social

Bank erosion Water quality pH level BOD etc.

Identify Ecological Indicators

Experiential norms

Figure 7.6 POLAR stages four, five and six: Units, access and thresholds Source: Modified from Butler et al. (1995: 105).

242

Tour ism and Trail s

that northern Saskatchewan had been nominated to the Heritage Rivers System but had yet not been officially designated. The application of the model demonstrated no major recreational use problems along this section of the river, but there was some indication of minor issues that were best resolved to avoid larger problems in the future, namely canoe–jet boat conflicts, an issue not of level of use but rather type of use, excessive garbage and the availability of campsites. These were all very practical problems which managers could act upon by imposing limited use in near wilderness settings, multiple uses in natural settings, or multiple uses in developed settings. The utility of the model lies in that it provides managers with the necessary data to make informed choices. The wider utility of the model is clear within the Canadian Heritage Rivers System, but it can also be adapted and applied to other rivers, routes and tourism corridors.

Acceptable limits There is a level beyond which impacts are not acceptable, namely the limits of acceptable change (LAC) (Stankey et al., 1985). This concept accepts that solutions to overuse would most likely be found and instituted by resource managers rather than other stakeholders, but where the process would involve as many stakeholders as feasible to allow decisions to be built rather than made (Payne & Graham, 1993). Application of the LAC, similar to ROS, has been largely limited to national parks in a number of countries (e.g. Canada, New Zealand and the USA), which focus on using the procedure to administer an area’s resources rather than a linear space. Other management tools have developed that focus on managing visitor impacts (VIM). These are not much different than LACs, as they are staged planning processes designed by the US National Park Service to focus on limiting damage instead of preventing or repairing it. This planning process was not designed for recreational corridors specifically, but it could apply to lines as well as it does to areas. The same argument can be made for the VERP model (visitor experience and resource protection), also designed for the US National Park Service, as it combines opportunities with limits, and was intended for use across a wide spectrum of natural environments that could include tracks and trails within protected landscapes. Vaske et al. (2000) noted that VERP stresses that managerial responsibility is not to create experiences but create opportunities for experiences. Thus, the presence of nature trails and tracks, and even cultural routes, provides recreational and tourism opportunities for the formation of visitor experiences.

Stakeholder management Managing linear spaces involves a wide range of stakeholders, as alluded to throughout this book. Beyond managers are the recreationists

Managing Routes and Trail s

243

and tourists, local communities, landowners, political officers and various agencies. This depends on the length of the trail and the mix of landscapes its traverses. Many of the models previously discussed encourage collaboration and the forming of partnerships, where decisions and actions are collective rather than individual. Stakeholder theory, taken from the business management literature, has been effectively applied to tourism and heritage management (Aas et al., 2005; Jamal & Getz, 1995; Selman, 2004) and as a management approach has relevance to how linear resources are cared for. The following case study illustrates this approach to management of long-distance walking routes in Scotland, linking stakeholder management to wider elements of partnerships.

Case Study: Stakeholder Management and Long-Distance Walking Routes in Scotland Scotland has an abundance of trails that provide opportunities to experience the diversity of the Scottish landscape, from the majestic Highlands with its lochs, to coastal paths and those that recreate the journeys of past historical characters such as Rob Roy (see Table 7.9). Generally, Table 7.9 Scottish Great Trails Long distance walking route Annandale Way Ayrshire Coastal Path Berwickshire Coastal Path Borders Abbey Way

Distance involved 88 km 147 km 48 km 107 km

Fife Coastal Path

183 km

Great Glen Way

117 km

John Muir Way

73 km

Kintyre Way

140 km

Rob Roy Way

128 km

Southern Upland Way

338 km

Speyside Way

136 km

West Highland Way

151 km

Source: Compiled from Walkinghighlands (2014).

(Continued)

244

Tour ism and Trail s

Case Study: Stakeholder Management and Long-Distance Walking Routes in Scotland (Continued) these long-distance walking paths traverse many local authority regions and landscapes under different owners and stakeholders. In some situations they traverse areas under the jurisdiction of national park authorities. As Chapter 6 emphasized, this mix of ownership and responsibility requires adaptive management where all stakeholders’ views are represented. Scotland, compared to other countries, has been late in designating areas for long-distance trails. The first trail was the West Highland Way in 1980, followed by the Southern Upland Way, the Speyside Way, the Great Glen Way, Rob Roy Way and the Fife Coastal Path (Morrow, 2005). The West Highland Way remains the most popular trail, leading hikers from the edge of Glasgow to Fort William at the foot of Ben Nevis (Walkinghighlands, 2014). Some new trails, such as the Rob Roy Way, offer ramblers a sense of Scottish history, leading through the glens, along rivers and burns, and past mountains and lochs. The Rob Roy Way has become popular in recent years, especially since being recognized as one of Scotland’s Great Trails in 2012 (Scotland’s Great Trails, 2013). This particular path traverses landscapes traveled often by Rob Roy MacGregor, Scotland’s most notorious outlaw, in the 17th and 18th centuries. Given the diversity of landscapes and ownership of land associated with Scottish long-distance walking routes, stakeholder theory holds considerable explanatory power and policy guidance for effective heritage management, in this case as regards linear cultural heritage spaces. According to Morrow (2005), there are three dominant stakeholders of long-distance routes in Scotland: first, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), a non-departmental government body funded by the Scottish government; second, any local authority that routes traverse; and third, where applicable, Scottish National Park authorities. The primary stakeholder, SNH, has a mandate to promote, care for, and improve Scottish natural heritage in a sustainable manner, ensuring that all users have an awareness and understanding of the country’s landscapes and that they enjoy them responsibly (Scottish Natural Heritage, 2013). Local authorities look favorably at long-distance routes across Scotland for their economic potential from recreation and tourism. Bryden et al. (2010) noted that the Fife Coastal Path has an annual net expenditure between £24 (low end) and £29 million (high end) and supports between 800 and 900 full-time jobs in Fife. The two Scottish National Park authorities, as an additional stakeholder, are responsible not only for protecting landscapes but also for making use of them in sustainable and responsible ways, as

Managing Routes and Trail s

245

well as ensuring that local communities benefit economically from related activities, including long-distance walking. Other stakeholders include local tourist boards, local enterprise companies and other government-funded, non-departmental bodies like the Forestry Commission (Morrow, 2005). Given this mix of ownership and management responsibility, a model of inter-sectoral cooperation exists similar to what Boyd and Timothy (2001) proposed for cooperation in heritage places at different scales. In their model (Figure 7.7), the type of partnership most applicable to Scotland’s long-distance trails relates closely to a blending of Type A and Type B. Morrow (2005: 242–243) suggested that the partnership in the Scottish example works ‘because of the commitment and competence of the individuals involved’. Its structure allows stakeholder engagement by SNH to involve agencies and communities that express interest related to particular places along the way. Context Protected landscapes TYPE A Local & regional

Scale

Bi-naonal & internaonal

Mixed-use landscapes TYPE B

Formalized partnership, equal relaonship

Formal or informal partnership, unequal relaonship

Grass-roots focused

Agency-driven

High degree of cooperaon

Degree of cooperaon between government agencies

TYPE C

TYPE D

Informal-unequal partnership

Informal partnership

Local-level agency driven, grassroots focused

Local-level agency-driven approach

Cooperaon between same level polies

Limited degree of cooperaon only on issues of mutual benefit/mandates

Figure 7.7 Partnership models for landscapes of different context and scale Source: Adapted from Boyd and Timothy (2001).

Conclusion The outset of this chapter stated that the management of trails and routes is complex; levels and types of use will vary, tourism and recreation impacts will vary, and conflicts over users and uses will occur as the mandate of providing access and activities may have to be balanced against some

246

Tour ism and Trail s

degree of protection. This of course depends on the rationale for a trail’s design and the enabling legislation or political action that brought it to fruition in the first place. This chapter provided an overview of several management techniques and approaches that are available to route and trail managers and that focus on supply and demand perspectives. Which approach or combination of approaches is adopted will be dependent on site, situation and the nature of the problem arising and the model’s suitability to address the rising concerns. Selecting approaches from this ‘tool kit’ is favored more by managers than applying visitor frameworks and procedures that have largely remained the domain of the academy with limited application to real world situations. The use of stakeholder theory with links to partnership, collaboration and cooperation has more potential management mechanisms because it allows more widespread engagement over issues and concerns of different populations, levels and types of uses in the context of linear recreation and tourism spaces. Combined, the techniques, approaches and frameworks presented here provide managers with the necessary tool kit to be more effective. The degree to which they make use of these tools will vary over time and by venue.

8

Reflections and Futures

Reflections At the start of this book, we stated the obvious, that trails and routes are everywhere, either as part of an organically evolving cultural landscape or deliberately planned and imposed on natural landscapes. This statement is not in doubt. What is surprising, however, is the level of academic attention routes, trails and other linear corridors have or have not garnered. In the inaugural paper that launched the Journal of Heritage Tourism, Timothy and Boyd (2006) identified heritage trails as an emerging trend for research by cultural tourism specialists. They noted then that even though thousands of trails exist throughout the world and at different scales and sizes, scholars had theretofore given scant attention to them as socio-economic, political and environmental phenomena, and that ‘. . . there remains a dearth of research on heritage trails and routes, which needs to be addressed with some urgency’ (Timothy & Boyd, 2006: 9). Half a decade later, the authors maintain this view, for a considerable amount of public sector debate about trails and academic writings about them in the field of outdoor recreation have flourished, while research from a tourism perspective has been sluggish. The abundance of recreation-based literature and the growing, albeit slowly, output from tourism perspectives has provided a foundation for this book that focuses on both tourism and recreation perspectives of routes and paths. Besides, recreation and tourism cannot possibly be disconnected in the context of routes and trails; they are natural and inseparable partners in this area of inquiry. Heritage and nature trails are equally important resources for local residents (recreationists) as they are for mass and niche tourists (travelers from outside the area). Our concern is not the separation of the two but rather how they blend and work together to create linear corridororiented supply, demand and management challenges. Trails and routes clearly predate contemporary notions of leisure and the advent of modern tourism since the end of World War II, and they have been an integral means of facilitating the earliest forms of travel and mobility (Olsen & Timothy, 2006). They are undoubtedly an element, varying in 247

248

Tour ism and Trail s

importance over time and space, of any region’s attractions base and most likely can be linked to people’s desire in the present day to engage in sightseeing when they travel away from home. Given these points and the ubiquity of designated routes, trails and footpaths, the absence of concerted efforts to research them, beyond the conventional descriptive case study approach is somewhat surprising, particularly from the perspective of tourism. Why might this be the case? Does the subject area not illicit widespread scholarly interest or are there more interesting destinations and issues to study? Perhaps it is what we alluded to in 2006 when we stated that trails and routes by their very linear nature are difficult to study from at least two perspectives. First, demand for trails and routes is challenging to measure and analyze because people can in most cases join the route at any point along its length, making data collection and gathering user fees a formidable challenge, even when most people are channeled as much as possible through a primary gateway or visitor center. Second, research on route administration is often very complex, involving multiple stakeholders, often across different jurisdictions, with different policies and management paradigms. Table 8.1 shows that a search on the cabidirect database of 10 million abstracts for life sciences reveals only 609 matches for ‘tourism trails’ and slightly more at 861 matches for ‘tourism routes’. The table further illustrates that the majority of publications on either tourism trails or routes have appeared since 2000. What is encouraging though is the level of interest from 2010 to the present (2014), implying that, as a topic, there is some traction of interest developing. The table also reveals that much research on trails and routes takes place outside the tourism domain, typically in recreation and natural resource/environmental management fields. Despite this fact, the tourism focus must still be placed within a context of other themes and topics that have evoked much more interest in the tourism academy. For example, a cabidirect search for ‘tourism sustainability’ recorded 5162 matches, and ‘tourism and politics’ 4060 matches, to name only two. Combined research on tourism trails and routes (1460 matches) is on par with other emerging

Table 8.1 Researchers’ interest in tourism trails and routes over time Period of time

Trails

Tourism trails

Routes

Tourism routes

1960–1969 1970–1979 1980–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–2014

0 92 188 225 437 288

0 26 89 89 220 189

0 220 357 436 1062 939

0 12 118 148 203 169

Source: Compiled from the cabidirect abstracts database.

Ref lec t ions and Futures

249

themes such as ‘tourism and climate change’, which registered 1142 search results, suggesting that sufficient interest and research has been developed enough to justify a themed book on this interesting topic. Early thinking by Wall (1997) suggested that a useful way to categorize tourism (and we include recreation) spaces was to look at them as points (e.g. visitor centers, casinos, campgrounds and museums), areas (e.g. resorts, theme parks, protected areas and villages), and lines (e.g. routes, trails, railroads and coastlines). Undoubtedly there has been much more interest by tourism scholars in researching points and areas, but the numbers illustrated in Table 8.1 would suggest that research in linear tourism spaces is developing. One sign of a mature field of academic inquiry is when researchers shift from generic textbooks to tomes that often have a very narrow and specialized theme (Hall, 2005). The collation of research on trails and routes in this book is very indicative of the latter. We argue that sufficient research has been undertaken over the years to justify this book where topics such as trail and route types, supply and demand, impacts and management are examined, bringing together what is a rather disparate body of research into a condensed and accessible volume. Around these five aspects we provide some reflection in this concluding chapter. A short and speculative commentary is offered at the end on potential future directions for research on trails and routes. It should be noted at the outset, that the research analyzed in this book strongly reflects an English-language and developed country bias. This is not intentional but rather reflects the fact that recreation and tourism research on routes and trails is dominated by English-speaking experts in predominantly English-language journals and books, although publications in other languages were also utilized for their conceptual contributions throughout the book. While most of the examples and case studies were assembled from the world’s developed countries, this does not reflect that routes and trails as tourism resources in developing countries are any less important. It does, however, indicate the origins of most trail researchers and the unbalanced abundance of empirical material from the most developed, Western countries.

Toward a typology of trails and routes Categorizations or typologies are common in tourism studies, from those that focus on types of tourists (Prentice, 1994) to types of tourism (Novelli, 2005), so it should therefore not be surprising that we have proposed a simple typology of human-originated linear spaces that is inclusive of all linear tourism and recreation resources, including paths, bridleways, blueways, greenways, railway lines, scenic roads, wilderness tracks and tour circuits. Understanding this classification is, however, complicated further when scale and setting are considered.

250

Tour ism and Trail s

Scale, as discussed in Chapter 1, involves linear resources that range from small to large – small as in pathways within a visitor attraction (e.g. open-air museum or botanical garden) or a walking themed trail in a town or city; medium as in either long-distance walking trails or regional and national carbased touring byways connected by a specific natural, historical or cultural theme; and finally large (often known as mega-trails and routes), passing through more than one region or country and often linked to past migration or trade routes. Coupled with this is the reality that the setting may vary from urban areas, a common locale for themed walking trails, to peri-urban locations with greenways and rail-trail corridors, to rural environments involving themed touring routes or long-distance walking trails; and finally peripheral/ wilderness locations as contexts for remote nature trails and hiking tracks. We have also suggested that for some people these linear spaces can have a direct or indirect link to their past, to memories and senses of nostalgia, to the extent to which they have a personal connection to the place and its attractions.

Supply and demand While it is clear that other linear spaces exist, we have devoted most attention in this book to cultural heritage routes, nature trails and mixed routes. This threefold view was deliberate because the majority of written discourse has focused on these same classes of linear spaces. As noted in the previous chapter, cultural routes have been developed for a variety of reasons, and these were elaborated on at length to include enjoyment, preservation, image of place enhancement, economic development and as instruments of power and persuasion. What is perhaps more useful for researchers to build on is the conceptual model developed with respect to cultural heritage trails, stressing the difference between routes that have organically evolved (e.g. those involving trade, migration, pilgrimage, as well as intentionally built linear resources such as railways, canals and relict political boundaries) and those that have been purposively designed for tourism and leisure (e.g. trails devoted to urban heritage, film, art, music, literature, industrial archaeology, agriculture, food and wine, and religion). In the case of organically evolved routes we stress an evolution from ‘original’ route to ‘developed’ route. In contrast, purposive routes, we argue, have come about due to the presence of a certain theme within a defined linear space, around which a route was deliberately ‘designed’ (see Ramsay & Truscott, 2003). The book offers detailed examples of both organic and purposive cultural routes. The extent to which the conceptual models developed (see Chapter 2) fit with the many examples presented is perhaps an avenue for future research, as the models are viewed as abstractions of reality as opposed to deliberately fitting within the specific conditions for each cultural route. On the supply side we also examined nature trails and mixed routes, the latter emerging given the difficulty of separating culture and nature within

Ref lec t ions and Futures

251

the trails context. Again, a lengthy classification is presented for nature trails to include wilderness tracks, ski trails, water trails, geology trails, forest canopy walks and long-distance multi-day nature paths. We have been deliberately descriptive in this taxonomy, drawing together the disparate literature on each type. When culture and nature overlap, a number of mixed routes also result, namely bicycle trails, borderland greenways and greenbelts, scenic byways, self-drive scenic roads and rails-to-trails. To this end, detailed case studies are presented to illustrate real-world examples of the issues and concepts discussed in each chapter. Another model was developed which suggests that where nature trails exist they either do so as original tracks developed specifically as tourism resources, or where the nature trail is modified as a result of its use for a certain form of recreation. In these instances recreational activities are undertaken by tourists. In contrast, we have argued that where mixed routes are concerned, conceptually what has taken place is a transformation of natural space – wherein cultural assets exist – into a designed track or route that positions cultural and heritage features within a natural geographic setting. Demand was examined primarily from the perspective of participation, in particular the characteristics of trail users, how often they participate and the reasons why they participate, including motivations such as the desire to seek enjoyment and have meaningful experiences. We argue that a population that is active in outdoor pursuits facilitates greater use of trails, suggesting that in some cases certain types of routes (e.g. cycleways) were deliberately designed to accommodate sections of a population that lead an active lifestyle. As well, some people’s connections to religion are manifested in route-related travel. In this situation people may make use of known pilgrimage ways, such as the Camino de Santiago in northern Spain, to manifest their devotion to their deity physically by engaging in religious rituals and showing humility by traversing the Camino. For pilgrims this may be a life-altering experience and a one-chance opportunity. As pertains to trail consumers’ characteristics, research reveals similar patterns that are found for general cultural heritage tourists, namely they tend to be well-educated, of a higher socio-economic status, and relatively young to middle aged. The latter generalization breaks down as recreationfocused trails are used predominantly by younger males, whereas scenic drives appeal to older cohorts with few real gender differences. Lacking from the current research, however, is knowledge about ethnicity and race, as most research in North America and Europe focuses on mainstream and white populations rather than trying to understand trail uses and experiences of immigrants and racial/ethnic minorities (see Omar et al., 2012). The current research literature on demand reveals the importance of having legal and physical access to trails and routes, where patterns of demand are linked to setting type (greater use of trails in urban versus rural areas) and proximity to people’s homes. Reasons for participation focus on

252

Tour ism and Trail s

personal fitness and health, both at individual and community levels. We also make the case that trails and routes provide opportunities for enjoyable and meaningful experiences in destination places. Here the seminal work of Pine and Gilmore (1999) on the experience economy has much to offer, as active participation in trail- and route-based tourism could be argued to be both educational and escapist, the former involving some absorption in the narrative being told on the way, whereas the latter relates to some people’s desires to make use of linear spaces to get away from the pressures of home and immerse themselves in the natural or cultural environment. Equally, concepts such as nostalgia, prominent within heritage tourism discourse, are valuable in ascertaining why certain trails and routes have certain appeal over others, but there remains a dearth of research that addresses nostalgia in the context of linear space. A final consideration was to examine the research on why there might be an absence of demand. The findings presented here are not dissimilar to those cited in the broader recreation and tourism literature where barriers that are intrapersonal (crowding, safety concerns, lack of physical fitness, lack of interest), interpersonal (lack of people to share the experience with), and structural (disability to participate, too far away from home environment) exist. Yet another model was presented which illustrates where there may be a range of factors that help shape trail and route use demand (e.g. general trends in demand, elements of location, trail uses, characteristics of trail users, experience-enjoymentsatisfaction, barriers to use), but some are clearly more important than others, such as the experience to be gained and the physical quality of the trail. For our examination of both supply and demand, we have made extensive use of the ‘case study’ approach, selecting cases to illustrate various aspects of what is happening at a specific point of time in a specific context, and to present real-life examples linked to wider issues being discussed in the extant literature.

Impacts A conventional approach addressed the impacts arising from trail and route use, with the focus on the ecological, social and economic costs and benefits. The ecological impacts for non-hardened, unmaintained, or poorly designed countryside of wilderness tracks included soil compaction and erosion, vegetation loss and damage, changes to wildlife and the loss of part of a region’s tangible heritage. The vast majority of this research has centered on soil compaction, erosion and flora loss and damage with less attention devoted to how trail recreation affects wildlife (Gaines et al., 2003). Conversely a much smaller literature exists on the positive physical impacts. The focus in this book of positive physical outcomes is conservation, interpretation, education, urban renewal, as well as routes providing a natural corridor for utility easements.

Ref lec t ions and Futures

253

Two broad strands of research on the social impacts of trail use have been to address the perceptions and experiences of residents as well as the views and experiences of visitors. What clearly emerges in the former is a high degree of ‘not in my backyard’ syndrome, with people not wanting trails nearby as they are believed to have an impact on privacy, increase exposure to vandalism and reduce property values. The literature is full of examples where the reaction of locals to trail development ranged from passive opposition to violent confrontation (see Kaylen et al., 1993). As for research on the views and experiences of visitors, the majority of studies have focused on overcrowding, the displeasure of excessive levels of noise, particularly for wilderness trails, and animosity toward users who are seen to be misbehaving. Conversely, some research addresses the social benefits of trails and routes. This focuses predominantly on quality of life (QOL) enhancement, physical fitness and building community pride in local natural and cultural heritage (Iles & Wiele, 1993). The final category of impact is economic in nature and focuses on how trails induce visitor spending and financial impacts (Lumsdon et al., 2004). Previous research has focused either on user expenditures to demonstrate the size of monies involved, or, to a lesser extent, the indirect economic effects of trails as part of a regional tourism economy.

Planning and development The discussion on planning and developing linear recreation spaces revealed a number of interesting considerations. First, the development of large-scale trails is exclusively reliant on supranational or national government policies and legislative actions wherein priorities are sent for creating linear resources. The development of many route systems has been reliant on the vision and foresight of past administrations that recognized the importance of setting aside and creating these spaces for people to enjoy. At the local government level, small-scale trails and routes are increasingly seen as suitable means of fulfilling social, cultural, economic and environmental goals. Second, with respect to trail planning, there are several excellent models that can be used as exemplars for future trail planning and development (Hugo, 1999; McNamara & Prideaux, 2011). These are a step beyond traditional procedural planning, as they highlight a range of aspects that are addressed in this book, namely funding, the importance of volunteers, the need to acquire land-use rights, ensuring that there exists participatory development between the trail designers and the wider community, and ensuring that cooperation and collaboration are maintained throughout the planning and development phases. These are not new issues as many of them relate very closely to other forms of tourism development, in particular heritage and cultural tourism, especially the role volunteers will play in

254

Tour ism and Trail s

small-scale, locally-developed trails, and respecting the views and rights of native peoples where the route crosses into their jurisdiction or touches on indigenous themes (Furniss, 2000). The final point on planning and development relates to trail design. This book is not an instruction manual for trail design and monitoring and therefore does not provide hands-on details about these practices, for there are many sources that do provide application instructions. Nonetheless, we have presented a range of issues that developers need to be cognizant of, including location, slope consideration and gradient, signage, trail amenities, access, and the possible need to use trails to deflect pressure away from more popular areas. It is pertinent to note three of these issues which, if done incorrectly, can have major implications for trail use and overall satisfaction: how much physical alteration should take place – hardening as this can influence accessibility; the level of signage; and the number and range of trail amenities provided.

Management We take the position that trails and routes are very much a part of the public recreation and tourism domain, and so the focus in this book is management of their use in ways that maximize the quality of the user experience. To achieve this, a mix of supply and demand management approaches was presented both conceptually and within case studies to demonstrate that the techniques or what some writers call ‘tool kit’ (e.g. Hall & Lew, 2009) will vary depending on the nature and characteristics of the route/trail, the scale involved and the setting(s) or landscape(s) in which they are located. Part of the discussion of supply-leaning management entailed how best to design trails to address high-frequency use, to ensure all possible users have access and where necessary specific design features are put in place to mitigate physical impacts. From demand management perspectives, the discussion was geared toward the most appropriate methods of interpretation, how trails can be effectively funded, and the extent of formalization of educating visitors. Given the mix of landscapes routes traverse, several visitor management frameworks and procedures were evaluated as part of the management ‘tool kit’. These frameworks emphasize either maximizing opportunities or imposing limits. There is very limited evidence that these frameworks and procedures have been applied to trails and routes as they were deliberately designed for areas rather than linear corridors. That said, we suggest that there is a certain amount of potential within elements of the opportunity frameworks that could be used toward effective administration of linear spaces. Preference remains with carrying capacity and trying to determine acceptable limits, but again there is a dearth of conceptual thinking on linear

Ref lec t ions and Futures

255

spaces. There are some models on carrying capacity that apply to trails and routes, but more need to be developed specifically for this unique context.

Futures Predicting the future is difficult. At best we can adopt scenario planning or rely on forecasting based on historical data and current knowledge (Yeoman, 2012). Futures writing has concentrated predominantly on tourism as a global phenomenon as opposed to looking at the futures of certain types of tourism or indeed particular tourism spaces. Gazing into the future of routes as recreation and tourism spaces depends on what future one is referring to – the immediate future, medium future (next decade) or distant future (a lifespan away). Also, in forming a vision of the future, we must ask three questions. First, what do we envision may happen (possible futures)? Second, what is most likely to happen (probable futures)? And finally, what would we wish to happen (preferable futures) (Page & Connell, 2010: 471)? In the case of trails it is perhaps better to suggest that forecasting is preferred over scenario planning. With regard to ‘possible’ futures, we will unlikely see considerable changes in the importance of trails and routes as providers of leisure and tourism experiences. The numbers and types of trails will not dramatically increase or decline. Rather, it is more likely that routes will become more ‘themed’, with this theming providing another brand identity mechanism for regions and how they are marketed. The level of demand in terms of participation may be influenced by a number of factors, including the rise in individualism in leisure, particularly as a result of social networking, increased concerns with people’s health, an aging population and the emergence of new tourism markets. The first driver has the potential to limit the levels of participation within the younger cohorts in populations at large; it may even be linked to the second driver as a less active society increases the likelihood of rising levels of obesity and ill health. The irony is that to overcome poor health, society needs to engage better in active forms of recreation – opportunities that trails and routes can provide. The third driver may result in a rise of participation in more active forms of leisure and recreation, and, within a broader tourism context, trails in urban and rural settings will offer suitable environments for walking, cycling and touring. The retirees of today tend to be healthier and better off financially than their forebears, so opportunities for travel lean in their favor. The fourth driver is unlikely to have a major impact on demand for recreation trails, as the market from the emergent economies (e.g. China and Russia) is unlikely to be interested in exploring new landscapes and destinations as expressed through trails and routes. However, world famous linear trails and other resources, such

256

Tour ism and Trail s

as the Inca Trail to Machu Picchu, Hadrian’s Wall, various historic railways or the Great Wall of China, most certainly will see a boost in visitation as new markets are exposed. As for the possible futures of impacts, there is little evidence to suggest these will alter dramatically as physical impacts are a consequence of levels of use. It is possible that certain types of trails and those that are highly accessible to large markets and have been positioned as integral to the tourism attractions of particular regions will be more ecologically impacted. This in turn will result in certain trails and routes receiving more management attention to address ecological damage, ensure they offer social benefits for users and remain economically viable. It may be fair to suggest that there will be little difference between ‘probable future’ and ‘possible future’ of trails as noted above. Trails and routes will unlikely take on any new prominence as recreation and tourism spaces, as most future demand for travel will remain based upon the destinations as a whole, where linear corridors may be only a part of the total experience. It is possible, however, that as people in the Western world become more nostalgic and reflective of their own personal and familial heritages (Timothy, 2008) route-based journeys with strong personal meanings may increase. Inorganic routes created deliberately for leisure and tourism will probably remain strong from the probable futures perspective. Levels of participation on urban routes and short-distance trails will probably grow, especially as technology-based interpretive tools and guides become a more normative part of the holiday or recreational experience. As regards administration, it is probable that less rural and wilderness trails will experience heavy levels of regimentation, and there will be more reliance on self-monitoring of appropriate behavior and conduct. Urban routes will be easier to manage as they might involve fewer stakeholders and can withstand higher levels of use than their wilderness counterparts can. Finally, in thinking of ‘preferable futures’, trails and routes have the potential to play an increased role in slow travel, particularly making use of walking and cycling as recreational and tourist activities. Equally, leisure linear corridors have the potential to be pivotal in the development of community-driven tourism where destinations benefit both socially and economically from their development and where they too become empowered stakeholders with a say in how trails are designed and managed. It would be naïve of us to think that trails and routes will become more prominent as recreation and tourism spaces in a preferable futures scenario, although they might in a limited number of circumstances. At best they should remain an important element in the landscapes that are already enjoyed by outdoor enthusiasts and tourists. An emerging way of looking at tourism and leisure is from a transformational perspective, where transformational experiences embrace travel and recreation that focus on the body (e.g. adventure travel, health and medical

Ref lec t ions and Futures

257

tourism, sport), mind (e.g. cultural heritage tourism, educational travel, meditation) and spirit (e.g. pilgrimage and wilderness trekking). Trails and routes offer much potential for all three of these outlooks and many more. Developing routes, trails and other linear resources, encouraging sustainable participation, and mitigating the impacts that accrue from their use, are crucial to the future success of these foundational attractions that add considerable appeal to destinations and communities and which are vital to preserving the world’s cultural and natural heritage.

References

Aas, C., Ladkin, A. and Fletcher, J. (2005) Stakeholder collaboration and heritage management. Annals of Tourism Research 32 (1), 28–48. Aguirre, J.A. (2009) Sustainable trail management in Costa Rica national parks: The use of photography for trail surfacing decisions under tropical rainforest conditions. PASOS: Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural 7 (1), 29–42. Aitchison, C., MacLeod, N. and Shaw, S. (2002) Leisure and Tourism Landscapes: Social and Cultural Geographies. London: Routledge. Aitken, B. and Smith, R. (2002) The West Highland Way (6th edn). Edinburgh: Mercat Press. Albrecht, J. (1996) Trail Planning, Construction and Maintenance: A Bibliography Supplement, 1996. St Paul: Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Minnesota. Alderney Railway (2013) Welcome to Alderney Railway. See www.alderneyrailway.com/ (accessed 18 January 2013). Allton, D.J. and Lieber, S.R. (1983) Attributes of Chicago trail areas. Leisure Sciences 5 (3), 197–220. Alonso, A.D. (2013) Tannat: The positioning of a wine grape as symbol and ‘referent’ of a nation’s gastronomic heritage. Journal of Heritage Tourism 8 (2–3), 105–119. Alves, F.J.S. (2008) Underwater archaeological trails. Museum International 60 (4), 81–90. Amekudzi, A. and Fomunung, I. (2004) Integrating brownfields redevelopment with transportation planning. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 130 (4), 204–212. Amoamo, M. and Thompson, A. (2010) (Re)imaging Ma¯ori tourism: Representation and cultural hybridity in postcolonial New Zealand. Tourist Studies 10 (1), 35–55. Andereck, K.L., Valentine, K.M., Knopf, R.C. and Vogt, C.A. (2005) Residents’ perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research 32 (4), 1056–1076. Andereck, K.L., Vogt, C.A., Larkin, K., and Freye, K. (2001) Differences between motorized and nonmotorized trail users. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 19 (3), 62–77. Antonson, H. and Jacobsen, J.K.S. (2014) Tourism development strategy or just brown signage? Comparing road administration policies and designation procedures for official tourism routes in two Scandinavian countries. Land Use Policy 36, 342–350. Appalachian Trail Conservancy (2013) 2000 milers. See www.appalachiantrail.org/ about-the-trail/2000-milers (accessed 13 April 2013). Appeldoorn, K. (1993) Ondernemers niet negatief over mountainbikes. Rekreaksie 23 (3), 16–17. Arellano, A. (2011) Tourism in poor regions and social inclusion: The porters of the Inca Trail to Machu Picchu. World Leisure Journal 54 (2), 104–118. Arizona Republic (2005) Route of Iron Curtain pushed as tourist trail. Arizona Republic, 2 October, T2.

258

References

259

Arocena, J.M., Nepal, S.K. and Rutherford, M. (2006) Visitor-induced changes in the chemical composition of soils in backcountry areas of Mt Robson Provincial Park, British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Environmental Management 79, 10–19. Arrowsmith, C. and Inbakaran, R. (2002) Estimating environmental resiliency for the Grampians National Park, Victoria, Australia: A quantitative approach. Tourism Management 23, 295–309. Ashbaugh, B.L. and Kordish, R.J. (1971) Trail Planning and Layout. New York: National Audubon Society. Ashworth, G. and Bruce, D.M. (2009) Town walls, walled towns and tourism: Paradoxes and paradigms. Journal of Heritage Tourism 4 (4), 299–313. Ashworth, G. and Hartmann, R. (eds) (2005a) Horror and Human Tragedy Revisited: The Management of Sites of Atrocities for Tourism. New York: Cognizant. Ashworth, G. and Hartmann, R. (2005b) Introduction: Managing atrocity for tourism. In G. Ashworth and R. Hartmann (eds) Horror and Human Tragedy Revisited: The Management of Sites of Atrocities for Tourism (pp. 1–14). New York: Cognizant. Ashworth, G. and Kavaratzis, M. (eds) (2012) Towards Effective Place Brand Management: Branding European Cities and Regions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Ashworth, G. and Tunbridge, J. E. (2000) The Tourist-Historic City: Retrospect and Prospect in Managing the Heritage City. New York: Pergamon. Auckland City (2004) Coast to Coast Walkway. Auckland: Auckland City Council. Australian Tropical Foods (n.d.) Taste of the Tropics Food Trail. Cairns: Australian Tropical Fruits. Axelsson-Lindgren, C. and Sorte, G. (1987) Public response to differences between visually distinguishable forest stands in a recreation area. Landscape and Urban Planning 14, 211–217. Azlin, Y.N. and Philip, E. (2004) Soil compaction and tree decline along a recreational forest trail in Malaysia. Arboricultural Journal 27 (3), 239–243. Backpacker Guides (2012) Southeast Asia: Suggested itinerary. See www.backpackerguides. co.uk/index.php/suggested-itineraries (accessed 1 September 2012). Báez, A.L. (2002) Sky walk – Sky trek: A successful community project in the mountains of Monteverde, Costa Rica. Mountain Research and Development 22 (2), 128–131. Baggio, R. and Cooper, C. (2010) Knowledge transfer in a tourism destination: The effects of a network structure. The Service Industries Journal 30 (10), 1757–1771. Baggio, R., Scott, N. and Cooper, C. (2010) Network science: A review focused on tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 27 (3), 802–827. Bakkal, I. and Scaperlanda, A. (1991) Characteristics of U.S. demand for European tourism: A translog approach. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 127 (1), 119–137. Ballantyne, R. and Packer, J. (2005) Promoting environmentally sustainable attitudes and behaviour through free-choice learning experiences: What is the state of the game? Environmental Education Research 11 (3), 281–295. Ballinger, D. (1994) Managing the Rideau Canal: Issues of conservation and tourism. ICOMOS Canada Bulletin 3 (3), 38–40. Banister, C., Groome, D. and Pawson, G. (1992) The shared use debate: A discussion on the joint use of canal towing paths by walkers, anglers and cyclists. Journal of Environmental Management 34 (2), 149–158. Basnet, K. (1993) Solid waste pollution versus sustainable development in high mountain environments: A case study of Sagarmatha National Park of Khumbu Region, Nepal. Contributions to Nepalese Studies 20 (1), 131–139. Baud-Bovy, M. and Lawson, F. (1998) Tourism and Recreation Handbook of Planning and Design. Oxford: Architectural Press. Bavarian Tourismus Marketing (2013) Travelling while using all senses. See www. bavaria.by/culinary-routes (accessed 11 April 2013).

260

Tour ism and Trail s

Beaumont, N. and Dredge, D. (2010) Local tourism governance: A comparison of three network approaches. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 18 (1), 7–28. Beer, S., Edwards, J., Fernandes, C. and Sampaio, F. (2002) Regional food cultures: Integral to the rural tourism product? In A.M. Hjalager and G. Richards (eds) Tourism and Gastronomy (pp. 207–223). London: Routledge. Beeton, S. (1999a) Hoofing it – On four or two feet? Managing multi-use trails and sites. Current Issues in Tourism 2 (2–3), 211–225. Beeton, S. (1999b) Visitors to national parks: Attitudes of walkers toward commercial horseback tours. Pacific Tourism Review 3 (1), 49–60. Beeton, S. (2006) Sustainable tourism in practice: Trails and tourism. Critical management issues of multi-use trails. Tourism and Hospitality Planning and Development 3 (1), 47–64. Belan, J. (2000) Toronto’s success story in outdoor recreation with an educational twist. Parks & Recreation Canada 57 (6), 20–21. Bell, S. (2008) Design for Outdoor Recreation (2nd edn). Abingdon: Taylor and Francis. Bellarine Tourism (2013) The Bellarine Taste Trail. See www.thebellarinetastetrail.com. au (accessed 1 May 2013). Benfield, R.W. (2013) Garden Tourism. Wallingford: CABI. Bennett, R.M., Tranter, R.B. and Blaney, R.J.P. (2003) The value of countryside access: A contingent valuation survey of visitors to the Ridgeway National Trail in the United Kingdom. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 46 (5), 659–671. Bergsma, J.R. (1988) Planning of tourist routes: The Green Coast Road in the northern Netherlands. In B. Goodall and G. Ashworth (eds) Marketing in the Tourism Industry: The Promotion of Destination Regions (pp. 89–100). London: Croom Helm. Beritelli, P. (2011) Cooperation among prominent actors in a tourist destination. Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2), 607–629. Besculides, A., Lee, M.E. and McCormick, P.J. (2002) Residents’ perceptions of the cultural benefits of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 29 (2), 303–319. Betz, C.J., Bergstrom, J.C. and Bowker, J.M. (2003) A contingent trip model for estimating rail-trail demand. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 46 (1), 79–96. Beunard, B. and Berger-Sabattel, R. (1998) La via ferrata, un produit qui grimpe. Espaces 151, 54–59. Bhuju, D.R. and Ohsawa, M. (1998) Effects of nature trails on ground vegetation and understory colonization of a patchy remnant forest in an urban domain. Biological Conservation 85, 123–135. Bichis-Lupas, M. and Moisey, R.N. (2001) A benefit segmentation of rail-trail users: Implications for marketing by local communities. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 19 (3), 78–92. Biers-Ariel, M., Newbrun, D. and Smart, M.F. (2000) Spirit in Nature: Teaching Judaism and Ecology on the Trail. Springfield, NJ: Behrman House. Binkley, C.S. and Mendelsohn, R.O. (1987) Recreation user fees: An economic analysis. Journal of Forestry 85 (5), 31–35. Binks, G., Dower, M., Downing, P. and Jenkins, J. (1978) Self-Guided Trails. Cheltenham: Countryside Commission. Bissix, G., Rive, K. and Kruisselbrink, D. (2009) Identifying key messages to encourage minimal impact on the Cape Split Trail. Leisure/Loisir 33 (2), 615–636. Bjønness, I.M. (1982) Tourism in the periphery – A development problem: The Nepalese case. In A. Närman (ed.) Development Geography and the Rural Periphery (pp. 109–124). Göteborg, Sweden: Department of Human and Economic Geography, University of Gothenburg. Blackwell, M., Pagoulatos, A., Hu, W.Y. and Auchter, K. (2009) Recreational demand for equestrian trail-riding. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 38 (2), 229–239.

References

261

Blair, S. (2003) Making tracks, from point to pathway: The heritage of routes and journeys. Historic Environment 16 (2), 2–3. Blanco, N.C.P. (2002) An educational strategy for the environment in the national park system of Venezuela. Environmental Education Research 8 (4), 463–473. Bohlin, M. and Brandt, D. (2014) Creating tourist experiences by interpreting places using digital guides. Journal of Heritage Tourism 9 (1), 1–17. Bork, K. (1989) Easy access with trail partners. Parks & Recreation 24 (12), 22–26. Boucher, B.J. (1990) Punta Gorda to create ecotourism trail. The Belize Review 2 (9), 12–13. Bowers, R. (2000) From eyesore to economic benefit: Studying the rails-to-trails program. Futures 17 (1–2), 22–23. Bowick, B. (2003) Recreation trails: Where are we? Parks and Recreation Canada 61 (1), 24–25. Bowman, G. (2000) Christian ideology at the image of a holy land: The place of Jerusalem pilgrimage in the various Christianities. In J. Eade and M.J. Sallnow (eds) Contesting the Sacred: The Anthropology of Christian Pilgrimage (pp. 98–121). New York: Routledge. Boyd, S.W. (2002) Cultural and heritage tourism in Canada: Opportunities, principles and challenges. Tourism and Hospitality Research 3 (3), 211–233. Boyd, S.W. (2008) Marketing challenges and opportunities for heritage tourism. In A. Fyall, B. Garrod, A. Leask and S. Wanhill (eds) Managing Visitor Attractions: New Directions (pp. 283–294). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Boyd, S.W. (2013) The Causeway Coastal Route and Saint Patrick’s Trail: Heritage tourism route development in Northern Ireland. In B. Garrod and A. Fyall (eds) Contemporary Cases in Heritage (pp. 204–228). London: Goodfellow. Boyd, S.W. and Butler, R.W. (1996) Managing ecotourism: An opportunity spectrum approach. Tourism Management 17 (8), 557–566. Boyd, S.W. and Butler, R.W. (1999) Definitely not monkeys or parrots, probably deer and possibly moose: Opportunities and realities of ecotourism in northern Ontario. Current Issues in Tourism 2 (2–3), 123–137. Boyd, S.W. and Butler, R.W. (2000) Tourism and national parks: The origin of the concept. In R.W. Butler and S.W. Boyd (eds) Tourism and National Parks: Issues and Implications (pp. 13–27). Chichester: Wiley. Boyd, S.W. and Butler, R.W. (2009) Tourism and the Canadian national park system: Protection, use and balance. In W. Frost and C.M. Hall (eds) Tourism and National Parks: International Perspectives on Development, Histories and Change (pp. 102–113). London: Routledge. Boyd, S.W. and Tham, W.L. (2004) Experiencing tourism: Urban walking trails in Napier and Dunedin, New Zealand. Paper presented at the Pre-IGU Congress, Loch Lomond, Scotland, 13–15 August. Boyd, S.W. and Timothy, D.J. (1999) Heritage trails: Opportunities and implications for management. Paper presented at the Sustaining Rural Environments: Issues in Globalization, Migration and Tourism International Conference, Flagstaff, Arizona, 20–23 October. Boyd, S.W. and Timothy, D.J. (2001) Developing partnerships: Tools for interpretation and management of World Heritage Sites. Tourism Recreation Research 26 (1), 47–53. Boyne, S., Williams, F. and Hall, D. (2002) On the trail of regional success: Tourism, food production and the Isle of Arran Taste Trail. In A.M. Hjalager and G. Richards (eds) Tourism and Gastronomy (pp. 91–114). London: Routledge. Brady, L.M. (2008) Life in the DMZ: Turning a diplomatic failure into an environmental success. Diplomatic History 32 (4), 585–611. Bramwell, B. and Lane, B. (2011) Critical research on the governance of tourism and sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 19 (4–5), 411–421. Brás, J.M., Costa, C. and Buhalis, D. (2010) Network analysis and wine routes: The case of the Bairrada Wine Route. Service Industries Journal 30, 1621–1641.

262

Tour ism and Trail s

Briedenhann, J. and Wickens, E. (2004) Tourism routes as a tool for the economic development of rural areas – Vibrant hope or impossible dream? Tourism Management 25, 71–79. Briganti, C.M. and Heol, L.A. (1994) Design and Information Requirements for Travel and Tourism Needs on Scenic Byways. Charlottesville, VA: Virginia Transportation Research Council. Bright, J.A. (1986) Hiker impact on herbaceous vegetation along trails in an evergreen woodland of central Texas. Biological Conservation 36, 53–69. Bristow, R.S. (1998) Volunteer-based recreation land management. Parks and Recreation 33 (8), 70–76. British Heritage Railways (2013) The Great Laxey Mine Railway. See www.britishheritage-railways.co.uk/glmr.html (accessed 2 February 2013). Brodsky-Porges, E. (1981) The Grand Tour: Travel as an educational device, 1600–1800. Annals of Tourism Research 8, 171–186. Brown, M.C. and Barter, C. (2004) Acadia style: Using historic precedents to rehabilitate hiking trails. APT Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology 35 (2–3), 61–66. Bruce Trail Conservancy (2013) About us. See http://brucetrail.org/pages/about-us/theniagara-escarpment (accessed 3 April 2013). Brunori, G. and Rossi, A. (2000) Synergy and coherence through collective action: Some insights from wine routes in Tuscany. Sociologia Ruralis 40 (4), 409–423. Bruwer, J. (2003) South African wine routes: Some perspectives on the wine tourism industry’s structural dimensions and wine tourism product. Tourism Management 24, 423–435. Bryan, R.B. (1977) The influence of soil properties on degradation of mountain hiking trails at Grovelsjon. Geografiska Annaler, A: Physical Geography 59 (1–2), 49–65. Bryden, D.M., Westbrook, S.R., Burns, B., Taylor, W.A. and Anderson, S. (2010) Assessing the Economic Impacts of Nature Based Tourism in Scotland. Inverness: Scottish Natural Heritage. Bryson, B. (1998) A Walk in the Woods: Rediscovering America on the Appalachian Trail. New York: Broadway Books. Buckley, R. and Pannell, J. (1990) Environmental impacts of tourism and recreation in national parks and conservation reserves. Journal of Tourism Studies 1 (1), 24–32. Bullock, S. and Lawson, S. (2007) Examining the potential effects of management actions on visitor experiences on the summit of Cadillac mountain, Acadia National Park. Human Ecology Review 14 (2), 140–156. Burgener, L.W. (1987) Die Wanderwege in der Schweiz. Magglingen 44 (7), 6–7. Busby, G. (1996) Long distance paths as rural tourism resources. Footprint 2 (2), 10–13. Butler, R.W. (1999) Sustainable tourism: A state-of-the-art review. Tourism Geographies 1 (1), 7–25. Butler, R.W., Fennell, D.A. and Boyd, S.W. (1995) Canadian Heritage Rivers System recreational carrying capacity study. Proceedings of the CHRS Rivers Conference, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, 8–10 May, pp. 100–126. Butler, R.W. and Hinch, T. (eds) (2007) Tourism and Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Implications. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Butler, R.W. and Waldbrook, L.A. (1991) A new planning tool: The tourism opportunity spectrum. Journal of Tourism Studies 2 (1), 1–14. Cahill, K.L., Marion, J.L. and Lawson, S.R. (2008) Exploring visitor acceptability for hardening trails to sustain visitation and minimize impacts. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 16 (2), 232–245. Cain, R. (1991) Rails-to-trails: Is the National Trails System back on track after Preseault? The Urban Lawyer 23 (1), 63–73. Cairns City Council (n.d.) Southern Heritage Drive. Cairns: Cairns City Council. Canadian Heritage (2008) Canadian taste trails. Review.com, December, 10–11.

References

263

Canadian Heritage Rivers Board (2007) Canadian Heritage Rivers System: Strategic Plan 2008–2018. Ottawa: CHRB. Carabelli, F.A. (2002) A proposal for the development of tourism in the forested landscapes of Tierra del Fuego, Patagonia, Argentina. Tourism Analysis 6, 185–202. Carden, A.R. (2006) How public relations put the kicks in Route 66 – And still is. Journal of Vacation Marketing 12 (2), 130–141. Carothers, P., Vaske, J.J. and Donnelly, M.P. (2001) Social values versus interpersonal conflict among hikers and mountain bikers. Leisure Sciences 23 (1), 47–61. Casbeard, R., Duncan, T., Kline, C. and Schneider, P. (2010) Slavery heritage in Bristol: History, memory and forgetting. Annals of Leisure Research 13 (1–2), 143–166. Caton, K. and Santos, C.A. (2007) Heritage tourism on Route 66: Deconstructing nostalgia. Journal of Travel Research 45 (4), 371–386. Causeway Coast and Glens Tourism Partnership (2011) Tourism Area Plan 2012–2017: Growing Tourism Together. Edinburgh: BTS Solutions. Ceballos-Lascuráin, H. (1990) La Ruta Maya: A transfrontier ecocultural tourism circuit in the Yucatan region. In J. Thorsell (ed.) Parks on the Borderline: Experience in Transfrontier Conservation (pp. 51–61). Gland: IUCN. Center for Outdoor Ethics (2014) The Leave No Trace Seven Principles. See https://lnt. org/learn/7-principles (accessed 19 August 2014). Cerutti, S. and Dioli, I. (2013) Via Francigena mountain itineraries: The case of Piacenza Valleys. International Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage 1 (1), 83–92. Cessford, G.R. (2000) Noise impact issues on the Great Walks of New Zealand. In D.N. Cole, S.F. McCool, W.T. Borrie and J. O’Laughlin (eds) Wilderness Science in a Time of Change Conference, Vol. 4. Wilderness Visitors, Experiences and Visitor Management (pp. 69–76). Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station. Charlevoix Tourism (2013) The Flavour Trail. See www.tourisme- charlevoix.com/en/ circuits/flavor-trail (accessed 3 May 2013). Chavez, D.J. (1996) Mountain biking: Direct, indirect, and bridge building management styles. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 14 (4), 21–35. Chavez, D.J. (1997) Bunny hops or vegetable tunnels? Perceptions and preferences of mountain bike riders on the San Jacinto Ranger District. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 12 (2), 44–48. Chavez, D.J., Harding, J.A. and Tynon, J.F. (1999) National recreation trails: A forgotten designation. Journal of Forestry 97 (10), 40–43. Che, D. (2009) Value-added agricultural products and entertainment in Michigan’s fruit belt. In G. Halseth, S. Markey and D. Bruce (eds) The Next Rural Economies: Constructing Rural Place in Global Economies (pp. 102–114). Wallingford: CABI. Chettri, N., Sharma, E. and Deb, D.C. (2001) Bird community structure along a trekking corridor of Sikkim Himalaya: A conservation perspective. Biological Conservation 102, 1–16. Cheung, S.C.H. (1999) The meanings of a heritage trail in Hong Kong. Annals of Tourism Research 26, 570–588. Chhabra, D. (2010) Sustainable Marketing of Cultural and Heritage Tourism. London: Routledge. Chizhova, V.P. (2004) Impacts and management of hikers in Kavkazsky State Biosphere Reserve, Russia. In R. Buckley (ed.) Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism (pp. 377–381). Wallingford: CABI. Cho, W., Oh, K. and Bae, J.N. (2004) Trail deterioration and distribution characteristics of South-North green corridor in Incheon, Korea – A case study of mountainous type urban natural parks. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 18 (4), 359–368. Christ, M.K. (2002) The Arkansas Civil War Heritage Trail: A grassroots battlefield preservation initiative. CRM 25 (4), 44–45. Clark, J.D. (1989) Adopt-a-Highway: A new source of pride for Americans. Transportation Builder 1 (1), 14–16.

264

Tour ism and Trail s

Clark, R.N. and Stankey, G.H. (1979) The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum: A Framework for Planning, Management, and Research. Washington, DC: USDA. Clay, G.R. and Daniel, T.C. (2000) Scenic landscape assessment: The effects of land management jurisdiction on public perception of scenic beauty. Landscape and Urban Planning 49, 1–13. Coffin, A.W. (2007) From roadkill to road ecology: A review of the ecological effects of roads. Journal of Transport Geography 15 (5), 396–406. Cohen, E. (1982) Jungle guides in northern Thailand – The dynamics of a marginal occupational role. Sociological Review 30 (2), 234–266. Cohen, K., Cook, M. and Pearce, H. (2001) Heritage Trails of the Tropical North. Brisbane: Queensland Government, Environmental Protection Agency. Coleman, A. (1994) The development of the Hadrian’s Wall National Trail. In R. Harrison (ed.) Manual of Heritage Management (pp. 70–71). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Conlin, M.V. and Bird, G.R. (eds) (2014) Railway Heritage and Tourism: Global Perspectives. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Conlin, M.V. and Jolliffe, L. (eds) (2011) Mining Heritage and Tourism: A Global Synthesis. London: Routledge. Cook, A. (2008) Recreation value of a new long-distance walking track. Tourism Economics 14 (2), 377–391. Cook, W.L. (1988) Compatibility of tourism and wilderness. Tourism Recreation Research 13 (1), 3–7. Cooper, M., O’Mahony, K. and Erfurth, P. (2004) Backpackers: Nomads join the mainstream? An analysis of backpacker employment on the ‘Harvest Trail Circuit’ in Australia. In G. Richards and J. Wilson (eds) The Global Nomad: Backpacker Travel in Theory and Practice (pp. 180–195). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Cope, A.M., Cairns, S., Fox, K., Lawlor, D.A., Lockie, M., Lumsdon, L., Riddoch, C. and Rosen, P. (2003) The UK National Cycle Network: An assessment of the benefits of a sustainable transport infrastructure. World Transport Policy & Practice 9 (1), 6–17. Cope, A.M., Doxford, D. and Hill, T. (1998) Monitoring tourism on the UK’s first longdistance cycle route. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 6 (3), 210–223. Cordes, K. (2001) Introduction – Millennium trails and scenic byways: Recreation in the 21st century. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 72 (1), 21–22. Corigliano, M.A. (2002) The route to quality: Italian gastronomy networks in operation. In A.M. Hjalager and G. Richards (eds) Tourism and Gastronomy (pp. 166–185). London: Routledge. Correia, L., Ascenção, M.J.P. and Charters, S. (2004) Wine routes in Portugal: A case study of the Bairrada Wine Route. Journal of Wine Research 15 (1), 15–25. Council of Europe (2013) Cultural Routes of the Council of Europe. See www.coe.int/t/ dg4/cultureheritage/culture/routes/default_en.asp# (accessed 3 October 2013). Countryside Agency (2001) The State of the Countryside 2001. Cheltenham: The Countryside Agency. Countryside Commission (1990) Paths, Routes and Trails: Policies and Priorities. Cheltenham: Countryside Commission. Countryside Panel (1987) Major Routes for Walking, Cycling & Horse Riding: A Regional Strategy, Update of Topic Report. Nottingham: East Midlands Regional Council for Sport and Recreation. Cox, P. (2012) Strategies promoting cycle tourism in Belgium: Practices and implications. Tourism Planning & Development 9 (1), 25–39. Cramer, M. (2013) The Berlin Wall Trail: A cycling and hiking route on the traces of Berlin’s East-West division during the Cold War. In K.G. Tidball and M. Krasny (eds) Greening in the Red Zone: Disaster, Resilience and Community Greening (pp. 445– 449). New York: Springer-Verlag.

References

265

Crang, M. (1994) On the heritage trail: Maps of and journeys to olde Englande. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 12, 341–355. Crawford, D.W. and Godbey, G. (1987) Reconceptualizing barriers to family leisure. Leisure Sciences 9, 119–127. Crawford, D.W., Jackson, E.L. and Godbey, G. (1991) A hierarchical model of leisure constraints. Leisure Sciences 13, 309–320. Creaser, P. (2010) Australia’s geological heritage: Raising awareness at a national level. In R. Dowling and D. Newsome (eds) Global Geotourism Perspectives (pp. 18–32). Oxford: Goodfellow. Crnjanski, D. (1998) The heritage of Alsace: Trails for the imbedding tourist. In J.M. Fladmark (ed.) In Search of Heritage: As Pilgrim or Tourist? (pp. 395–404). Shaftesbury: Donhead. Croce, E. and Perri, G. (2010) Food and Wine Tourism: Integrating Food, Travel and Territory. Wallingford: CABI. Crompton, J.L. (2001) Perceptions of how the presence of greenway trails affects the value of proximate properties. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 19 (3), 114–132. Cubit, S. and McArthur, S. (1995) Walking track management: Only half the answer? Australian Parks & Recreation 31 (4), 15–20. Curry, N. (1997) Countryside Recreation, Access and Land Use Planning. London: E & FN Spon. Cusack, C.M. and Digance, J. (2009) The Melbourne Cup: Australian identity and secular pilgrimage. Sport in Society 12 (7), 876–889. Cyclists’ Touring Club (1985) Cycling into Leisure: New Developments and Opportunities. London: Cyclists’ Touring Club. Dahles, H. (1998) Redefining Amsterdam as a tourist destination. Annals of Tourism Research 25 (1), 55–69. Daigle, J.J., Watson, A.E. and Haas, G.E. (1994) National Forest Trail Users: Planning for Recreation Opportunities. Washington, DC: US National Forest Service. Dann, G.M.S. (1994) Tourism: The nostalgia industry of the future. In F.W. Theobald (ed.) Global Tourism: The Next Decade (pp. 55–67). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. D’Antonio, A., Monz, C., Newman, P., Lawson, S. and Taff, D. (2013) Enhancing the utility of visitor impact assessment in parks and protected areas: A combined socialecological approach. Journal of Environmental Management 124, 72–81. Davies, A. and Prentice, R.C. (1995) Conceptualizing the latent visitor to heritage attractions. Tourism Management 16, 491–500. Davies, F. (1973) Yearning for Yesterday. New York: Free Press. Davies, N.J., Lumsdon, L.M. and Weston, R. (2012) Developing recreational trails: Motivations for recreational walking. Tourism Planning & Development 9 (1), 77–88. de Kok, F.J.M. (1989) Toeristische autoroutes: uit de tijd of bij de tijd? Recreatie en Toerisme 21 (9), 287–288. de Kok, F.J.M. (1991) De Koninklijke Nederlandse Toeristenbond wil in 1991 met routeaanpassingen kunnen starten. Recreatie en Tourisme 1 (3), 14–19. de Leon, P. and Rivera, J.E. (eds) (2010) Voluntary Environmental Programs: A Policy Perspective. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. de Vink, G.J. (1989) Het groene network: recreatieroutes in Zuid Holland. Recreatie 28 (3), 14–18. Dearden, P. and Harron, S. (1994) Alternative tourism and adaptive change. Annals of Tourism Research 21 (1), 81–102. Deery, M., Jago, L. and Fredline, L. (2012) Rethinking social impacts of tourism research: A new research agenda. Tourism Management 33 (1), 64–73. den Breejen, L. (2007) The experience of long distance walking: A case study of the West Highland Way in Scotland. Tourism Management 28 (6), 1417–1427.

266

Tour ism and Trail s

Deluca, T.H., Patterson, W.A., Freimund, W.A. and Cole, D.N. (1998) Influence of llamas, horses, and hikers on soil erosion from established recreation trails in western Montana, USA. Environmental Management 22 (2), 255–262. Deng, J., Qiang, S., Walker, G.J., and Zhang, Y. (2003) Assessment on and perception of visitors’ environmental impacts of nature tourism: A case study of Zhangjiajie National Forest Park, China. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 11 (6), 529–548. Denstadli, J.M. and Jacobsen, J.K. (2011) The long and winding roads: Perceived quality of scenic tourism routes. Tourism Management 32 (4), 780–789. Denstadli, J.M., Lindberg, K. and Vistad, O.I. (2010) Stakeholder consensus regarding trail conditions and management responses: A Norwegian case study. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 10 (3), 358–374. Department for Culture, Media and Sport (2010) Taking Part: The National Survey of Culture, Leisure and Sport. London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Department of Conservation (1996) Visitor Strategy. Wellington: Department of Conservation. Department of Conservation (2013) Take a walk, a Great Walk, through some of New Zealand’s most awe-inspiring landscapes. See www.doc.govt.nz/parks- andrecreation/tracks-and-walks/great-walks (accessed 3 June 2013). Derrett, R. and St Vincent Welch, J. (2008) 40 sheds and 40 kilometers: Agricultural sheds as heritage tourism opportunities. In B. Prideaux, D.J. Timothy and K. Chon (eds) Cultural and Heritage Tourism in Asia and the Pacific (pp. 73–83). London: Routledge. Desjardins, E. and Schwartz, A.L. (2007) Collaborating to combat childhood obesity. Health Affairs 26 (2), 567–571. Dickens, S.J.M., Gerhardt, F. and Collinge, S.K. (2005) Recreational portage trails as corridors facilitating non-native plant invasions of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (U.S.A.). Conservation Biology 19 (5), 1653–1657. Digance, J. (2006) Religious and secular pilgrimage: Journeys redolent with meaning. In D.J. Timothy and D.H. Olsen (eds) Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys (pp. 36–48). London: Routledge. Din, K.H. (1988) Social and cultural impacts of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 15 (4), 563–566. Dolesh, R.J. (2003) Blueways and greenways, connecting communities. Parks & Recreation 38 (9), 70–77. Dolesh, R.J. (2004a) Follow the trail toward improved health. Parks & Recreation 39 (5), 40–46. Dolesh, R.J. (2004b) Tough terrain: The conflicts associated with multi-use trails. Parks & Recreation 39 (10), 56–63. Donaire, J.A. and Galí, N. (2008) Modeling tourist itineraries in heritage cities: Routes around the Old District of Girona. PASOS: Revista de Turismo y Patriomonio Cultural 6 (3), 435–449. Donohoe, H.M. (2012) Sustainable heritage tourism marketing and Canada’s Rideau Canal World Heritage Site. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 20 (1), 121–142. Downward, P. and Lumsdon, L. (2001) The development of recreational cycle routes: An evaluation of user needs. Managing Leisure 6 (1), 50–60. Dowson, B. and Doxford, D. (1997) Planning for recreational cycling – Meeting local demand? Land Use Policy 14 (2), 163–165. Draper, R. and Petty, K. (2001) The National Scenic Byways Program: On the road to recreation. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 72 (1), 27–31. Dredge, D. and Jenkins, J. (eds) (2007) Tourism Planning and Policy. Brisbane: Wiley. Dredge, D. and Pforr, C. (2008) Policy networks and tourism governance. In N. Scott, R. Baggio and C. Cooper (eds) Network Analysis and Tourism: From Theory to Practice (pp. 58–78). Clevedon: Channel View Publications.

References

267

Drew, G. (1998) South Australia’s mining heritage trails – A cultural tourism feature. MESA Journal 10, 31–34. Driver, B.L., Brown, P.J., Stankey, G.H. and Gregoire, T.G. (1987) The ROS Planning System: Evolution, basic concepts, and research needed. Leisure Sciences 9, 201–212. Drumm, E. (1999) Addressing the flaws of the Rails-to-Trails Act. Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy 8, 158–171. du Cros, H. (2008) Too much of a good thing? Visitor congestion management issues for popular World Heritage tourist attractions. Journal of Heritage Tourism 2 (3), 225–238. Dupuis, L. and Müller, D.K. (2005) Time-space use among cross-country skiers in Abisko (Sweden) and Vercors (France). In C.M. Hall and S.W. Boyd (eds) Nature-Based Tourism in Peripheral Areas: Development or Disaster? (pp. 91–104). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. DuVal, L. (2001) Historic Route 66 is still kicking in Albuquerque. Arizona Republic, 17 June, T3. Dwyer, L., Forsyth, P. and Dwyer, W. (2010) Tourism Economics and Policy. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Dye, T. (1992) Understanding Public Policy (7th edn). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Eagleston, H. and Rubin, C. (2013) Non-motorized winter recreation impacts to snowmelt erosion, Tronsen Basin, Eastern Cascades, Washington. Environmental Management 51 (1), 167–181. Ebony (1990) Georgia’s Black History Trail. Ebony 45 (4), 167–172. Eby, D.W. and Molnar, L.J. (2002) Importance of scenic byways in route choice: A survey of driving tourists in the United States. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 36, 95–106. Elkinton, S. and Maglienti, D.C. (1994) Preserving America’s national historic trails. Historic Preservation 8 (4), 17–24. Elwood, S., Goodchild, M.F. and Sui, D.Z. (2012) Researching volunteered geographic information: Spatial data, geographic research, and new social practice. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 102 (3), 571–590. Enoch, Y. and Grossman, R. (2010) Blogs of Israeli and Danish backpackers in India. Annals of Tourism Research 37 (2), 520–536. Erkus-Öztürk, H. and Eraydin, A. (2010) Environmental governance for sustainable tourism development: Collaborative networks and organisation building in the Antalya tourism region. Tourism Management 31 (1), 113–124. eturbo News (2008) Now tourists can follow ‘Jesus Trail’. See www.eturbonews.com/ 4871/now-tourists- can-follow-jesus-trail (accessed 22 November 2013). European Commission (2011) Future of Transport: Analytical Report. Brussels: European Commission. European Cyclists’ Federation (2013a) EuroVelo Map. Brussels: European Cyclists’ Federation. European Cyclists’ Federation (2013b) Welcome to the European Cyclists’ Federation. See www.ecf.com/ (accessed 3 July 2013). European Institute of Cultural Routes (2011) Certified itineraries. See www.cultureroutes.ro/en/itineraries/ (accessed 3 October 2013). European Institute of Cultural Routes (2013) European routes of the industrial heritage. See www.culture-routes.lu/php/fo_index.php?lng=en&dest=bd_pa_det&id=00000170 (accessed 3 May 2013). Everitt, A. (2009) Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome. New York: Random House. Eyerman, R. and Löfgren, O. (1995) Romancing the road: Road movies and images of mobility. Theory, Culture and Society 12 (1), 53–79. Fabos, J.G. (1995) Introduction and overview: The greenway movement and use of potential greenways. Landscape and Urban Planning 33, 1–14.

268

Tour ism and Trail s

Fagence, M.T. (2011) ‘Dead men do tell tales’: ‘Teasing out’ the contribution of the folk hero to heritage-based tourism. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Australia. Faggetter, R. (2001) The Great Ocean Road: From where to where? Paper presented at the Australia ICOMOS Making Tracks Conference, Alice Springs, May. Fai, L.K. (1989) Tourist routes in Hunan province. China Tourism 144, 32–35. Fairbanks, W.S. and Tullous, R. (2002) Distribution of pronghorn (Antilocapra Americana Ord) on Antelope Island State Park, Utah, USA, before and after establishment of recreation trails. Natural Areas Journal 22 (4), 277–282. Farrell, T.A. and Marion, J.L. (2001) Identifying and assessing ecotourism visitor impacts at eight protected areas in Costa Rica and Belize. Environmental Conservation 28 (3), 215–225. Farrell, T.A. and Marion, J.L. (2002) Trail impacts and trail impact management related to visitation at Torres del Paine National Park, Chile. Leisure/Loisir 26 (1–2), 31–59. Federal Highway Administration (1997) Community Guide to Planning and Managing a Scenic Byway. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration (2005) Wetland Trail Design and Construction. Honolulu: University Press of the Pacific. Feinsinger, P., Margutti, L. and Oviedo, R.D. (1997) School yards and nature trails: Ecology education outside the university. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12 (3), 115–120. Fernandes, C., Pimenta, E., Gonçalves, F. and Rachão, S. (2012) A new research approach for religious tourism: The case of the Portuguese route to Santiago. International Journal of Tourism Policy 4 (2), 83–94. Ferris, C. (1996) Access: To pay or not to pay? Countryside Recreation Network News 4 (3), 4–6. Ferris, C. (2003) Catching up: How Northern Ireland is striving to catch up with the rest of the UK in meeting the demand for increased countryside recreation opportunities. Countryside Recreation 11 (1), 6–10. Fiala, S. (1999) Happy trails to you: Recipes for regional success. Parks & Recreation 34 (1), 62–68. Fietsersbond (2013) English info. See www.fietsersbond.nl/english-info (accessed 29 June 2013). Finke, G.D. (1997) Trailblazing signs. How 12 (1), 76–79. Finnish Transport Agency (2013) The Saimaa Canal. See http://portal.liikennevirasto.fi/ sivu/www/e/transport_network/waterways_canals/canals (accessed 2 March 2013). Fix, P. and Loomis, J. (1997) The economic benefits of mountain biking at one of its meccas: An application of the travel cost method to mountain biking in Moab, Utah. Journal of Leisure Research 29 (3), 342–352. Flegg, E. (2004) Freedom to roam? Countryside Recreation 12 (2), 24–27. Fletcher, R.J. (1995) Whipstick Nature Trail. The Victorian Nationalist 112 (3), 129–134. Flink, C.A., Olka, C. and Searns, R.M. (2001) Trails for the Twenty-First Century: Planning, Design and Management Manual for Multi-Use Trails. Washington, DC: Island Press. Foresta, R. (1987) Transformation of the Appalachian Trail. Geographical Review 77 (1), 76–85. Forsberg, M. (1995) Rails to trails. The Western Planner 16 (1), 6–11. Foti, P., White, D., Brodehl, G., Waskey, T. and Brown, E. (2006) Planning and Managing Environmentally Friendly Mountain Bike Trails. Whitney, ON: Shimano American Corporation. Francis, C. (1992) Dogging the trails on Lookout Mountain. Dog World 77 (8), 18–24. Frauman, E. and Cunningham, P.H. (2001) Using a means-end approach to understand the factors that influence greenway use. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 19 (3), 93–113.

References

269

Fremaux, S. and Fremaux, M. (2013) Remembering the Beatles’ legacy in Hamburg’s problematic tourism strategy. Journal of Heritage Tourism 8 (4), 303–319. Frost, F.A. and Shanka, T. (2001) Cape to Cairo – Can the dream be realised? Journal of Vacation Marketing 7 (3), 235–244. Frost, W. (2005) Making an edgier interpretation of the gold rushes: Contrasting perspectives from Australia and New Zealand. International Journal of Heritage Studies 11 (3), 235–250. Frost, W. (2008) Popular culture as a different type of heritage: The making of AC/DC Lane. Journal of Heritage Tourism 3 (3), 176–184. Frost, W. (2011) Visitor interpretation of the environmental impacts of the gold rushes at the Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park, Australia. In M.V. Conlin and L. Jolliffe (eds) Mining Heritage and Tourism: A Global Synthesis (pp. 97–107). London: Routledge. Frost, W. and Hall, C.M. (eds) (2009) Tourism and National Parks: International Perspectives on Development, Histories and Change. London: Routledge. Furniss, E. (2000) Systemic ambiguity, first nations, and Canadian nationalism: Dilemmas of history-making in the development of a National Heritage Trail. Social Analysis 44 (1), 39–65. Furuseth, O.J. and Altman, R.E. (1991) Who’s on the greenway: Socioeconomic, demographic, and locational characteristics of greenway users. Environmental Management 15 (3), 329–336. Gager, P. and Conacher, A. (2001) Erosion of access tracks in Kalamunda National Park, Western Australia: Causes and management implications. Australian Geographer 32 (3), 343–357. Gaines, D.M. (1997) Look before leaping into a rut: Conserving historic trails. CRM 20 (1), 34–35. Gaines, D.M. and Krakow, J.L. (1996) The Trail of Tears National Historic Trail. Landscape and Urban Planning 36, 159–169. Gaines, W.L., Singleton, P.H. and Ross, R.C. (2003) Assessing the Cumulative Effects of Linear Recreation Routes on Wildlife Habitats on the Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests. Portland: USDA Forest Service. Gallenti, G. and Galli, M. (2002) The new competitiveness in the rural space: Some methodological remarks about a case study. Agricoltura Mediterranea 132 (2), 148–165. Gangewere, R.J. (1991) The Three Rivers Heritage Trail. Carnegie Magazine 60 (8), 22–30. Gangewere, R.J. (1992) Rails-to-trails comes to Pittsburgh. Carnegie Magazine 61 (3), 32–38. Garcés Feliú, E. (2011) Cultural tourism in fragile institutional contexts: Project for cultural routes in Tierra del Fuego. Journal of Tourism Research 3 (2), 35–43. Garrard, I. (1982) An Activity Profile: Bushwalkers and Trail Hikers. Parramatta, NSW: Crown Lands Office. Garrod, B. (2008) Managing visitor impacts. In A. Fyall, B. Garrod and A. Leask (eds) Managing Visitor Attractions: New Directions (2nd edn) (pp. 165–180). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Garrod, B. and Fyall, A. (2000) Managing heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 27, 682–708. Geiger, B.F. and Werner, K.A. (2009) A guided walking trail to explore the Martin Luther King Jr. National Voting Rights Walk and Selma Antebellum Historical District. International Journal of Heritage Studies 15 (5), 467–476. Gerow, K., Kline, N.C., Swann, D.E. and Pokomy, M. (2010) Estimating annual vertebrae mortality on roads at Saguaro National Park, Arizona. Human-Wildlife Interactions 4 (2), 283–292.

270

Tour ism and Trail s

Getz, D. (1999) Resort-centred tours and development of the rural hinterland: The case of Cairns and the Atherton Tablelands. Journal of Tourism Studies 10 (2), 23–34. Gibson, T. (1999) From rails to trails. Compressed Air 104 (4), 30–36. Gilbert, D. (1989) Rural tourism and marketing: Synthesis and new ways of working. Tourism Management 10 (1), 39–50. Gobster, P.H. (2005) Recreation and leisure research from an active living perspective: Taking a second look at urban trail use data. Leisure Sciences 27, 367–383. Goeft, U. (2000) Managing mountain biking in Western Australia. Australian Parks and Leisure 3 (1), 29–31. Gonzáles, R.C.L. (2006) The way of St James: Religious and cultural tourism. Paper presented at the International Conference on Religious Tourism, Nicosia, Cyprus, 20 October. Gonzáles, R.C.L. and Medina, J.S. (2003) Cultural tourism and urban management in northwestern Spain: The pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela. Tourism Geographies 5 (4), 446–460. Gonzáles-Ávila, M.E. (2011) Una propuesta para desarrollar turismo rural en los municipios de Zacatecas, México: las rutas acrigo-culturales. PASOS: Revista de Turismo y Patriomonio Cultural 9 (1), 129–145. Gonzalez Huezo, M.A. (2008) El patrimonio sorbo a sorbo, Gestión de turismo cultural sostenible para la región de Tequila. PASOS: Revista de Turismo y Patriomonio Cultural 6 (2), 327–333. Goodchild, M. (2007) Citizens as sensors: The world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal 69, 211–221. Goodey, B. (1975) Urban trails: Origins and opportunities. The Planner 61, 29–30. Govers, R. and Go, F. (2009) Place Branding: Glocal, Virtual and Physical Identities, Constructed, Imagined and Experienced. London: Palgrave. Graham, B., Ashworth, G.J. and Tunbridge, J.E. (2000) A Geography of Heritage: Power, Culture and Economy. London: Arnold. Graham, B. and Murray, M. (1997) The spiritual and the profane: The pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela. Ecumene 4, 389–409 Graham, O. (2004) The Otago Central Rail Trail: Bringing the past into the future. Australasian Parks and Leisure 7 (2), 33. Greenleaf, R.D., Echelberger, H.E. and Leonard, R.E. (1984) Backpacker satisfaction, expectations and use levels in an eastern forest setting. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 2 (3), 49–56. Griffiths, M. and van Schaik, C.P. (1993) The impact of human traffic on the abundance and activity periods of Sumatran rain forest wildlife. Conservation Biology 7 (3), 623–626. Gunn, C. and Var, T. (2002) Tourism Planning (4th edn). London: Routledge. Gustke, L.D. and Hodgson, R.W. (1980) Rate of travel along an interpretive trail: The effect of an environmental discontinuity. Environment and Behavior 12 (1), 53–63. Hall, C.M. (2005) Tourism: Rethinking the Social Science of Mobility. London: Pearson. Hall, C.M. (2008) Tourism Planning: Policies, Processes and Relationships (2nd edn). London: Pearson. Hall, C.M. (2013) Why forage when you don’t have to? Personal and cultural meaning in recreational foraging: A New Zealand study. Journal of Heritage Tourism 8 (2–3), 224–233. Hall, C.M. and Boyd, S.W. (eds) (2005) Nature-based Tourism in Peripheral Areas: Development or Disaster? Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Hall, C.M. and Jenkins, J. (1995) Tourism and Public Policy. London: Routledge. Hall, C.M. and Lew, A.A. (eds) (1998) Sustainable Tourism: A Geographical Perspective. London: Longman. Hall, C.M. and Lew, A.A. (2009) Understanding and Managing Tourism Impacts: An Integrated Approach. London: Routledge.

References

271

Hall, C.M. and Macionis, N. (1998) Wine tourism in Australia and New Zealand. In R. Butler, C.M. Hall and J. Jenkins (eds) Tourism and Recreation in Rural Areas (pp. 197–224). Chichester: Wiley. Hall, C.M. and McArthur, S. (1998) Integrated Heritage Management: Principles and Practice. London: The Stationery Office. Hall, C.M. and Page, S. (2010) The contribution of Neil Leiper to tourism studies. Current Issues in Tourism 13 (4), 299–209. Hall, C.M., Springett, D.V. and Springett, B.P. (1993) The development of an environmental education tourist product: A case study of the New Zealand Natural Heritage Foundation’s Nature of New Zealand Programme. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1 (2), 130–136. Hall, C.N. and Kuss, F.R. (1989) Vegetation alteration along trails in Shenandoah National Park, Virginia. Biological Conservation 48, 211–227. Hall, D. (2005) Transport tourism: Travelling through heritage and contemporary recreation. In M. Novelli (ed.) Niche Tourism: Contemporary Issues, Trends and Cases (pp. 89–100). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Hall, K.B. (1991) Designing fitness trails for seniors. Parks & Recreation 26 (8), 28–31. Hallo, J.C. and Manning, R.E. (2011) Managing park roads and scenic driving using indicators and standards-based frameworks. In B. Prideaux and D. Carson (eds) Drive Tourism: Trends and Emerging Markets (pp. 339–357). London: Routledge. Hammitt, W.E. and Patterson, M.E. (1993) Use patterns and solitude preferences of shelter campers in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, U.S.A. Journal of Environmental Management 38, 43–53. Hammond, R. (2004) Cultural and heritage tourism – International. Travel & Tourism Analyst 20, 1–61. Hampton, B. and Cole, D. (1995) Soft Paths: How to Enjoy the Wilderness Without Harming It. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books. Hampton, M.P. (2005) Heritage, local communities and economic development. Annals of Tourism Research 32 (3), 735–759. Hampton, M.P. (2013) Backpacker Tourism and Economic Development. London: Routledge. Hankinson, G. (2010) Place branding research: A cross-disciplinary agenda and the views of practitioners. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 6, 300–315. Hanley, N. (1994) Valuing forest characteristics: A comparison of methods. Landscape Research 19 (1), 28–29. Hardy, A. (2003) An investigation into the key factors necessary for the development of iconic touring routes. Journal of Vacation Marketing 9 (4), 314–330. Hartmann, R. (2014) Dark tourism, thanatourism, and dissonance in heritage tourism studies. Journal of Heritage Tourism 9 (2), 166–182. Hashimoto, A. and Telfer, D.J. (2003) Positioning an emerging wine route in the Niagara Region: Understanding the wine tourism market and its implications for marketing. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 14 (3–4), 61–76. Hayes, D. and MacLeod, N. (2007) Packaging places: Designing heritage trails using an experience economy perspective to maximize visitor engagement. Journal of Vacation Marketing 13 (1), 45–58. Hayes, D. and MacLeod, N. (2008) Putting down routes: An examination of local government cultural policy shaping the development of heritage trails. Managing Leisure 13 (2), 57–73. Haynes, K. and Cope, A. (1998) Provision for disabled users in national parks in England and Wales. Countryside Recreation 6 (1), 13–15. Hearne, R.R. and Salinas, Z.M. (2002) The use of choice experiments in the analysis of tourist preferences for ecotourism development in Costa Rica. Journal of Environmental Management 65, 153–163. Hedberg, N.A. (1989) This trail’s right on track! The Iowan 38 (1), 10–14, 56.

272

Tour ism and Trail s

Heintzman, P. (2009) Nature-based recreation and spirituality: A complex relationship. Leisure Sciences 32 (1), 72–89. Helleiner, F.M. (1986) Trees and loops: A network analysis of recreational trails systems. Recreation Research Review 12 (4), 33–36. Hemme, D. (2005) Landscape, fairies and identity: Experience on the backstage of the Fairy Tale Route. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change 3 (2), 71–87. Hemmings, L. (1993) Back to nature Down Under. Rotarian 162 (2), 22–27. Henderson, J. (2011) Railways as heritage attractions: Singapore’s Tanjong Pagar station. Journal of Heritage Tourism 6 (1), 73–79. Hendricks, W.W., Ramthun, R.H. and Chavez, D.J. (2001) The effects of persuasive message source and content on mountain bicyclists’ adherence to trail etiquette guidelines. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 19 (3), 38–61. Herbert, D.T. (2001) Literary places, tourism and the heritage experience. Annals of Tourism Research 28, 312–333. Hesseln, H., Loomis, J.B. and González-Cabán, A. (2004) Comparing the economic effects of fire on hiking demand in Montana and Colorado. Journal of Forest Economics 10, 21–35. Hessler, P. (2007) Walking the wall. The New Yorker, 21 May, pp. 56–65. Hill, B.J. (1998) Reflections on an outdoor recreation experience: Reenactment of Mormon Trail wagon train. Parks and Recreation 33 (8), 58–63. Hill, E., Goldenberg, M. and Freidt, B. (2009) Benefits of hiking: A means-end approach on the Appalachian Trail. Journal of Unconventional Parks, Tourism and Recreation Research 2 (1), 19–27. Hill, K. (1997) Move over, Casey Jones. State Legislatures 23 (1), 9. Hill, W. (1996) The Mormon Trail: Yesterday and Today. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado. Hinckley, G.B. (1997) The Mormon Trail: A crusade for goodness. Vital Speeches 63 (17), 542–544. Hiss, T. (1997) Rails to trails. Atlantic Monthly 12, 34–36, 44–45. Hitrec, T. (1996) Kulturni itinereri: važan segment europske turistčke ponude. Turizam 44 (3), 47–60. Hjalager, A.M. and Richards, G. (2002) Still undigested: Research issues in tourism and gastronomy. In A.M. Hjalager and G. Richards (eds) Tourism and Gastronomy (pp. 224–234). London: Routledge. Hogan, Z. (1998) The Tsauling Historic Trail. Travel in Taiwan 12 (11), 34–36. Holden, A. (2008) Environment and Tourism (2nd edn). London: Routledge. Holland, W. (2013) Trail trends in the United States. Australasian Parks and Leisure 16 (3), 21–25. Holloway, J.C. and Taylor, N. (2006) The Business of Tourism (7th edn). London: Prentice Hall. Hood, M.G. (1983) Staying away: Why people choose not to visit museums. Museum News 61, 50–57. Hornby, N. and Sheate, W.R. (2001) Sustainable management of recreational off-road vehicles in national parks in the UK. Environmental & Waste Management 4 (2), 95–105. Hose, T.A. (2006) Geotourism and interpretation. In R.K. Dowling and D. Newsome (eds) Geotourism (pp. 221–241). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Hubbell, S. (1997) High-wire act atop the rain forest. New York Times, 15 June, pp. 12, 24. Huber, B. (1994) Mountainbiking: Gesetzesänderung in Rheinland-Pfalz nicht erwünscht. AFZ, Allgemeine Forst Zeitschrift 49 (22), 1256–1258. Hudman, L.E. and Jackson, R.H. (1992) Mormon pilgrimage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 19 (1), 107–121. Hughes, J.D. and Subash Chandran, M.D. (1998) Sacred groves around the earth: An overview. In P.S. Ramakrishnan, K.G. Saxena and U.M. Chandrashekara (eds)

References

273

Conserving the Sacred for Biodiversity Management (pp. 69–46). New Delhi: IBH Publishing. Hughes, M. and Morrison-Saunders, A. (2002) Impact of trail-side interpretive signs on visitor knowledge. Journal of Ecotourism 1 (2–3), 122–132. Hughes, M. and Morrison-Saunders, A. (2003) Visitor attitudes toward a modified natural attraction. Society and Natural Resources 16, 191–203. Hugo, M.L. (1987) Die omgewingsimpak van voetslaanpaaie in Suid-Afrika. South African Geographer 15 (1–2), 59–71. Hugo, M.L. (1999) A comprehensive approach towards the planning, grading and auditing of hiking trails as ecotourism products. Current Issues in Tourism 2 (2–3), 138–173. Hull, L. (1996) Beyond illustration: Sculpture trails and parks as environmental and historic interpretation. Legacy 7 (1), 24–27. Hvenegaard, G.T. and Dearden, P. (1998) Ecotourism versus tourism in a Thai national park. Annals of Tourism Research 25 (3), 700–720. Ihamäki, P. (2012) Geocachers: The creative tourism experience. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 3 (3), 152–175. Ihamäki, P. (2013) Geocachers’ creative experiences along a coastal road in Finland. International Journal of Leisure and Tourism Marketing 3 (3), 282–299. Iles, L and Wiele, K. (1993) The benefits of rail-trails and greenways. Recreation Canada 51 (5), 25–28. Inskeep, E. (1991) Tourism Planning: An Integrated and Sustainable Development Approach. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Ioannides, D. and Timothy, D.J. (2010) Tourism in the USA: A Spatial and Social Synthesis. London: Routledge. Ishii, K. (2012) The impact of ethnic tourism on hill tribes in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research 39 (1), 290–310. Jackson, E.L. (ed.) (2005) Constraints to Leisure. State College, PA: Venture. Jackson, E.L. and Scott, D. (1999) Constraints to leisure. In E.L. Jackson and T.L. Burton (eds) Leisure Studies: Prospects for the Twenty-First Century (pp. 299–321). State College, PA: Venture. Jackson, E.L. and Wong, R.A.G. (1982) Perceived conflict between urban cross-country skiers and snowmobilers in Alberta. Journal of Leisure Research 14 (1), 47–62. Jackson, S.A., Haider, W. and Elliot, T. (2003) Resolving inter-group conflict in winter recreation: Chilkoot Trail National Historic Site, British Columbia. Journal for Nature Conservation 11, 317–323. Jacobs, M.J. and Schloeder, C.A. (1992) Managing brown bears and wilderness recreation on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, USA. Environmental Management 16 (2), 249–254. Jacoby, J. (1990) Mountain bikes: A new dilemma for wildland recreation managers? Western Wildlands 16 (1), 25–28. Jaffe, E. and Pasternak, H. (2004) Developing wine trails as a tourist attraction in Israel. International Journal of Tourism Research 6 (4), 237–249. Jamal, T. and Getz, D. (1995) Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research 22 (1), 186–204. Jansen-Verbeke, M. and Lievois, E. (1999) Analysing heritage resources for urban tourism in European cities. In D.G. Pearce and R.W. Butler (eds) Contemporary Issues in Tourism Development (pp. 81–107). London: Routledge. Javaheri, H. (2011) Optimal tourism route in historical urban areas: A case study of Tehran’s down town, Iran. South Asian Journal of Tourism and Heritage 4 (1), 34–43. Jensen, C.R. and Guthrie, S.P. (2006) Outdoor Recreation in America (6th edn). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Jesus Trail (2013) Hike the 65 km Jesus Trail from Nazareth to Capernuam. See http:// jesustrail.com/ (accessed 3 September 2013).

274

Tour ism and Trail s

Jim, C.Y. and Chen, S.S. (2003) Comprehensive greenspace planning based on landscape ecology principles in compact Nanjing city, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 95–116. Johanson, L.B. and Olsen, K. (2010) Alta Museum as a tourist attraction: The importance of location. Journal of Heritage Tourism 5 (1), 1–16. John Grimshaw and Associates (1982) Study of Disused Railways in England and Wales: Potential Cycle Routes. London: Department of Transport. Johnson, N.C. (2004) Fictional journeys: Paper landscapes, tourist trails and Dublin’s literary texts. Social and Cultural Geography 5 (1), 91–107. Johnson, P.A., Sieber, R.E., Magnien, N. and Ariwi, J. (2012) Automated web harvesting to collect and analyse user-generated content for tourism. Current Issues in Tourism 15 (3), 293–299. Johnston, A.M. (2003) Self-determination: Exercising indigenous rights in tourism. In S. Singh, D.J. Timothy and R.K. Dowling (eds) Tourism in Destination Communities (pp. 115–134). Wallingford: CABI. Jones, G. (2001) Monitoring the impacts of tourism along the Inca Trail to Machu Picchu, Peru. TRI News 20, 2–5. Jones, J. (1997) Keeping the legend alive: How can we help the ‘lost generation’ find the value of historic trails? CRM 20 (1), 46–48. Jones, M. (1994) Steps to funding multi-use trails. Parks and Recreation 29 (3), 49–53. Jones, R.J. (1985) Halifax town centre conservation study. Landscape Design 154, 22–25. Kammen, C. (1993) Gateway to Freedom: A black history trail. Heritage 9 (4), 16–21. Kaplan, M. (1997) New World Hispanic heritage along the Anza Trail. CRM 20 (11), 37–39. Kaylen, M.S., Bhullar, H., Vaught, D. and Braschler, C. (1993) Rural landowners’ attitudes towards the Missouri River State Trail. Journal of Leisure Research 25 (3), 281–289. Kearsley, G. and Coughlan, D. (1999) Coping with crowding: Tourist displacement in the New Zealand backcountry. Current Issues in Tourism 2 (2–3), 197–210. Keirle, I. and Stephens, M. (2004) Do walkers stay on footpaths? An observational study of Cwm Idwal in the Snowdonia National Park. Countryside Recreation 12 (2), 7–9. Kelemen, Z. (1994) A Dunakanyar-Ipolyvölgye kerékpárutjairól. Dunakanyar 30 (1–2), 46–47. Kelly, S.C. (1988) Route 66: The Highway and Its People. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Kent, R.L. (1993) Attributes, features and reasons for enjoyment of scenic routes: A comparison of experts, residents, and citizens. Landscape Research 18 (2), 92–102. Kerstetter, D., Confer, J. and Bricker, K. (1998) Industrial heritage attractions: Types and tourists. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 7 (2), 91–104. Kim, S.O., Lee, C.H. and Shelby, B. (2003) Utilization of photographs for determining impact indicators for trail management. Environmental Management 32 (2), 282–289. Kim, S.O. and Shelby, B. (2005) Developing standards for trail conditions using image capture technology. Leisure Sciences 27, 279–295. Kimball, S.B. (1988) Historic Sites and Markers along the Mormon and Other Great Western Trails. Urbana: University of Illinois. Kimball, S.B. (1997) A trail historic resource study: How I did one. CRM 20 (1), 6–7. Kirschbaum, J.B., Axelson, P.W., Longmuir, P.E., Mispagel, K.M., Stein, J.A. and Yamada, D.A. (1999) Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, Part II: Best Practices Design Guide. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation. Kline, C., Cardenas, D., Duffy, L. and Swanson, J.R. (2012) Funding sustainable paddle trail development: Paddler perspectives, willingness to pay and management implications. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 20 (2), 235–256.

References

275

Kontogeorgopoulos, N. (2005) Community-based ecotourism in Phuket and Ao Phangnga, Thailand: Partial victories and bittersweet remedies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 13 (1), 4–23. Koščak, M. (1999) Heritage trails through Dolenjska and Bela Krajina in south-east Slovenia – Bordering region between Slovenia and Croatia. Zeme˘de˘lská Ekonomika 45 (2), 71–77. Kottke, M. (1988) Estimating economic impacts of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 15 (1), 122–133. Kowalke, H. (2004) Entwicklungsprozesse und Entwicklungsprobleme im sächsisch – böhmischen Grenzraum. Dresden: Interreg, European Union. Krakover, S. and Cohen, R. (2001) Visitors and non-visitors to archaeological heritage attractions: The cases of Massada and Avedat, Israel. Tourism Recreation Research 26 (1), 27–33. Krause, P., Smith, A., Veale, B. and Murray, M. (2001) Achievements of the Grand River Conservation Authority, Ontario. Water Science and Technology 43 (9), 45–55. Kuby, M.J., Wentz, E.A., Vogt, B.J. and Virden, R. (2001) Experiences in developing a tourism web site for hiking Arizona’s highest summits and deepest canyons. Tourism Geographies 3 (4), 454–473. Kulshreshtha, S.N. and Gillies, J.A. (1993) Economic evaluation of aesthetic amenities: A case study of river view. Water Resources Bulletin 29 (2), 257–266. Kuniyal, J.C. (2005) Solid waste management in the Himalayan trails and expedition summits. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 13 (4), 391–410. Kuniyal, J.C. and Jain, A.P. (1999) Public involvement in environmental assessment of solid waste management in UP Himalayan tourists’ treks, India. Environmental & Waste Management 2 (4), 279–290. Kušen, E. (2010) Modern pilgrimage routes in Croatia. Tourism 58 (3), 312–317. Kuss, F.R. and Jenkins, W.A. (1984) Effects of footgear design on trail wear: A summary of five years of research. In L.M. Anderson (ed.) Proceedings of the Southern Recreation Research Conference, Asheville, North Carolina (pp. 39–49). Athens, GA: University of Georgia, Institute for Behavioral Research. Kutiel, P., Zhevelev, H. and Harrison, R. (1999) The effect of recreational impacts on soil and vegetation of stabilised coastal dunes in the Sharon Park, Israel. Ocean and Coastal Management 42, 1041–1060. Kwon, T.H., Lee, J.W. and Kim, D.W. (2004) Trail deterioration and managerial strategy on the ridge of the Baekdudaegan: A case of the trail between Namdeogyusan and Sosagogae. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 18 (2), 175–183. Kyle, G., Graefe, A. and Manning, R. (2004) Satisfaction derived through leisure involvement and setting attachment. Leisure/Loisir 28 (3–4), 277–306. Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R. and Bacon, J. (2004) Predictors of behavioral loyalty among hikers along the Appalachian Trail. Leisure Sciences 26, 99–118. Laiolo, P. (2003) Diversity and structure of the bird community overwintering in the Himalayan subalpine zone: Is conservation compatible with tourism? Biological Conservation 115, 251–262. Lambrecht, B. (1999) Unhappy trails. Illinois Issues 25 (6), 16–21. Lamont, M. (2009) Independent bicycle tourism: A whole tourism systems perspective. Tourism Analysis 14 (5), 605–620. Landsberg, J., Logan, B. and Shorthouse, D. (2001) Horse riding in urban conservation areas: Reviewing scientific evidence to guide management. Ecological Management and Restoration 2 (1), 36–46. Langelo, L. (2006) Place attachment and perceptions of ecological and social impacts on the Mormon Pioneer Historic Trail. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Arizona State University.

276

Tour ism and Trail s

La Pierre, Y. (1998) On the trail of discovery. National Parks 72 (7–8): 34–38. Laufenberg, T.L. (2004) Stabilized Engineered Wood Fiber for Accessible Trails – Installation and Serviceability Results: Governor Dodge State Park, Wisconsin. Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service. Laugesen, A. (2000) Making a unique heritage: Celebrating Pike’s Pawnee Village and the Santa Fe Trail, 1900–1918. Kansas History 23 (3), 172–185. Lawson, S.R., Manning, R.E., Valliere, W.A. and Wang, B. (2003) Proactive monitoring and adaptive management of social carrying capacity in Arches National Park: An application of computer simulation modeling. Journal of Environmental Management 68, 305–313. Leask, A. and Barriere, O. (2000) The development of heritage trails in Scotland. Insights 11, A117–123. Lee, B. and Shafer, C.S. (2002) The dynamic nature of leisure experience: An application of affect control theory. Journal of Leisure Research 34 (3), 290–310. Lee, H.S., Lee, I.S. and Yoon, E.J. (1999) Assessment of the effect of closing trails in Puk’ansan National Park based on satellite image analysis. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 13 (2), 153–159. Lee, J.H., Scott, D. and Moore, R.L. (2002) Predicting motivations and attitudes of users of a multi-use suburban trail. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 20 (3), 18–37. Lee, W., Xiong, L. and Hu, C. (2012) The effect of Facebook users’ arousal and valence on intention to go to the festival: Applying an extension of the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Hospitality Management 31 (3), 819–827. Lee, W.S., Kim, J., Graefe, A.R. and Chi, S.H. (2013) Valuation of an eco-friendly hiking trail using the contingent valuation method: An application of psychological ownership. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 13 (1), 55–69. Leiper, N. (1990) Tourist attraction systems. Annals of Tourism Research 17 (3), 367–384. Leisure Information Network (2003) The rails-to-trails and greenway movements. Parks & Recreation Canada 61 (1), 44–45. Leisure Management (1997) Hadrian’s Wall trail looks likely. Leisure Management 17 (3), 20. Lemberg, D. (2004) The Michigan Heritage Water Trail Program. Paper presented at the Association of American Geographers Annual Conference, Philadelphia, 16 March. Lemky, K. and Jolliffe, L. (2011) Mining heritage and tourism in the former coal mining communities of Cape Breton Island, Canada. In M. Conlin and L. Jolliffe (eds) Mining Heritage and Tourism: A Global Synthesis (pp. 144–157). London: Routledge. Lengfelder, J.R. and Timothy, D.J. (2000) Leisure time in the 1990s and beyond: Cherished friend or incessant foe? Visions in Leisure and Business 19 (1), 13–26. Lennon, J. and Foley, M. (2000) Dark Tourism: The Attraction of Death and Disaster. London: Thomson. Leonard, R.E., McMahon, J.L. and Kehoe, K.M. (1985) Hiker Trampling Impacts on Eastern Forests. Broomall, PA: USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Leonard, R.E. and Whitney, A.M. (1977) Trail Transect: A Method for Documenting Trail Changes. Upper Darby, PA: Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture. Lesens, I. (1990) Cyclotourisme: les 2 roues de l’infortune. Espaces 103, 35–38. Leshikar-Denton, M.E. and Scott-Ireton, D.A. (2007) A maritime heritage trail and shipwreck preserves for the Cayman Islands. In J.H. Jameson and D.A. Scott-Ireton (eds) Out of the Blue: Public Interpretation of Maritime Cultural Resources (pp. 64–84). New York: Springer. Leung, Y.F. and Marion, J.L. (1998) Evaluating spatial qualities of visitor impacts on recreation resources: An index approach. Journal of Applied Recreation Research 23 (4), 367–389.

References

277

Leung, Y.F. and Marion, J.L (1999a) Assessing trail conditions in protected areas: Application of a problem-assessment method in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, USA. Environmental Conservation 26 (4), 270–279. Leung, Y.F. and Marion, J.L. (1999b) The influence of sampling interval on the accuracy of trail impact assessment. Landscape and Urban Planning 43, 167–179. Leung, Y.F. and Marion, J.L. (2000) Recreation impacts and management in wilderness: State-of-the-knowledge review. In D.N. Cole, S.F. McCool, W.T. Borrie and J. O’Laughlin (eds) Wilderness Science in a Time of Change Conference, Vol. 5. Wilderness Ecosystems Threats and Management (pp. 23–48). Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station. Lew, A.A. (1987) A framework of tourist attraction research. Annals of Tourism Research 14, 533–575. Lew, A.A. (1991) Scenic roads and rural development in the U.S. Tourism Recreation Research 16 (2), 23–30. Li, W., Ge, X. and Liu, C. (2005) Hiking trails and tourism impact assessment in protected area: Jiuzhaigou Biosphere Reserve, China. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 108, 279–293. Librett, J.J., Yore, M.M. and Schmid, T.L. (2006) Characteristics of physical activity levels among trail users in a US national sample. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31 (5), 399–405. Lieber, S.R. and Allton, D.J. (1983) Modeling trail area evaluations in metropolitan Chicago. Journal of Leisure Research 15 (3), 184–202. Lieber, S.R. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (1984) Modelling recreation choice: A case study of management alternatives in Chicago. Regional Studies 18 (1), 31–43. Lieber, S.R. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (1985) Physical and social conditions affecting recreation site preferences. Environment and Planning A 17, 1613–1625. Light, D. (1995) Heritage as informal education. In D.T. Herbert (ed.) Heritage, Tourism and Society (pp. 117–145). London: Mansell. Lindley, W.R. (2000) Heritage tourism: With a new approach, trail history draws travelers in Oregon. Overland Journal 18 (3), 2–7. Lindsey, G., Maraj, M. and Kuan, S.C. (2001) Access, equity, and urban greenways: An exploratory investigation. Professional Geographer 53 (3), 332–346. Lipscombe, N. and Geddis, A. (2000) The benefits and concerns of railtrail development in Australia. Australian Parks and Leisure 3 (2), 26–33. Little, C.E. (1990) Greenways for America. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Liu, J.Y. (1993) Hiker trampling impacts on alpine vegetation along trails of Yushan National Park. Quarterly Journal of the Experimental Forest of National Taiwan University 7 (3), 53–72. Liu, J.Y. (1995) Studies on the trail erosion and its monitoring of Tataka Area, Yushan National Park, central Taiwan. Quarterly Journal of the Experimental Forest of National Taiwan University 9 (3), 1–19. Liu, J.Y., Chen, C.N., and Lai, M.J. (2001) Trail impacts in Auwanta Forest Recreation Area, central Taiwan. Journal of the Experimental Forest, National Taiwan University 15 (4), 249–271. Liu, J.Y. and Tseng, C.L. (2003) Trail impacts in Hohuanshan Area, Taroko National Park, Central Taiwan. Journal of the Experimental Forest, National Taiwan University 17 (3), 141–151. Logan, W.S. (2002) Vietnam’s Highway No.1: Corridor of power and patrimony. Historic Environment 16 (2), 23–26. López-Guzmán, T. and Sánchez Cañizares, S.M. (2008) La creación de productos turísticos utilizando rutas enológicas. PASOS: Revista de Turismo y Patriomonio Cultural 6 (2), 159–171.

278

Tour ism and Trail s

López-Guzmán, T., Sánchez Cañizares, S.M., and Garcia, R. (2009) Wine routes in Spain: A case study. Tourism 57 (4), 421–434. Loverseed, H. (1994) Transport: Rail travel in North America. Travel & Tourism Analyst 1, 4–18. Lowman, M. (2009) Canopy walkways for conservation: A tropical biologist’s panacea or fuzzy metrics to justify ecotourism. Biotropica 41 (5), 545–548. Lumsdon, L. (1996) Cycling Opportunities: Making the Most of the National Cycling Network. Stockport: Simon Holt Marketing Services. Lumsdon, L. (2000) Transport and tourism: Cycle tourism – A model for sustainable development? Journal of Sustainable Tourism 8 (5), 361–377. Lumsdon, L., Downward, P. and Cope, A. (2004) Monitoring of cycle tourism on long distance trails: The North Sea Cycle Route. Journal of Transport Geography 12, 13–22. Lusk, A. (1995) Safewalks: Neighborhood stroll to peaceful existence. Parks & Recreation 30 (8), 44–49. Lynn, N.A. and Brown, R.D. (2003) Effects of recreational use impacts on hiking experiences in natural areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 64, 77–87. MacCannell, D. (1976) The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: Schocken Books. MacDonald, S.H. (1987) Building support for urban trails. Parks & Recreation 22 (11), 26–33. Macerinskiene, A. (2010) Determination criteria for national water tourism routes. In C.A. Brebia and F.D. Pineda (eds) Sustainable Tourism IV (pp. 145–158). Southampton, UK: WIT Press. Mackay, J.W. (2007) New legislation for outdoor access: A review of Part 1 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. Scottish Affairs 59, 1–29. MacLennan, J. and Moore, R.L. (2011) Conflicts between recreation subworlds: The case of Appalachian Trail long-distance hikers. LARNet: The Cyber Journal of Applied Leisure and Recreation Research 13 (1), 1–17. MacLeod, N.E. (2004) Seeing place: A critique of the heritage trail as a visual interpretation of place. LSA Publication 84, 61–78. Magro, T.C. and Amando de Barros, M.I. (2004) Understanding use and users at Itatiaia National Park, Brazil. In R. Buckley (ed.) Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism (pp. 361– 376). Wallingford: CABI. Mahoney, C. (1999) Heritage tourism: Strategies for implementation and the model of The Civil War Discovery Trail. History News 54 (1), 21–23. Maikhuri, R.K., Rana, U., Rao, K.S., Nautiyal, S. and Saxena, K.G. (2000) Promoting ecotourism in the buffer zone areas of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve: An option to resolve people-policy conflict. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 7 (4), 333–342. Malibu Parks (2006) Malibu Parks Public Access Enhancement Plan: Accessibility Design Guidelines. Malibu, CA: Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority. Mannell, R.C. and Kleiber, D.A. (1997) A Social Psychology of Leisure. State College, PA: Venture. Manning, R. (1999) Crowding and carrying capacity in outdoor recreation: From normative standards to standards of quality. In E.L. Jackson and T.L. Burton (eds) Leisure Studies: Prospects for the Twenty-First Century (pp. 323–334). State College, PA: Venture. Mansfeld, Y. (2012) The role of religious institutions in sustainable tourism development and operation. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Sustainable Religious Tourism: Commandments, Obstacles and Challenges, Lecce, Italy, 28 October. Mansley, C. (2000) Managing the ‘right to roam’. ECOS 21 (3–4), 54–59. Mariñas Otero, E.J. (1990) El Camino de Santiago en el arte y en la cultura europea. Estudios Turísticos 106, 29–42.

References

279

Marion, J.L. and Leung, Y.F. (2001) Trail resource impacts and an examination of alternative assessment techniques. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 19 (3), 17–37. Marion, J.L. and Leung, Y.F. (2004) Environmentally sustainable trail management. In R. Buckley (ed.) Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism (pp. 229–243). Wallingford: CABI. Marion, J.L., Leung, Y.F. and Nepal, S.K. (2006) Monitoring trail conditions: New methodological considerations. The George Wright Forum 23 (2), 36–49. Markwell, K., Stevenson, D. and Rowe, D. (2004) Footsteps and memories: Interpreting an Australian urban landscape through thematic walking tours. International Journal of Heritage Studies 10 (5), 457–473. Marrell, B. (2000) Trails to tranquility. South Carolina Wildlife 47 (5), 12–19. Marsh, T. (2003) The West Highland Way. Milnthorpe: Cicerone. Martin, A. and McBoyle, G. (2006) Scotland’s Malt Whisky Trail: Management issues in a public–private tourism marketing partnership. International Journal of Wine Marketing 18 (2), 98–111. Mason, R. and O’Mahony, B. (2007) On the trail of food and wine: The tourist search for meaningful experience. Annals of Leisure Research 10 (3–4), 498–517. Masson, G. (2001) The Chilkoot Trail National Historic Site: A Canadian cultural route management approach. Paper presented at the Australia ICOMOS Making Tracks Conference, Alice Springs, May. Mathieson, A. and Wall, G. (1982) Tourism: Economic, Physical and Social Impacts. London: Longman. Mbaiwa, J.E. (2003) The socio-economic and environmental impacts of tourism development on the Okavango Delta, north-western Botswana. Journal of Arid Environments 54, 447–467. McFarlane, B.L., Boxall, P.C. and Watson, D.O. (1998) Past experience and behavioral choice among wilderness users. Journal of Leisure Research 30 (2), 195–213. McGlade, D. (2014) Hadrian’s Wall Path National Trail and the World Heritage Site: A case study in heritage access management. In P.G. Stone and D. Brough (eds) Managing, Using and Interpreting Hadrian’s Wall as World Heritage (pp. 47–61). New York: Springer. McIntosh, A.J., Zygadlo, MK. and Matunga, H. (2004) Rethinking Maori tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 9 (4), 331–352. McNamara, K.E. and Prideaux, B. (2011) Planning nature-based hiking trails in a tropical rainforest setting. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 16 (3), 289–305. McQuaid-Cook, J. (1978) Effects of hikers and horses on mountain trails. Journal of Environmental Management 6 (3), 209–212. Meaney, C.A., Ruggles, A.K., Clippinger, N.W. and Lubow, B.C. (2002) The impact of recreational trails and grazing on small mammals in the Colorado Piedmont. Prairie Naturalist 34 (3–4), 115–136. Means, M. (1999) Happy trails: Regional cooperation is alive and well in heritage corridors. Planning 65 (8), 4–9. Medina, F.X. and Tresserras, J. (2008) Wine tourism and wine routes in Catalonia: Case analyses. PASOS: Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural 6 (3), 493–509. Merom, D., Bauman, A., Vita, P. and Close, G. (2003) An environmental intervention to promote walking and cycling – The impact of a newly constructed Rail Trail in Western Sydney. Preventive Medicine 36, 235–242. Meschik, M. (2012) Sustainable cycle tourism along the Danube Cycle Route in Austria. Tourism Planning & Development 9 (1), 41–56. Meyer, E. (1993) The impact of summer and winter tourism on the fauna of alpine soils in Western Austria. Revue Suisse de Zoologie 100 (3), 519–527. Meyer-Cech, K. (2003) Food trails in Austria. In C.M. Hall, L. Sharples, R. Mitchell, N. Macionis and B. Cambourne (eds) Food Tourism Around the World: Development, Management and Markets (pp. 149–157). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.

280

Tour ism and Trail s

Meyer-Cech, K. (2005) Regional cooperation in rural theme trails. In D. Hall, I. Kirkpatrick and M. Mitchell (eds) Rural Tourism and Sustainable Business (pp. 137–148). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Miller, J.R. and Hobbs, N.T. (2000) Recreational trails, human activity, and nest predation in lowland riparian areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 50, 227–236. Miller, S.G., Knight, R.L. and Miller, C.K. (1998) Influence of recreational trails on breeding bird communities. Ecological Applications 8 (1), 162–169. Miller, S.G., Knight, R.L. and Miller, C.K. (2001) Wildlife responses to pedestrians and dogs. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29 (1), 124–132. Mills, J. (1990) Clearing the path for all of us where trains once ran. Smithsonian 21 (1), 132–141. Millward, H. (1993) Public access in the west European countryside: A comparative survey. Journal of Rural Studies 9, 39–51. Misra, M. (2011) Shadow of the Silk Road. International Journal of Environmental Studies 68 (3), 400–404. Miyakuni, K. and Vander Stoep, G. (2005) Importance and implementation of linkages in community-based tourism planning: A tourism corridor case study in Shuri, Japan. Paper presented at the International Conference on Border Tourism and Community Tourism Development, Jinghong, Xishuangbanna, China, 5–9 July. Miyakuni, K. and Vander Stoep, G. (2006) Linking linkage concepts from diverse fields to build a community-based tourism planning framework: The case of Shuri, Japan. Tourism Geographies 8 (3), 286–309. Moisey, R.N. and Bichis, M. (1999) Psychographics of senior nature tourists: The Katy Nature Trail. Tourism Recreation Research 24 (1), 69–76. Moore, R.L., Dattilo, J. and Devine, M.A. (1996) A comparison of rail-trail preferences between adults with and without disabilities. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 13, 27–37. Moore, R.L. and Driver, B.L. (2005) Introduction to Outdoor Recreation: Providing and Managing Natural Resource Based Opportunities. State College, PA: Venture. Moore, R.L., Gitelson, R.J. and Graefe, A.R. (1994) The economic impact of rail-trails. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 12 (2), 63–72. Moore, R.L. and Graefe, A.R. (1994) Attachments to recreation settings: The case of railtrail users. Leisure Sciences 16, 17–31. Moore, R.L., Graefe, A.R., and Gitelson, R.J. (1994) Living near greenways: Neighboring landowners’ experiences with and attitude toward rail-trails. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 12 (1), 79–93. Moore, R.L. and Ross, D.T. (1998) Trails and recreational greenways: Corridors of benefits. Parks and Recreation 33 (1), 68–79. Moore, R.L. and Scott, D. (2003) Place attachment and context: Comparing a park and a trail within. Forest Science 49 (6), 877–884. Moore, R.L., Scott, D. and Graefe, A.R. (1998) The effects of activity differences on recreation experiences along a suburban greenway trail. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 16 (2), 35–53. Moore, R.L. and Shafer, C.S. (2001) Introduction to special issue trails and greenways: Opportunities for planners, managers, and scholars. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 19 (3), 1–16. Morey, E.R., Buchanan, T. and Waldman, D.M. (2002) Estimating the benefits and costs to mountain bikers of changes in trail characteristics, access fees, and site closures: Choice experiments and benefits transfer. Journal of Environmental Management 64, 411–422. Morgan, N., Pritchard, A. and Pride, R. (eds) (2004) Destination Branding: Creating the Unique Destination Proposition. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.

References

281

Morgan, S.H. (1994) Rails to trails: On the right track. Probate and Property 8 (5), 10–17. Morris, H.V. (1972) Planning a Nature Trail. London: Institution of Municipal Engineers. Morrow, S. (2005) Continuity and change: The planning and management of long distance walking routes in Scotland. Managing Leisure 10 (4), 237–250. Moscardo, G. (1996) Mindful visitors: Heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 23 (2), 376–397. Moulin, C. and Boniface, P. (2001) Routeing heritage for tourism: Making heritage and cultural tourism networks for socio-economic development. International Journal of Heritage Studies 7 (3), 237–248. Mowen, A.J., Graefe, A.R. and Williams, D.R. (1998) An assessment of activity and trail type as indicators of trail user diversity. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 16 (1), 80–96. Mu, X. (2011) Rail linking Europe to open up China’s west. China Daily, 7 February. See www.chinadaily.com.cn/ business/2011- 07/02/content_12823190.htm (accessed 2 September 2012). Mudway, P. (2004) Engineered forest recreation. Landwards 59 (4), 2–6. Müller, D.K. and Pettersson, R. (2001) Access to Sami tourism in northern Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 1 (1), 5–18. Müller, S.W., Rusterholz, H.P. and Baur, B. (2004) Rock climbing alters the vegetation of limestone cliffs in the northern Swiss Jura Mountains. Canadian Journal of Botany 82 (6), 862–870. Mulvaney, J. (2003) ‘. . .these Aboriginal lines of travel’. Historic Environment 16 (2), 4–7. Mundet, L. and Coenders, G. (2010) Greenways: A sustainable leisure experience concept for both communities and tourists. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 18 (5), 657–674. Murray, M. and Graham, B. (1997) Exploring the dialectics of route-based tourism: The Camino de Santiago. Tourism Management 18, 513–524. National Trails (2012) About the national trails. See www.nationaltrail.co.uk/text. asp?PageId=2 (accessed 1 September 2012). National Trails (2013) How many people use National Trails? See www.nationaltrail.co. uk/faq.asp?PageId=7 (accessed 8 July 2013). Natural England (2012) Natural England – For people, for places, for nature. See www. naturalengland.org.uk/ (accessed 1 September 2012). Ndlovu, N. and Rogerson, C.M. (2003) Rural local economic development through community-based tourism: The Mehloding hiking and horse trail, Eastern Cape, South Africa. Africa Insight 33 (1–2), 124–129. Neff, L.J., Ainsworth, B.E., Wheeler, F.C., Krumwiede, S.E. and Trepal, A.J. (2000) Assessment of trail use in a community park. Family and Community Health 23 (3), 76–84. Nelson, C., Linch, J., Vogt, C. and van der Woud, A. (2002) Use and Users of the Pere Marquette Rail-Trail in Midland County Michigan. East Lansing: Department of Park, Recreation and Tourism Resources, Michigan State University. Nepal, S.K. (2003) Trail impacts in Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National Park, Nepal: A logistic regression analysis. Environmental Management 32 (3), 312–321. Nepal, S.K. and Nepal, S.A. (2004) Visitor impacts on trails in the Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National Park, Nepal. Ambio 33 (6), 334–340. Nepal, S.K. and Way, P. (2007a) Characterizing and comparing backcountry trail conditions in Mount Robson Provincial Park, Canada. Ambio 36 (5), 394–400. Nepal, S.K. and Way, P. (2007b) Comparison of vegetation conditions along two backcountry trails in Mount Robson Provincial Park, British Columbia (Canada). Journal of Environmental Management 82, 240–249. Newsome, D. and Dowling, R. (2010) Geotourism: Opportunity and tourism significance. In R. Dowling and D. Newsome (eds) Global Geotourism Perspectives (pp. 230–247). Oxford: Goodfellow.

282

Tour ism and Trail s

Newsome, D., Dowling, R. and Leung, Y-F. (2012) The nature and management of geotourism: A case study of two established iconic geotourim destinations. Tourism Management Perspectives 2, 19–27. Nickens, E. (1995) Where the sun now stands. Historic Preservation 47 (5), 42–46. Nisbett, N. and Hinton, J. (2005) On and off the trail: Experiences of individuals with specialized needs on the Appalachian Trail. Tourism Review International 8, 221–237. Noe, F.P., Hammitt, W.E., and Bixler, R.D. (1997) Park users perceptions of resource and use impacts under varied situations in three national parks. Journal of Environmental Management 49 (3), 323–336. Noe, F.P., Hull, R.B. and Wellman, J.D. (1982) Normative response and norm activation among ORV users within a seashore environment. Leisure Sciences 5 (2), 127–142. Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (2013) Northern Ireland Tourism Statistics 2012. Belfast: Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) (2011) The Causeway Coastal Route Tourist Brochure. Belfast: Northern Ireland Tourist Board. Northern Ireland Tourist Board (2013) Saint Patrick’s Trail. See www. discovernorthernireland.com/stpatrick/ (accessed 19 April 2013). Notaro, S. and de Salvo, M. (2009) Estimating the economic benefits from outdoor recreation on a scenic route: The Ponale Road. Tourism Analysis 14, 313–323. Novelli, M. (2005) Niche Tourism: Contemporary Issues, Trends and Cases. Oxford: Elsevier. Nowers, R., de Villiers, E. and Myburgh, A. (2002) Agricultural theme routes as a diversification strategy: The Western Cape wine routes case study. Agrekon 41 (2), 195–209. Nylander, M. (2001) National policy for ‘rural tourism’: The case of Finland. In L. Roberts and D. Hall (eds) Rural Tourism and Recreation: Principles to Practices (pp. 77–82). Wallingford: CABI. O’Brien, R. and Curtis, C. (1979) The Donkin Heritage Trail. Planning and Building Developments 40, 13–26. O’Reilly, A.M. (1986) Tourism carrying capacity: Concepts and issues. Tourism Management 7 (4), 254–258. Oficina del Peregrino (2006–2013) Estadísticas de la Peregrinación. See www. oficinadelperegrino.org (accessed 3 July 2013). Oishi, Y. (2013) Toward the improvement of trail classification in national parks using the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum. Environmental Management 51, 1126–1136. Oku, H. and Fukamachi, K. (2003) Occurrence pattern of landscape experience during forest recreation. Journal of the Japanese Forestry Society 85 (1), 63–69. Olsen, D.H. (2006) Tourism and informal pilgrimage among the Latter-day Saints. In D.J. Timothy and D.H. Olsen (eds) Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys (pp. 254–270). London: Routledge. Olsen, D.H. and Timothy, D.J. (2006) Tourism and religious journeys. In D.J. Timothy and D.H. Olsen (eds) Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys (pp. 1–21). London: Routledge. Olsen, M. (2003) Tourism themed routes: A Queensland experience. Journal of Vacation Marketing 9 (4), 331–341. Olson, J. (2001) Millennium trails: Honor the past, imagine the future. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 72 (1), 23–26. Omar, W.R.W., Patterson, I. and Pegg, S. (2012) A green pathway for future tourism success: Walking trails in Kuala Lumpur. Tourism Planning and Development 9 (1), 57–76. Omphile, U.J. and Powell, J. (2002) Large ungulate habitat preference in Chobe National Park, Botswana. Journal of Range Management 55 (4), 341–349. Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Clubs (2013) About OFSC trails. See www.ofsc.on.ca/ plan-my-ride/trails/about- ofsc-trails.html (accessed 5 February 2013). Orams, M.B. (1996) Using interpretation to manage nature-based tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 4 (2), 81–94.

References

283

Orbaşli, A. (2000) Tourists in Historic Towns: Urban Conservation and Heritage Management. London: E & FN Spon. Orbaşli, A. and Woodward, S. (2008) A railway ‘route’ as a linear heritage attraction: The Hijaz Railway in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Journal of Heritage Tourism 3 (3), 159–175. Ormsby, A.A. (1996) An attitudinal survey of resident perceptions of conservation at Five Blues Lake National Park, Belize. TRI News 15 (1), 13–15. Ottman, J. (1989) South Dakota’s Centennial Trail. The Western Horseman 54 (8), 94–96. Outdoor Foundation (2012) Outdoor Recreation Participation: Topline Report, 2012. Boulder, CO: Outdoor Foundation. Page, S.J. (2012) Introduction to Tourism Management (4th edn). London: Routledge. Page, S.J. and Connell, J. (2010) Leisure: An Introduction. Harlow: Pearson. Paine, L.P. (2001) Blazing the Maine Maritime Heritage Trail: Planning and prospects. Bulletin of the Australian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 25, 75–78. Palau, R., Forgas, S., Blasco, D. and Ferrer, B. (2012) An analysis of greenways from an economic perspective. Tourism Planning & Development 9 (1), 15–24. Papouchis, C.M., Singer, F.J. and Sloan, W.B. (2001) Responses of desert bighorn sheep to increased human recreation. Journal of Wildlife Management 65 (3), 573–582. Parfit, M. (1993) Along the Cabot Trail. National Geographic Traveler 10 (4), 84–94. Parker, M.O. and Moore, R.L. (1998) Effects of contact methods on adjacent landowner attitudes toward a proposed rail-trail. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 16 (3), 1–14. Parks Canada (1997) The Canadian Heritage Rivers System: Annual Report (1996/1997). Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services. Parks Canada (2014) The Canadian Heritage Rivers System. See www.chrs.ca (accessed 6 January 2014). Patterson, M.E. and Hammitt, W.E. (1990) Backcountry encounter norms, actual reported encounters, and their relationship to wilderness solitude. Journal of Leisure Research 22 (3), 259–275. Paulick, J. (2005) Letting the grass grow over history. Deutsche Welle, 7 November. See www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1765430,00.html (accessed 30 November 2005). Pavlovich, K. (2003) The evolution and transformation of a tourism destination network: The Waitamo Caves, New Zealand. Tourism Management 24 (2), 203–216. Payne, C. (1997) Pearls on a string: Interpreting historic trails. CRM 20 (1), 36–37. Payne, R.J. and Graham, R. (1993) Visitor planning and management in parks and protected areas. In P. Dearden and R. Rollins (eds) Parks and Protected Areas in Canada: Planning, and Management (pp. 185–210). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Peak District National Park Authority (2012) Peak District National Park Authority News. See www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/ learning-about/news (accessed 30 June 2012). Peak District National Park Authority (2013) Monsal trail and tunnels. See www. peakdistrict.gov.uk/visiting/cycle/monsaltrail (accessed 5 July 2013). Pearce, H., Cohen, K. and Cook, M. (2002) Heritage Trails of the Queensland Outback. Brisbane: Queensland Government, Environmental Protection Agency. Pellegrini, M. (1999) La via dei parchi iniziativa del Comitato per le Vie Verdi d’Europe e del WWF. Mondo Macchina 8 (6), 56–57. Pena, N. (1991) On track. Bicycling 32 (6), 92–96. Pendleton, L., Sohngen, B., Mendelsohn, R. and Holmes, T. (1998) Measuring environmental quality in the southern Appalachian Mountains. Forest Science 44 (4), 603–609. Pennington-Gray, L. (2003) Understanding the domestic VFR drive market in Florida. Journal of Vacation Marketing 9 (4), 354–367. Petersen, M. (1985) Improving Voluntary Registration Through Location and Design of Trail Registration Stations. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

284

Tour ism and Trail s

Peterson, E. (1999) Trailblazing: Millennium trails celebrate recreation, trails and communities. Athletic Business 23 (9), 36–37. Phillips, D.P. (1991) The Lewis and Clark Heritage Trail Foundation. Heritage Quest 36, 73–74. Phillips, R. and Budruk, M. (2011) Introduction. In M. Budruk and R. Phillips (eds) Quality-of-Life Community Indicators for Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management (pp. 1–10). London: Springer. Pine, B.J. and Gilmore, J.H. (1998) Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review 76 (4), 97–105. Pine, B.J. and Gilmore, J.H. (1999) The Experience Economy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Pitkänen, K. and Vepsäläinen, M. (2006) The changing historical dimensions of lake tourism at Savonlinna: Savonlinna – The Pearl of Lake Saimaa. Lake representations in the tourist marketing of Savonlinna. In C.M. Hall and T. Härkönen (eds) Lake Tourism: An Integrated Approach to Lacustrine Tourism Systems (pp. 67–82). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Plathong, S., Inglis, G.J. and Huber, M.E. (2000) Effects of self-guided snorkeling trails on corals in a tropical marine park. Conservation Biology 14 (6), 1821–1830. Plummer, R., Telfer, D. and Hashimoto, A. (2006) The rise and fall of the WaterlooWellington Ale Trail: A study of collaboration within the tourism industry. Current Issues in Tourism 9 (3), 191–205. Plummer, R., Telfer, D., Hashimoto, A. and Summers, R. (2005) Beer tourism in Canada along the Waterloo-Wellington Ale Trail. Tourism Management 26, 447–458. Pollock, N., Chase, L., Ginger, C. and Kolodinsky, J. (2012) The Northern Forest Canoe Trail: Economic impacts and implications for community development. Community Development 43 (2), 244–258. Poria, Y., Biran, A. and Reichel, A. (2006) Tourist perceptions: Personal vs. non-personal. Journal of Heritage Tourism 1 (2), 121–132. Post-Trib.com (2009) Thirsty tourists follow Ontario’s ale trail. E-Turbo News. See www. eturbonews.com/8046/thirsty-tourists-follow- ontarios-ale-trail (accessed 2 March 2013). Potito, A.P. and Beatty, S.W. (2005) Impacts of recreation trails on exotic and ruderal species distribution in grassland areas along the Colorado Front Range. Environmental Management 36 (2), 230–236. Potter, F.I. and Manning, R.E. (1984) Application of the Wilderness Travel Simulation Model to the Appalachian Trail in Vermont. Environmental Management 8 (6), 543–550. Pouta, E., Sievänen, T. and Neuvonen, M. (2006) Recreational wild berry picking in Finland – Reflection of a rural lifestyle. Society & Natural Resources, 285–304. Prentice, R.C. (1994) Heritage: A key sector of the new tourism. Progress in Tourism, Recreation and Hospitality Management 5, 309–324. Prentice, R.C. (1995) Heritage as formal education. In D.T. Herbert (ed.) Heritage, Tourism and Society (pp. 146–169). London: Mansell. Price, M.F. (1983) Management planning in the Sunshine Area of Canada’s Banff National Park. Parks 7 (4), 6–10. Prideaux, B. (1999) Tracks to tourism: Queensland rail joins the tourist industry. International Journal of Tourism Research 1 (2), 73–86. Prideaux, B. (2002) Creating rural heritage visitor attractions: The Queensland Heritage Trails Project. International Journal of Tourism Research 4, 313–323. Prideaux, B. and Carson, D. (2003a) A framework for increasing understanding of selfdrive tourism markets. Journal of Vacation Marketing 9 (4), 307–313. Prideaux, B. and Carson, D. (2003b) The marketing of drive tourism. Journal of Vacation Marketing 9 (4), 307–395.

References

285

Prideaux, B. and Carson, D. (eds) (2011) Drive Tourism: Trends and Emerging Markets. London: Routledge. Prideaux, B. and Timothy, D.J. (2011) From mining boom towns to tourist haunts: The ghost town life cycle. In M. Conlin and L. Jolliffe (eds) Mining Heritage and Tourism: A Global Synthesis (pp. 227–238). London: Routledge. Prideaux, B., Timothy, D.J. and Cooper, M. (2009) Introducing river tourism: Physical, ecological and human aspects. In B. Prideaux and M. Cooper (eds) River Tourism (pp. 1–22). Wallingford, UK: CABI. Przybylska, L. and Sołjan, I. (2010) Polish pilgrimages to Santiago de Compostela: Ways of St. James in Poland. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites 6 (2), 211–218. Puczkó, L. and Rátz, T. (2007) Trailing Goethe, Humbert, and Ulysses: Cultural routes in tourism. In G. Richards (ed.) Cultural Tourism: Global and Local Perspectives (pp. 131–148). New York: Haworth. Pulido-Bosch, A., Martin-Rosales, W., López-Chicano, M., Rodriguez-Navarro, C.M. and Vallejos, A. (1997) Human impact in a tourist karstic cave (Aracena, Spain). Environmental Geology 31 (3–4), 142–149. Qin, Y. and Zheng, B. (2010) The Qinhai-Tibet Railway: A landmark project and its subsequent environmental challenges. Environment, Development and Sustainability 12 (5), 859–873. Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (1996) The Story of Railbanking and Rail-trails by the Numbers. Washington, DC: Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2012) D& L Trail 2012 User Survey and Economic Impact Analysis. Washington, DC: Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (2013) About Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. See www. railstotrails.org/aboutus/index.html (accessed 2 July 2013). Railtrails Australia (2013) Railtrails Australia: Trail descriptions. See www.railtrails. org.au/ (accessed 2 July 2013). Ralston, R. and Rhoden, S. (2005) The motivations and expectations of volunteers on cycle trails: The case of the National Cycle Network, UK. Tourism and Hospitality Planning and Development 2 (2), 101–114. Ramsay, J. and Truscott, M.C. (2003) Tracking through Australian forests. Historic Environment 16 (2), 32–38. Rasor, R. (1988) The trails network: New directions. American Forests 94 (3–4), 58–60, 67. Rathke, D.M. and Baughman, M.J. (1994) Recreational Trail Design and Construction. St Paul: Minnesota Extension Service, University of Minnesota. Rátz, T., Smith, M. and Michalkó, G. (2008) New places in old spaces: Mapping tourism and regeneration in Budapest. Tourism Geographies 10 (4), 429–451. Ravenscroft, N. (2004) Tales from the tracks. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 39 (1), 27–44. Ravenscroft, N. and Long, H.A.R. (1994) Horses in the countryside: Conflict or co-operation? Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England 155, 79–86. Ravenscroft, N. and Rogers, G. (2003) A critical incident study of barriers to participation on the Cuckoo Trail, East Sussex. Managing Leisure 8 (4), 184–197. Reader’s Digest (2005) The Most Scenic Drives in America. Pleasantville, NY: Reader’s Digest Association. Reffay, A. (1980) Alpages et developpement touristique en Champsaur. Revue de Geographie Alpine 68 (1), 39–62. Reid, R.D. (1983) Fitness trails: Programming the benefits. Recreation Canada 41 (1), 50–53. Rennicke, J. (1997a) Hiking the Chilkoot Trail. National Geographic Traveler 14 (2), 110–120. Rennicke, J. (1997b) Utah’s Capital Reef National Park. National Geographic Traveler 14 (5), 94–103.

286

Tour ism and Trail s

Rennie, B. (1980) Interpretive evaluation: An applied methodology for self-guided trails. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Guelph, Canada. Revitt, M. and Sanders, D. (2002) Ecotourism on Lancelin Island, Western Australia. Journal of Ecotourism 1 (2–3), 190–196. Rhoden, S., Ineson, E.M. and Ralston, R. (2009) Volunteer motivation in heritage railways: A study of the West Somerset Railway volunteers. Journal of Heritage Tourism 4 (1), 19–36. Rice, J. (2001) Norfolk Island trade routes. Paper presented at the Australia ICOMOS Making Tracks Conference, Alice Springs, May. Ricker, B.A., Johnson, P.A. and Sieber, R.E. (2013) Tourism and environmental change in Barbados: Gathering citizen perspectives with volunteered geographic information (VGI). Journal of Sustainable Tourism 21 (2), 212–228. Rickly-Boyd, J.M. (2012) On lifestyle climbers: An examination of rock climbing dedication, community, and travel. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Geography, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA. Ríos-Jara, E., Galván-Villa, C.M., Rodríguez-Zaragoza, F.A., López-Uriarte, and MuñozFernández, V.T. (2013) The tourism carrying capacity of underwater trails in Isabel island National Park, Mexico. Environmental Management 52 (2), 335–347. Rizzello, K. and Trono, A. (2013) The pilgrimage to the San Nicola Shrine in Bari and its impact. International Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage 1 (1), 24–40. Rogerson, C.M. (2002) Tourism and local economic development: The case of the Highlands Meander. Development Southern Africa 19 (1), 143–167. Rogerson, C.M. (2007) Tourism routes as vehicles for local economic development in South Africa: The example of the Magaliesberg Meander. Urban Forum 18 (1), 49–68. Ron, A.S. and Timothy, D.J. (2013) The land of milk and honey: Biblical foods, heritage and Holy Land tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism 8 (2–3), 234–247. Rosenblum, I. (2008) Tourists may tread ‘Pilgrim’s Route’, visit W. Bank Christian sites by next year. Haaretz, 9 September. Ross, D. (1989) Westward, ho! The Santa Fe Trail. New Mexico Magazine 67 (6), 42–52. Ruff, A.R. and Mellors, O. (1993) The mountain bike – The dream machine? Landscape Research 18 (3), 104–109. Sack, D. and da Luz, S. (2003) Sediment flux and compaction trends on off-road vehicle (ORV) and other trails in an Appalachian forest setting. Physical Geography 24 (6), 536–554. Sandell, K. and Fredman, P. (2010) The right of public access: Opportunity or obstacle for nature tourism in Sweden? Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 10 (3), 291–309. Santos, R. (1988) Trekkers and the environment. Contours 3 (6), 10. Santos, X.M. (2002) Pilgrimage and tourism at Santiago de Compostela. Tourism Recreation Research 27 (2), 41–50. Schasberger, M.G., Hussa, C.S., Polgar, M.F., McMonagle, J.A., Burke, S.J. and Gegaries, A.J. (2009) Promoting and developing a trail network across suburban, rural and urban communities. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 37 (6), s336–s344. Scheyvens, R. (2002) Tourism for Development: Empowering Communities. London: Prentice Hall. Schill, B. and Schill, B. (1997) Moseying along the heritage trail: Find peace, quiet and antiquity around New Jersey’s Delaware Bay. Trailer Life 57 (6), 63–83. Schuett, M.A. (1997) State park directors’ perceptions of mountain biking. Environmental Management 21 (2), 239–246. Schutt, A.M. (1997) The Bruce Trail, Ontario Users and their Economic Impact. Peterborough, ON: Trent University.

References

287

Schutt, A.M. (1998) Trails for economic development: A case study. Journal of Applied Recreation Research 23 (2), 127–145. Schwartz, D. (1996) Talking trails. Wisconsin Natural Resources 20 (4), 4–5. Scotland’s Great Trails (2013) The Rob Roy Way. See www.robroyway.com (accessed 1 December 2013). Scott, N., Baggio, R. and Cooper, C. (2008) Network Analysis and Tourism: From Theory to Practice. Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Scott, P. (1986) Managing access within the countryside. Leisure Management 6 (5), 10–12. Scott, P. (1990) Recreation 2000 – Setting the agenda for countryside recreation. Ecos 11 (2), 40–43. Scott-Ireton, D.A. (2007) The value of public education and interpretation in submerged cultural resource management. In J.H. Jameson and D.A. Scott-Ireton (eds) Out of the Blue: Public Interpretation of Maritime Cultural Resources (pp. 19–32). New York: Springer. Scotter, G.W. (1981) Response rates at unmanned trail registers, Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, Canada. Journal of Leisure Research 13 (2), 105–111. Scottish Natural Heritage (2013) Scottish Natural Heritage: All of nature for all of Scotland. See www.snh.gov.uk (accessed 1 December 2013). Scottish Tourist Board (1986) Route Signposting Research. Glasgow: Scottish Tourist Board. Scottish Tourist Board (2004) Scotland’s Malt Whiskey Trail. Glasgow: Scottish Tourist Board. Seaton, A.V. (1996) Guided by the dark: From thanatopsis to thanatourism. International Journal of Heritage Studies 2 (4), 234–244. Seher, J. (1991) Natural passages: NPS manages thousands of miles of trails that offer both scenic and historic routes. National Parks 65 (9–10), 42–44. Seibel, M. (2013) Forest canopy tourism: Analyzing a flagship attraction in the ecotourism arena from a political ecology perspective. In M. Lowman, S. Devy and T. Ganesh (eds) Treetops at Risk: Challenges of Global Canopy Ecology and Conservation (pp. 361–365). London: Springer. Selman, P. (2004) Community participation in the planning and management of cultural landscapes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 47 (3), 365–392. Senate Chancellery (2013) Berlin Wall Trail. See www.berlin.de/mauer/mauerweg/ index/index.en.php (accessed 1 May 2013). Settina, N. and Kauffman, R.B. (2001) Water trails. Parks and Recreation 36 (9), 94–103. Sevigny, R. (1992) Florida’s black heritage trail. Historic Preservation Forum 6 (4), 6–9. Seward, K. (2001) Routes to recovery. Leisure Management 21 (4), 62–64. Shackley, M. (1996) Community impact of the camel safari industry in Jaisalmar, Rajasthan. Tourism Management 17 (3), 213–218. Shackley, M. (2003) The Frankincense Route: A proposed cultural itinerary for the Middle East. Historic Environment 16 (2), 12–17. Shackley, M. (2006) Atlas of Travel and Tourism Development. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Shafer, C.S., Lee, B.K. and Turner, S. (2000) A tale of three greenway trails: User perceptions related to quality of life. Landscape and Urban Planning 49, 163–178. Shailes, A., Senior, M.L. and Andrew, B.P. (2001) Tourists’ travel behaviour in response to congestion: The case of car trips to Cornwall, United Kingdom. Journal of Transport Geography 9, 49–60. Sharma, P. (1997) Impacts and implications: Environmental degradation. ICIMOD, Newsletter of the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development 28, 3–11. Sharples, L. (2002) Wine tourism in Chile: A brave new step for a brave new world. International Journal of Wine Marketing 14 (2), 43–53. Sharpley, R. and Stone, P. (2009) The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism. Bristol: Channel View Publications.

288

Tour ism and Trail s

Sharpley, R. and Telfer, D.J. (2008) Tourism and Development in the Developing World. London: Routledge. Shaw, S. and MacLeod, N. (2000) Creativity and conflict: Cultural tourism in London’s city fringe. Tourism, Culture and Communication 2 (3), 165–175. Shelby, B. (1981) Encounter norms in backcountry settings: Studies of three rivers. Journal of Leisure Research 13, 129–138. Shelby, B., Vaske, J.J. and Harris, R. (1988) User standards for ecological impacts at wilderness campsites. Journal of Leisure Research 20 (3), 245–256. Sheppard, M. (2004) New approach? Australasian Leisure Management 46, 40–42. Shi, Q., Li, C. and Deng, J.Y. (2002) Assessment of impacts of visitors’ activities on vegetation in Zhangjiajie National Forest Park. Journal of Forestry Research 13 (2), 137–140. Shipley, R.M. and Beaudet, G. (1996) The development of the Welland Canal as a tourism resource: A silk purse from a sow’s ear – Is it possible? Téoros 15 (2), 41–45. Shoval, N. and Isaacson, M. (2007) Tracking tourists in the digital age. Annals of Tourism Research 34 (1), 141–159. Shoval, N. and Isaacson, M. (2009) Tourist Mobility and Advanced Tracking Technologies. London: Routledge. Siderelis, C. and Moore, R. (1995) Outdoor recreation net benefits of rail-trails. Journal of Leisure Research 27 (4), 344–359. Sievänen, T. (1989) The trail inventory and forest recreation. Scandinavian Forest Economics 30, 89–105. Sievänen, T. (1991) Scandinavian research on multiple forest uses: Socio-economic and ecological aspects of forest recreation. Tourism Recreation Research 16 (2), 55–59. Simms, L. (1992) The White River Trace and the Trail of Tears. Missouri Conservationist 53 (8), 25–27. Simões, O. (2008) Enoturismo em Portugal: as rotas de vinho. PASOS: Revista de Turismo y Patriomonio Cultural 6 (2), 269–279. Simone-Charteris, M.T. and Boyd, S.W. (2010) The development of religious heritage tourism in Northern Ireland: Opportunities, benefits and obstacles. Tourism 58 (3), 229–257. Sims, C.B., Hodges, D.G., Fly, J.M. and Stephens, B. (2005) Modeling visitor acceptance of a shuttle system in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 23 (3), 25–44. Sims, R. (2009) Food, place and authenticity: Local food and the sustainable tourism experience. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 17 (3), 321–336. Singapore Tourism Board (2012) Discover Singapore through heritage trails. See www. yoursingapore.com/content/traveller/en/ browse/see-and- do/culture-and-heritage/ a-touch- of-history/ heritage-trails.html (accessed 13 February 2013). Singh, Rana P.B. (2006) Pilgrimage in Hinduism: Historical context and modern perspectives. In D.J. Timothy and D.H. Olsen (eds) Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys (pp. 220–236). London: Routledge. Singh, Rana P.B. (ed.) (2011) Holy Places and Pilgrimages: Essays on India. New Delhi: Shubhi Publications. Sipes, J.L., James, A.P., Lindley, J., Campbell, T., Gragg, R. and Harbert, C. (1997) Scenic byways: A review of processes, administration, and economic impacts. Transportation Research Record 1599, 96–103. Sivijs, A. (2003) The Drive Tourism Programme 2002–2002. Journal of Vacation Marketing 9 (4), 342–353. Slavicek, L.C. (2009) The Great Wall of China. New York: Chelsea House. Smith, M. and Puczkó, L. (2011) National identity construction and tourism in Hungary: A multi-level approach. In E. Frew and L. White (eds) Tourism and National Identities: An International Perspective (pp. 38–51). London: Routledge.

References

289

Smith, R.C. (2007) Florida’s maritime heritage trail. In J.H. Jameson and D.A. ScottIreton (eds) Out of the Blue: Public Interpretation of Maritime Cultural Resources (pp. 52–63). New York: Springer. Smith, V.L., Hetherington, A.Q. and Brumbaugh, M.D.D. (1986) California’s Highway 89: A regional tourism model. Annals of Tourism Research 13, 415–433. Snowball, J.D. and Courtney, S. (2010) Cultural heritage routes in South Africa: Effective tools for heritage conservation and local economic development? Development Southern Africa 27 (4), 563–576. Snyder, S.A. and Smail, R.A. (2009) Are all-terrain vehicle riders willing to pay trail user fees to ride on public lands in the USA? Tourism Economics 15 (2), 437–451. Sofield, T.H.B. and Birtles, R.A. (1996) ‘Indigenous peoples’ cultural opportunity spectrum for tourism (IPCOST). In R.W. Butler and T. Hinch (eds) Tourism and Indigenous Peoples (pp. 396–433). Boston, MA: International Thomson Business Press. Spacil, F. (1985) A future for Basildon Plotlands. Landscape Design 156, 14–17. Spencer, D.M., Kim, D.K., Nelson, C.M. and Holecek, D.F. (1999) Characteristics and behaviour of tourists who use trails. Current Issues in Tourism 2 (2–3), 174–196. Stankey, G.H., Cole, D.N., Lucas, R.C., Peterson, M.E. and Frissell, S.S. (1985) The Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) System for Wilderness Planning. Odgen, UT: USDA Forest Service. Stansfield, J.M. (1985) Managing a farm walk. Farm Management International 1 (1), 31–35. Staski, E. (2004) An archaeological survey of El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro, Las Cruces – El Paso. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 8 (4), 231–245. Stausberg, M. (2011) Religion and Tourism: Crossroads, Destinations and Encounters. London: Routledge. Stebbins, R.A. (2007) Serious Leisure: A Perspective of Our Time. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Stevens, S. (1988) Tourism and development in Nepal. Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers 67/68, 67–80. Stewart-Spears, G. (1993) Trail of Tears dedication and commemorative wagon train. Western Horseman 58 (9), 45–46. Stratford Tourism Alliance (2012) Savour Stratford Bacon & Ale Trail. Stratford, ON: Stratford Tourism Alliance. Strauss, C.H. and Lord, B.E. (2001) Economic impacts of a heritage tourism system. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 8 (4), 199–204. Studer, B. (1994) Velotourismus: pionierleistung im Kanton Solothurn. STV Bulletin 3, 17–18. Su, M.M. and Wall, G. (2012) Global–local relationships and governance issues at the Great Wall World Heritage Site, China. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 20 (8), 1067–1086. Sun, D. and Liddle, M. (1993) A survey of trampling effects on vegetation and soil in eight tropical and subtropical sites. Environmental Management 17, 497–510. Swanson, K.K. and DeVereaux, C. (2012) Culturally sustainable entrepreneurship: A case study for Hopi tourism. In K. Hyde, C. Ryan and A. Woodside (eds) Field Guide to Case Study Research in Tourism Hospitality and Leisure (pp. 479–495). Bingley, UK: Emerald. Swanson, K.K. and Timothy, D.J. (2012) Souvenirs: Icons of meaning, commercialization, and commoditization. Tourism Management 33 (3), 489–499. Tang, L. and Jang, S. (2010) The evolution from transportation to tourism: The case of the New York Canal System. Tourism Geographies 12 (3), 435–459. Tang, M.D. (1991) Evaluation of the tourist resources of the northern Silk Road, Xinjiang. Chinese Journal of Arid Land Research 4 (4), 329–337. Taplin, J.H.E. and Qiu, M. (1997) Car trip attraction and route choice in Australia. Annals of Tourism Research 24 (3), 624–637.

290

Tour ism and Trail s

Tassiopoulos, D., Nuntsu, N. and Haydam, N. (2004) Wine tourists in South Africa: A demographic and psychographic study. Journal of Wine Research 15 (1), 51–63. Taylor, K.C., Reader, R.J. and Larson, D.W. (1993) Scale-dependent inconsistencies in the effects of trampling on a forest understory community. Environmental Management 17 (2), 239–248. Teather, E.K. and Chow, C.S. (2003) Identity and place: The testament of designated heritage in Hong Kong. International Journal of Heritage Studies 9 (2), 93–115. Telfer, D.J. (2000) The northeast wine route: Wine tourism in Ontario, Canada and new York state. In C.M. Hall, L. Sharples, B. Cambourne and N. Macionis (eds) Wine Tourism Around the World: Development, Management and Markets (pp. 253–271). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Telfer, D.J. (2001a) From a wine tourism village to a regional wine route: An investigation of the competitive advantage of embedded clusters in Niagara, Canada. Tourism Recreation Research 26 (2), 23–33. Telfer, D.J. (2001b) Strategic alliances along the Niagara Wine Route. Tourism Management 22, 21–30. Telfer, D.J. and Hashimoto, A. (2003) Food tourism in the Niagara region: The development of a nouvelle cuisine. In C.M. Hall, L. Sharples, R. Mitchell, N. Macionis and B. Cambourne (eds) Food Tourism Around the World: Development, Management and Markets (pp. 158–177). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Tellez, A. (1994) The Mission Trail: A springboard for heritage tourism. CRM 17 (2), 30–31. Teye, V.B. and Timothy, D.J. (2004) The varied colors of slave heritage in West Africa: White American stakeholders. Space and Culture 7 (2), 145–155. Thapa, B. (2012) Why did they not visit? Examining structural constraints to visit Kafue National Park, Zambia. Journal of Ecotourism 11 (1), 74–83. Thapa, B. and Graefe, A.R. (2003) Level of skill and its relationship to recreation conflict and tolerance among adult skiers and snowboarders. World Leisure 45 (1), 13–25. Thevenot, G. (2007) Blogging as a social media. Tourism and Hospitality Research 7 (3–4), 287–289. Thompson, J.W. (2000) Getting trails on track. Landscape Architecture 90 (6), 80–98, 133. Threlkeld, K. (1997) The Mormon Trail today. Cobblestone 18 (5), 40–42. Tilden, F. (1977) Interpreting Our Heritage. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina. Timcak, G.M., Rybár, P. and Jablonská, J. (2011) Geotourism site development in Slovakia. In M.V. Conlin and L. Jolliffe (eds) Mining Heritage and Tourism: A Global Synthesis (pp. 158–170). London: Routledge. Timothy, D.J. (1997) Tourism and the personal heritage experience. Annals of Tourism Research 34 (3), 751–754. Timothy, D.J. (1998a) Collecting places: Geodetic lines in tourist space. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 7 (4), 123–129. Timothy, D.J. (1998b) Cooperative tourism planning in a developing destination. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 6 (1), 52–68. Timothy, D.J. (1999a) Cross-border partnership in tourism resource management: International parks along the US-Canada border. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 7 (3–4), 182–205. Timothy, D.J. (1999b) Participatory planning: A view of tourism in Indonesia. Annals of Tourism Research 26 (2), 371–391. Timothy, D.J. (2001) Tourism and Political Boundaries. London: Routledge. Timothy, D.J. (2002) Tourism and community development issues. In R. Sharpley and D.J. Telfer (eds) Tourism and Development: Concepts and Issues (pp. 149–164). Clevedon, UK: Channel View Publications. Timothy, D.J. (2007) Empowerment and stakeholder participation in tourism destination communities. In A. Church and T. Coles (eds) Tourism, Power and Space (pp. 199–216). London: Routledge.

References

291

Timothy, D.J. (2008) Genealogical mobility: Tourism and the search for a personal past. In D.J. Timothy and J. Kay Guelke (eds) Geography and Genealogy: Locating Personal Pasts (pp. 115–135). Aldershot: Ashgate. Timothy, D.J. (2009) River-based tourism in the USA: Tourism and recreation on the Colorado and Mississippi Rivers. In B. Prideaux and M. Cooper (eds) River Tourism (pp. 41–54). Wallingford, UK: CABI. Timothy, D.J. (2011a) Cultural Heritage and Tourism: An Introduction. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Timothy, D.J. (2011b) Highways and byways: Car-based tourism in the US. In B. Prideaux and D. Carson (eds) Drive Tourism: Trends and Emerging Markets (pp. 172–193). London: Routledge. Timothy, D.J. (2013) Religious views of the environment: Sanctification of nature and implications for tourism. In A. Holden and D. Fennell (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and the Environment (pp. 31–42). London: Routledge. Timothy, D.J. (2014) Contemporary cultural heritage and tourism: Development issues and emerging trends. Public Archaeology 13 (1–3), 1–12. Timothy, D.J. and Boyd, S.W. (2003) Heritage Tourism. Harlow: Prentice Hall. Timothy, D.J. and Boyd, S.W. (2006) Heritage tourism in the 21st century: Valued traditions and new perspectives. Journal of Heritage Tourism 1 (1), 1–17. Timothy, D.J. and Groves, D.L. (2001) Webcam images as potential data sources for tourism research. Tourism Geographies 3 (4), 394–404. Timothy, D.J. and Iverson, T. (2006) Tourism and Islam: Considerations of culture and duty. In D.J. Timothy and D.H. Olsen (eds) Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys (pp. 186–205). London: Routledge. Timothy, D.J. and Martens, T.F. (2012) Tourists in transfrontier protected areas: A case of La Amistad International Park. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 10 (2), 1–19. Timothy, D.J. and Olsen, D.H. (eds) (2006) Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys. London: Routledge. Timothy, D.J. and Ron, A.S. (2013) Understanding heritage cuisines and tourism: Identity, image, authenticity and change. Journal of Heritage Tourism 8 (2–3), 99–104. Timothy, D.J. and Saarinen, J. (2013) Cross-border cooperation and tourism in Europe. In C. Costa, D. Buhalis and E. Panyik (eds) European Tourism Planning and Organisation Systems, Volume I: New Perspectives and Emerging Issues (pp. 64–74). Bristol: Channel View Publications. Timothy, D.J. and Teye, V.B. (2004) American children of the African diaspora: Journeys to the motherland. In T. Coles and D.J. Timothy (eds) Tourism, Diasporas and Space (pp. 111–123). London: Routledge. Timothy, D.J. and Tosun, C. (2003) Appropriate planning for tourism in destination communities: Participation, incremental growth and collaboration. In S. Singh, D.J. Timothy and R.K. Dowling (eds) Tourism in Destination Communities (pp. 181–204). Wallingford, UK: CABI. Timothy, D.J., Prideaux, B. and Kim, S.S. (2004) Tourism at borders of conflict and (de)militarized zones. In T.V. Singh (ed.) New Horizons in Tourism: Strange Experiences and Stranger Practices (pp. 83–94). Wallingford, UK: CABI. Timothy, D.J. and White, K. (1999) Community-based ecotourism development on the periphery of Belize. Current Issues in Tourism 2 (2–3), 226–242. Tinsley, B.E. and Fish, E.B. (1985) Evaluation of trail erosion in Guadalupe Mountains National Park, Texas. Landscape Planning 12, 29–47. Tölle, A. (2010) Urban identity policies in Berlin: From critical reconstruction to reconstructing the Wall. Cities 27 (5), 348–357. Torbidoni, E.I.F., Grau, H.R. and Camps, A. (2005) Trail preferences and visitor characteristics in Aigüestortes i Estany de Sant Maurici National Park, Spain. Mountain Research and Development 25 (1), 51–59.

292

Tour ism and Trail s

Tourism Review (2011) New trail in Israel: In the footsteps of Jesus. See www.tourismreview.com/israel- opened-a-new-trail-in-the-footsteps- of-jesus-news3052 (accessed 19 December 2011). Tosun, C. (2005) Stages in the emergence of a participatory tourism development approach in the developing world. Geoforum 36 (3), 333–352. Towner, J. (1985) The Grand Tour: A key phase in the history of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 12 (3), 297–333. Trójnara, P. (1997) Wielkopolski Park Narodowy jako potencjalny obszar turystyki osób niepelnosprawnych poruszajacych sie na wózkach inwalidzkich. Morena: Prace Wielkopolskiego Parku Narodowego 5, 111–124. Troped, P.J., Saunders, R.P. and Pate, R.R. (2005) Comparisons between rail-trail users and nonusers and men and women’s patterns of use in a suburban community. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 2 (2), 169–180. Troped, P.J., Saunders, R.P., Pate, R.R., Reininger, B., Ureda, J.R. and Thompson, S.J. (2001) Associations between self-reported and objective physical environmental factors and use of a community rail-trail. Preventive Medicine 32, 191–200. Turner, A. (2006) Introduction to Neogeography. New York: O’Reilly Turner, J.C. and Davies, W.P. (1995) Farm-based tourism and recreation in the United Kingdom. Agricultural Processes 70, 21–43. Turner, V. (1973) The center out there: pilgrim’s goal. History of Religions, 12(3): 191-230. Underwood, A. (1997) Onward, Mormon pilgrims. Newsweek, 28 April, p. 65. UNESCO (2012) The Slave Route. See www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/ dialogue/the-slave-route/ (accessed 3 March 2013). US Department of Transportation (2013) The National Scenic Byways Program. See http://byways.org/learn/program.html (accessed 22 July 2013). Usherwood, P. (1996) Romans and Barbarians: Hadrian’s Wall in modern times. In M. Robinson, N. Evans and P. Callaghan (eds) Tourism and Culture: Image, Identity and Marketing (pp. 279–288). Newcastle: University of Northumbria. US National Park Service (2009) The New Amsterdam Trail. New York City: New York Harbor Parks. US National Park Service (2013a) National Trails System. See www.nps.gov/nts/nts_trails. html (accessed 30 April 2013). US National Park Service (2013b) National Water Trails System. See www.nps.gov/ WaterTrails/Home (accessed 13 February 2013). Usón, C.L. (2002) Gaudi, de valor cultural a producte turistic. Estudis de Turisme de Catalunya 6 (10), 11–20. Vail, D. and Heldt, T. (2004) Governing snowmobilers in multiple-use landscapes: Swedish and Maine (USA) cases. Ecological Economics 48, 469–483. VanBlarcom, B. and Janmaat, J. (2013) Comparing the costs and health benefits of a proposed rail trail. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events 5 (2), 187–206. van Damme, L. and van Dijk, J. (1990) Recreatieve fietser in beeld: recreatief gedrag en routekeuze. Recreatie en Toerisme 2 (4), 100–103. van Gorp, B. and Béneker, T. (2007) Holland as other place and other time: Alterity in projected tourist images of the Netherlands. GeoJournal 68 (4), 293–305. van Winkle, C.M. and MacKay, K.J. (2008) Self-serving bias in visitors’ perceptions of the impacts of tourism. Journal of Leisure Research 40 (1), 69–89. Vance, J.M. (1991) Rails to trails. Missouri Conservationist 52 (4), 2–5. Vanhove, N. (2002) Tourism policy – Between competitiveness and sustainability: The case of Bruges. Tourism Review 57 (3), 34–40. Vaske, J., Donnelly, M. and Whittaker, D. (2000) Tourism, national parks and impact management. In R.W. Butler and S.W. Boyd (eds) Tourism and National Parks: Issues and Implications (pp. 203–222). Chichester: Wiley.

References

293

Verde Canyon Railroad (2013) Verde Canyon Railroad: It’s not the destination, it’s the journey. See http://verdecanyonrr.com/ (accessed 13 January 2013). Vesey, C. and Dimanche, F. (2003) From Storyville to Bourbon Street: Vice, nostalgia and tourism. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change 1 (1), 54–70. Villa, C.J. (2001) Cleaning up at the tracks: Superfund meets rails-to-trails. Harvard Environmental Law Review 25, 482–534. Wachowiak, H. (1994) Grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit im Tourismus: Eine Analyse Grenzüberschreitender Massnahmen Entland der Westlichen Staatsgrenze der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zwischen Ems-Dollart und Baden-Nordelsass-Südpfalz. Trier: Europäisches Tourismus Institut. Wagar, J.A. (1964) The carrying capacity of wildlands for recreation. Forest Science Monograph 7, 23. Wahlquist, W.L. (1994) Mormon trail. In S.K. Brown, D.Q. Cannon and R.H. Jackson (eds) Historical Atlas of Mormonism (pp. 86–96). New York: Simon & Schuster. Walker, P. (1996) Walking trails in the UK. Australian Parks & Recreation 32 (1), 27–30. Walkinghighlands (2014) Helping you to discover and explore the real Scotland. See www.walkhighlands.co.uk/ (accessed 3 January 2014). Wall, G. (1997) Tourism attractions: Points, lines, and areas. Annals of Tourism Research 24 (1), 249–243. Wall, G. and Wright, C. (1977) The Environmental Impact of Outdoor Recreation. Waterloo, ON: Department of Geography, University of Waterloo. Wallin, T.R. and Hardin, C.P. (1996) Estimating trail-related soil erosion in the humid tropics: Jatun Sacha, Ecuador, and La Selva, Costa Rica. Ambio 25 (8), 517–522. Wallis, M. (1992) Route 66: The Mother Road. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Wanalertsakul, S., Manoram, K. and Aneksuk, B. (2011) Tourism roads in Lower Mekong Basin economic circle (Thailand-Laos-Cambodia-Vietnam) – An analysis. South Asian Journal of Tourism and Heritage 4 (2), 27–37. Wandres, J. (2000) Rebuilding railroads restores communities and boosts economies. The Rotarian 176 (5), 28–33. Wang, G.J., Macera, C.A., Scudder-Soucie, B., Schmid, T., Pratt, M., Buchner, D. and Heath, G. (2004a) A cost-benefit analysis of physical activity using bike/pedestrian trails. Health Promotion Practice 6 (2), 174–179. Wang, G.J., Macera, C.A., Scudder-Soucie, B., Schmid, T., Pratt, M., Buchner, D. and Heath, G. (2004b) Cost analysis of the built environment: The case of bike and pedestrian trails in Lincoln, Nebraska. American Journal of Public Health 94 (4), 549–553. Wang, H., Yang, Z., Chen, L., Yang, J. and Li, R. (2010) Minority community participation in tourism: A case of Kanas Tuva villages in Xinjiang, China. Tourism Management 31 (6), 759–764. Wang, S. and Hji-Avgoustis, S. (2011) Evaluating costs and benefits of a tourism project: A case study of the Indianapolis Cultural Trail. Tourism Today 11, 172–181. Waterman, R.E., Misdorp, R. and Mol, A. (1998) Interactions between water and land in the Netherlands. Journal of Coastal Conservation 4 (2), 115–126. Watkins, S. (1984) The new opportunities for cycling. ILAM Journal 2 (9), 17–19. Watson, A.P. (1982) The design of self-guiding, interpretative, nature trails accessible to the disabled. Arboricultural Journal 6 (4), 287–293. Wearing, S. and Nelson, H. (2000) Pilot study to develop a methodology for monitoring walking tracks in the Blue Mountains national parks. Australian Parks and Leisure 2 (3), 38–40. Weaver, D.B. (1995) Alternative tourism in Montserrat. Tourism Management 16, 593–604. Webster, B. and Webster, M. (2003) Lewis and Clark by Air: A Pictorial Tour of the Historic Lewis and Clark Trail. Prior, OK: ViaPlanes.

294

Tour ism and Trail s

Wells, S. and White, A.T. (1995) Involving the community. In S. Gubbay (ed.) Marine Protected Areas: Principles and Techniques for Management (pp. 61–84). London: Chapman and Hall. Welsh, D. (1998) Rails-to-trails rip-off. Traffic World 256 (5), 56. Wessell, J.E. (1997) Recreation quality and usage: A comparative study of three west Michigan rail-trails. Small Town 28 (1), 4–11. Westerhausen, K. and Macbeth, J. (2003) Backpackers and empowered local communities: Natural allies in the struggle for sustainability and local control? Tourism Geographies 5 (1), 71–86. Westing, A.H. (2001) A Korean DMZ park for peace and nature: Towards a code of conduct. In C.H. Kim (ed.) The Korean DMZ: Reverting Beyond Division (pp. 157–191). Seoul: Sowha. Weston, R. and Mota, J.C. (2012) Low carbon tourism travel: Cycling, walking and trails. Tourism Planning & Development 9 (1), 1–3. Whinam, J., Cannell, E.J., Kirkpatrick, J.B. and Comfort, M. (1994) Studies on the potential impact of recreational horseriding on some alpine environments of the Central Plateau, Tasmania. Journal of Environmental Management 40, 103–117. Whinam, J. and Comfort, M. (1996) The impact of commercial horse riding on sub-alpine environments at Cradle Mountain, Tasmania, Australia. Journal of Environmental Management 47, 61–70. White, L. and Frew, E. (eds) (2013) Dark Tourism and Place Identity: Managing and Interpreting Dark Places. London: Routledge. Wiberg-Carlson, D. and Schroeder, H. (1992) Modeling and Mapping Urban Bicyclists’ Preferences for Trail Environments. St. Paul, MN: North Central Forest Experiment Station, USDA, Forest Service. Wie˛ckowski, M. (2010) Specific features of development of tourism within the areas neighbouring upon the Polish eastern border. Europa XXI 20, 101–115. Willard, P. and Beeton, S. (2012) Low impact experiences: Developing successful rail trail tourism. Tourism Planning & Development 9 (1), 5–13. Williams, D.R., Roggenbuck, J.W. and Bange, S. (1991) The effect of norm-encounter compatibility on crowding perceptions, experience and behavior in river recreation settings. Journal of Leisure Research 23 (2), 154–172. Willingham, W.F. (1994) Interpreting the Oregon Trail: Three new perspectives. The Public Historian 16 (1), 51–54. Wilson, J.P. and Seney, J.P. (1994) Erosional impact of hikers, horses, motorcycles and bicycles on mountain trails in Montana. Mountain Research and Development 14 (1), 77–88. Wine Institute (2013) World Wide Production by Country. San Francisco: Wine Institute. Wolfe, I.D., Hagenlob, G. and Croft, D.B. (2012) Visitor monitoring along roads and hiking trails: How to determine usage levels in tourist sites. Tourism Management 33 (1), 16–28. Wolfe, R. (1998) Promoted walks in Britain: The recreational route potential of paths, trails and open access. Occasional Paper – Leicester University 38, 150–160. Wong, P.P. (2004) Environmental impacts of tourism. In A.A. Lew, C.M. Hall and A.M. Williams (eds) A Companion to Tourism (pp. 450–461). Oxford: Blackwell. Woo, B.M. (1991) Restoration strategies on deteriorated ecosystems due to recreational use in nature parks in Korea. Journal of the Korean Forestry Society 80 (4), 369–378. Wood, D. and Lemery, L. (1994) Rail trails and heritage on a national wild and scenic river. Trends 31 (4), 12–14. World Tourism Organization (1996) WTO Silk Road Forum Xian, China, Final Report. Madrid: UNWTO. Woyke, P.P. (2004) Hopping frogs and trail walks: Connecting young children and nature. Young Children 59 (1), 82–85.

References

295

Wrede, V. and Mügge-Bartolović, V. (2012) GeoRoute Ruhr – A network of geotrails in the Ruhr Area National GeoPark, Germany. Geoheritage 4 (1–2), 109–114. Wright, C.W. (1995) Natural beauty acquired generously. Parks & Recreation 30 (8), 51–55. Wright, D.C. (1997) Private rights and public ways: Property disputes and rails-to-trails in Indiana. Indiana Law Review 30, 723–761. Yan, S., Zhang, C.M., Xu, Y.Q. and Kan, Y.P. (2000) Some concepts for developing the tourist resources in Yili Kazak Autonomous Prefecture, Xinjiang, China. Arid Land Geography 23 (1), 1–6. Yankholmes, A.K.B. and Boakye, K.A. (2010) ‘Awusai Atso’: Community attachment to and use of transatlantic slave trade resources in Danish-Osu, Ghana. Journal of Heritage Tourism 5 (1), 49–67. Yeoman, I. (2012) 2050 – Tomorrow’s Tourism. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Yiannakis, J.N. and Davies, A. (2012) Diversifying rural economies through literary tourism: A review of literary tourism in Western Australia. Journal of Heritage Tourism 7 (1), 33–44. Ynetnews (2008) Now tourists can follow ‘Jesus Trail’. eTurbo News, 9 September. Yoo, K.J. and Kwon, T.H. (2004) Visitors’ perceptions on trail use in Korean national parks: Case studies in Bukhansan and Chiaksan National Park. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 18 (4), 437–445. Young, J. (1998) Countryside needs for the visually-impaired. Countryside Recreation 6 (1), 4–6. Zeller, R.H. (2004) The state of conservation of three trails in Chapada Diamantina National Park (Parque Nacional da Chapada Diamantina – Bahia) and management needs. Natureza & Conservação 2 (1), 110–117. Zierer, C.M. (1952) Tourism and recreation in the west. Geographical Review 42 (3), 462–481. Zillinger, M. (2007) Tourist routes: A time-geographical approach on German car-tourists in Sweden. Tourism Geographies 9 (1), 64–83.

Index

Acadia National Park (USA) 199–202 access for all see right of way access points see trailheads accessibility 22, 44, 62, 67, 74, 84, 94, 107, 123, 141, 152, 154, 165, 190, 206–210, 215, 217–219, 229, 251, 254, 256 accommodations 22, 54, 89, 124, 145, 149–150, 154, 155–156, 158, 160, 226 adopt-a-highway 154, 184–185 adopt-a-trail 154 adventure tourism 42, 256 Africa 13, 17, 28, 32, 41, 71, 97 African-Americans 20 agriculture 11, 18, 48, 53, 54, 78, 92, 160, 189, 216, 250 agritourism see agriculture agri-trails see agriculture air quality 141, 183 Ale Trail (Canada) 14, 52, 102 Alexander MacKenzie Voyageur Route (Canada) 69 All-American Roads (USA) 83 amenities see facilities American Automobile Association 84 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (USA) 207–208 Andorra 47, 80 animals see wildlife Appalachian Trail (USA) 2–3, 11, 72–73, 76–77, 116, 185, 227 Appalachian Trail Conservancy 77, 116 archaeological sites 9, 10, 43, 44, 83, 96, 138, 152, 191, 199, 208, 216–217, 220, 225 architecture 11, 45, 160, 191–196 see also historic sites Armenia 80 Asia 7, 12, 17, 25, 32, 36, 41, 71, 72, 90, 97 attachment, trail 109, 115

attractions, tourist 8–10, 40, 41, 49, 51, 56, 61, 66, 70, 71, 84–85, 113, 120, 160, 194–195, 197–198, 207, 214–215, 221, 229, 232, 248, 257 Australia 2, 7, 11, 17, 19, 24, 36, 47, 54, 70, 72, 78, 91, 93, 97, 103, 114, 137, 152, 159, 174, 218–219, 220, 222–224, 226, 230 Austria 8, 13, 47, 98–99 authenticity 55, 137, 225 automobiles 12, 82–83, 91, 109, 111 see also drive tourism Azerbaijan 80 backcountry see wilderness backpackers 7, 135 Bacon and Ale Trail (Canada) 52 Bairrada Wine Route (Portugal) 51 barefoot trails 63 barriers see constraints bathrooms see toilets beaches 85, 207, 209 Beatles Trail (UK) 46–47 bed and breakfasts see accommodations beer trails 52–53 behavior 16, 129, 145, 149–150, 214, 219, 222, 229, 256 see also code of conduct Belgium 34, 38, 40, 78, 80, 99, 238 Belize 18, 70, 71, 77, 160 Bellarine Taste Trail (Canada) 54 Berg Lake Trail (Canada) 130–133 Berlin Wall 41 Berlin Wall Trail (Germany) 42 bicycle repair services 160 bicycle trails see cycling bicycles see cycling bikers see cycling biking see cycling Big Sur’s Coastal Highway (USA) 84

296

Inde x

birdwatching 98, 151, 220 blazes see markers blogs 58, 230 see also social media Blue Creek Nature Reserve (Belize) 71 Blue Creek Cave System (Belize) 70 blueways see water trails boardwalks 139, 140, 199, 208, 219–220 boats 64, 206, 242 borderland greenways 60, 80–82, 95 borders 12, 21, 39–42, 80, 82, 189, 231, 250 see also cross-border trails, borderland greenways branding 30, 50, 51, 54, 160, 230–232 braiding, trail 128 Brazil 2 Brewery Trail (Germany) 53 bridges 76, 93 bridleways 3, 4, 16, 61, 107, 108, 116, 145, 151, 160, 249 see also equestrians brochures 45, 77, 192, 194, 226 brownfields 141 see also gentrification Bruce Trail (Canada) 62, 160, 172 Buddhism 2, 33, 101 buffer zone 198, 217 built environment 70 see also architecture, cities, historic sites Bukit Timah Trail (Singapore) 46 Bureau of Land Management (USA) 28–29, 83, 166, 189 Cabot Trail (Canada) 21 cafes see restaurants Caledon Trailway/Trans Canada Trail (Canada) 172 California National Historic Trail (USA) 11 Cambodia 7 Camino de Santiago 13, 21, 22, 33–36, 58–59, 101–102, 141, 165, 231, 251 camping 64, 73, 98, 176, 223, 227 campgrounds/campsites 9, 11, 57, 64, 138, 147–148, 155, 160, 198, 216, 219, 228, 249 Canada 14, 36, 47, 49, 51, 52, 54, 62, 66, 68–69, 90, 102, 130–133, 160, 166–172, 174, 217, 220, 223, 239–242 Canadian Heritage Rivers System 167–172, 239–242 canals 6, 21, 38–40, 47, 68, 143, 250 canal towpaths 38–40, 99, 105, 186 canoeing 67–68, 110, 160, 205, 206, 233–234, 242 see also water trails

297

canopy walks see forest canopy walks Cape to Cairo Corridor 13 capacity controls see carrying capacity Cape Split Trail (Canada) 223 capital cities 7 see also cities capitalism 82 car parks see parking carbon footprint see environmental stewardship Caribbean 32, 71, 78 carrying capacity 14, 138, 145, 172, 216, 228, 235, 238–242, 254–255 cars see automobiles Cascade Loop (USA) 84 casinos 249 castles 89 Catherine Cookson Trail (UK) 46 Causeway Coastal Route (UK) 85–90, 175, 198 caves 70, 135 cemeteries 9, 10, 46 Charlevoix Flavor Trail (Canada) 54 children 48, 62, 103, 111, 122, 205–206, 227 Chile 49 Chilkoot Trail (Canada/USA) 29 China 12, 25, 42, 255 Chinatown Trail (Singapore) 46 Christianity 2, 8, 13, 33–36, 51, 54, 101, 134 churches 9, 10, 33, 47, 55, 85, 194 cities 6, 7, 10, 13, 18, 20, 35, 44–46, 53, 61, 63, 64, 70, 76, 77, 78, 80, 84, 92–93, 94, 103, 108–109, 111, 117, 122–123, 125, 141, 143, 151–152, 153, 161, 186, 189, 191–196, 198, 203, 211–212, 236, 238, 250, 251, 255 historic 9, 152, 229, 238 Civic District Trail (Singapore) 46 Civil War Discovery Trail (USA) 224–225 Clerkenwell Historic Trail (UK) 19–20 climate change 249 Coast to Coast Cycle Route (C2C) (UK) 78–79, 116, 154–155, 183 coastal routes 60, 107–108 coastlines 69, 70, 107, 149 code of conduct 149–150, 219, 222, 224, 225, 227, 256 collaboration 14, 28, 50, 51–52, 54, 67, 79, 166, 169, 172, 180, 183, 188–190, 243, 245 collecting places 230 see also peak bagging

298

Tour ism and Trail s

Colliery Route (Canada) 47 colonialism 19, 28, 31 Common Rights of Way Act (UK) 107 communism 82 community pride see sense of place community-based tourism 72, 85, 90, 180, 183–184, 186–188, 253, 256 see also empowerment of communities, sustainability commuting see transportation conflict 142–145, 186, 190, 206, 216, 253 congestion 9, 78, 110, 122, 141–142, 143, 145–146, 152, 162, 183, 197, 199, 204, 216, 238, 252, 253 conservation 2, 18, 36, 45, 61, 63, 67, 68, 72, 73, 82, 140–141, 152, 166, 177, 179, 184, 189, 191, 218–219, 226, 227, 229, 238–239, 244, 246, 252 constraints 97, 121–124, 145, 207–210, 216, 252 construction materials 200–206, 210 Continental Divide Trail (USA) 76 cooperation see collaboration Costa Rica 61, 71, 121 Council of Europe 18, 19, 35, 47, 165–166 counting devices 97 see also data collection countryside see rural regions Countryside and Rights of Way Act (UK) 5, 175–176 Countryside Commission (UK) 5, 41 Craters of the Moon National Monument (USA) 70 crime 142–143, 162 Cromwell Trail (UK) 46 cross-border cooperation see collaboration cross-border trails 12, 29, 54, 79, 189, 203 see also borders cross-country skiing see skiing crowdedness see congestion cuisine see heritage cuisines, food trails culinary heritage 11 see also food trails, wine routes Cultural Avenue Project (Hungary) 211–212 cultural heritage 4, 83, 93, 122, 127, 137–139, 181, 205, 212, 224, 252, 253, 257 see also heritage trails, historic sites cultural landscapes 20, 36, 40, 41, 42, 54, 60, 65, 78, 119, 138, 141, 175, 189, 244, 254 cultural routes/trails see heritage trails

cultural values 61 cycling 5, 11, 17, 22, 34, 40, 53, 60, 61, 63, 78–81, 92, 93, 94, 95, 98–99, 101, 103, 109, 110, 111, 116, 118, 122, 123–124, 128–129, 146, 149, 151, 155–157, 173, 176–177, 181, 190, 192, 197, 198–200, 205–206, 208, 217, 251, 255, 256 Czech Republic 12, 13, 47, 99 D&L Trail (USA) 157–159 dark heritage 31–32, 229 data collection 96–97, 221, 226–228 see also intercept surveys day trips 66, 77, 82, 206 see also recreation deforestation 72 demand 96–125 see also market characteristics demarketing 230 Demilitarized Zone (Korean Peninsula) 82 see also borderland greenways demographics see market characteristics Denmark 78, 79, 98–99, 155, 176, 209 deserts 61, 66, 189 design, trail 116, 164, 181, 196–212, 219, 254 see also planning designation, trail 165–179 deterioration see wear and tear Diana Princess of Wales Memorial Walk (UK) 46 digital tracking technology 221, 229 dining locations see restaurants disabilities, people with 44, 94, 116, 122–123, 180, 198, 207–210, 221, 226, 252 Disabilities Discrimination Act (UK) 207 discovery walks 77 dissonance see conflict distance decay concept 109 drive tourism 17, 47, 70, 82–90, 95, 114, 155, 157, 192 driving trails see drive tourism economic development 6, 19, 45, 55, 177, 233 economic impacts 19, 50, 84, 111, 151, 153–163, 196, 204, 253 ecosystems 62, 126, 189, 197, 220, 238 ecotourism 55, 66, 97, 121, 160 ecotrails 11, 60, 62, 66, 121, 122, 146, 151, 160, 177, 180–181, 205 see also nature trails

Inde x

education, role of trails 55, 62, 68, 70, 72, 110, 112, 120, 140–141, 151, 154, 176, 204, 222–224, 252, 254 elderly population see market characteristics eminent domain 91, 172–173 employment generation 50–51, 72, 152, 153, 160, 161, 187 empowerment of communities 19, 85, 151, 169, 187, 256 England 2, 6, 12, 34, 41, 46, 61, 78, 86, 93–94, 100, 107–108, 111, 116, 154–155, 175, 183, 225, 232 enjoyment 97, 112–121, 252 see also experience, satisfaction entertainment 112–113 entrepreneurialism 51, 160, 187 entry points see trailheads environmental aesthetics 206, 209 environmental awareness see environmental education environmental education 98, 104 see also education, environmental stewardship environmental impacts 9, 67, 71, 84, 126, 127–141, 198–199, 201, 206, 209, 214–216, 220, 223, 224, 227, 229, 252, 254, 256 environmental stewardship 112, 161, 222 environmental trails see ecotrails, nature trails equestrian trails see equestrians equestrians 4, 5, 11, 22, 34, 47, 51, 65, 78, 93, 94, 101, 111, 116–117, 122, 128–129, 134–135, 144, 146, 150–151, 152, 155, 176–177, 181, 190, 198, 208, 217–219, 223–224, 230 see also bridleways equipment rentals 153, 155, 158–159, 160, 234 Erie Canal (USA) 39 erosion 67, 126–129, 135, 150, 181, 198, 207, 214, 252 see also environmental impacts ethics see code of conduct ethnicity 103, 104, 251 etiquette see code of conduct Europe 2, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 22, 32, 36, 38, 41, 47, 63, 66, 68, 72, 78–80, 90, 97, 98, 108, 138, 155, 175–176, 251 European Cultural Routes 18, 20, 35, 165–167, 189

299

European Cycle Route Network see EuroVelo European Cyclists’ Federation 98–99, 157 European Institute of Cultural Routes 166 European Union see Europe EuroVelo 79–80 events see festivals exercise 13, 117–118, 125, 152, 157, 181, 191, 206, 210 see also health expenditures 153, 155–157, 204 experience 58, 62, 65–66, 96, 97, 112–121, 125, 149–150, 182, 198, 205, 214, 224, 227, 229, 242, 251–252, 254 past 114–116 explorer trails 1, 18, 28–32 Facebook see social media facilities 74, 96, 114, 165, 200, 205–206, 254 factories 47, 64, 152 Fairy Tale Route (Germany) 47 families 10, 118, 120, 126, 153, 181, 185 farming see agriculture fauna see wildlife fees 96–97, 124, 154, 216–217, 221, 232–234, 248 festivals 49, 50, 51, 53, 54, 120, 192 Fife Coastal Path (Scotland) 244 film-induced tourism 18, 45, 46–47, 250 Finland 39, 41–42, 98, 176 Fire and Ice Trail (USA) 71 fishing 98 fitness trails 63, 97 see also health flooding 128–129, 135, 198 flora see vegetation fluvial systems see rivers food services see restaurants food trails/routes 18, 48–52, 53–54, 121, 160–161, 191, 231 footpaths 2, 4, 5, 11, 14, 21, 40, 61, 62, 72, 94, 107–108, 114, 116, 117, 121, 128–129, 134, 138, 143, 145, 149, 151, 160, 161, 175, 185, 188, 190, 197–198, 205, 208–210, 216, 219–220, 229, 248 foraging 176 forests 67, 70, 73, 126, 175 see also rainforests forest canopy walks 60, 71–72, 94, 220, 224, 251 forest fires 117 Fort Canning Trail (Singapore) 46 France 13, 34, 40–41, 43, 47, 49, 53, 55, 203

300

Tour ism and Trail s

Frankincense Route (Middle East) 25, 28 freedom to roam 176, 239 see also right of way Freedom Trail (USA) 46, 125, 193, 204 funding trails 154, 180, 183–185, 221, 232–234, 245, 253, 254 garbage see litter Garden Route (South Africa) 86 Garden of Gethsemane 134 gardens 10, 13, 43, 77, 134, 152, 232, 250 gastronomy see food trails gateways see trailheads Gaudi Trail (Spain) 11, 45 gender 100, 103, 104, 117, 233 see also market characteristics gentrification 35, 140–141, 163, 177, 252 geocaching 230 see also technology geographic information systems (GIS) 228 geology trails 70–71, 191, 251 Georgia, Republic of 80 geotrails see geology trails German Greenbelt 80–82 see also borderland greenways Germany 8, 12, 13, 34, 41, 45, 47, 49–50, 53, 78, 80, 82, 99, 155, 217 Ghana 72 Giant’s Causeway 86–90, 219 global positioning systems (GPS) 58, 205, 225, 229 see also technology golf 80, 89–90 Google Earth 42, 230 see also technology, internet Gospel Trail (Israel) 55–57 government 86, 92, 164, 165, 166, 173, 177–179, 183, 189, 242, 245, 253 gradient see slope Grand Canyon National Park (USA) 71, 137, 221 Grand Canyon Railway (USA) 37–38 Grand Tour 2, 7, 43 Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (Australia) 137 Great Glen Way (Scotland) 244 Great Pine Ridge Equestrian Trail (Canada) 172 Great Walks (New Zealand) 72–76, 145–149, 216 Great Wall of China 10, 42, 256 Greece 220 green space see greenways greenbelts see greenways

greenways 3, 4, 6, 13, 16, 46, 63, 67, 77, 80, 82, 84, 103, 104, 110, 111, 112, 116, 141, 143, 151, 153, 161, 186, 249 Gringo trails 7 guided tours 11, 86, 211, 217 guides 18, 99, 116, 149, 160, 182, 190, 224, 225, 226, 229 Hadrian’s Wall 41, 256 Hadrian’s Wall Path National Trail (UK) 12, 41, 61, 225 Harvest Trail (Australia) 7 hardening 64, 123, 165, 198–202, 208, 214, 219–221 Haute Randonnée Pyrénéenne (France/Spain) 40–41, 203 hazards see safety health 8, 63, 79, 96, 97, 98, 100, 104, 107, 110, 117–118, 151–152, 161, 162, 206, 220–221, 252, 253, 255, 256 heritage, personal see roots heritage centers see visitor centers heritage cuisines 54 see also food trails Heritage Lottery Fund (UK) 41, 154 heritage sites see historic sites heritage trails 13, 17–59, 62, 77, 96, 116, 121, 122–123, 152, 160, 163, 165, 188, 191–196, 216, 231, 242, 250 organic cultural routes 24–42, 165, 247, 250 purposes of 18–20 highways 1, 4, 9, 21, 22, 29, 32, 82–83, 90, 91, 102, 111, 122, 137, 173, 175, 181, 183, 197, 202 Hinduism 32, 101 hikers see hiking hiking 11, 14, 29, 42, 51, 57, 62, 63, 65, 74, 77, 92, 93, 96, 97–98, 104, 110, 111, 116–117, 119, 120, 123–124, 128, 138, 145–146, 149–150, 155, 160, 173, 175, 176, 181, 185, 197–200, 204–208, 217, 221 see also walking Hippy trails 7 historic buildings see historic sites historic sites 6, 9, 19, 28, 43, 44, 48, 69, 77, 92, 110, 123–124, 138, 141, 149, 152, 194, 207, 225, 229, 238 see also architecture historic villages 11 Hong Kong 19 horseback riding see equestrians horses see equestrians

Inde x

301

hotels see accommodations human resources 153 Humber Valley Heritage Trail (Canada) 172 Hummus Trail (India) 7 Hungary 47, 49, 79, 99, 211–212 hunting 1, 20, 24, 78, 165

Kampong Glam Trail (Singapore) 46 Katy Trail (USA) 93, 103, 117–118, 142–144 kayaking 67, 99, 206, 234 see also water trails Korea 25, 82, 228 Kosovo 80 Kyrgyzstan 12

Ice and Fire Trail (New Zealand) 71 Iceland 70, 80, 176 identity 20, 32, 33, 50, 152, 162, 165, 169, 192 image 19, 42, 160 Inca Trail (Peru) 17, 138, 231, 256 index of vegetation impact 134 see also environmental impacts India 7, 32–33 indigenous people 20, 24, 32, 72, 78, 160, 168, 187, 189, 236, 254 industrial heritage 66, 94, 152, 161, 191, 250 industrial trails 18, 47–48, 53 infrastructure 44, 82, 85, 89, 208 see also facilities intercept surveys 97, 156 see also data collection Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (USA) 83 internet 19, 97, 161, 205 interpersonal constraints see constraints interpretation 18, 43, 45, 62, 70, 85, 89, 140, 204, 224–227, 252, 254 multilingual 42, 226 interpretive centers 12, 153, 226 see also interpretation interpretive media 18, 61, 77, 93, 112, 137, 153, 181, 198, 203–205, 208, 219, 224–227, 256 interpretive trails 43, 45, 62, 111, 122, 197 intervening opportunity 88 intrapersonal constraints see constraints Iran 25 Ireland 54, 89 Iron Road (Central Europe) 47 Islam 33, 101 Israel 7, 51, 55–56 Isle of Man 38, 109 Italy 7, 13, 34, 43, 55

La Ruta Maya (Mexico/Central America) 12–13 Lake District National Park (UK) 78 Lake Ontario Waterfront Trail (Canada) 69, 172 lakes 38, 64, 68–69, 73, 126, 131, 161, 176 land acquisition 153, 183, 185–186 Land Reform (Scotland) Act 176 land-use rights see property rights landowners 29, 89, 91–93, 142–145, 172–173, 186, 189, 190, 197, 243, 244 concerns of over rail-trails 142–145, 175–176 landscapes see cultural landscapes, natural landscapes Laos 7 Latin America 12, 17, 49, 71, 97 Latvia 99 Lawrence Gateway and Merrimack Riverwalk (USA) 141 Leave no Trace 222–224 legislation 16, 25, 92, 123, 164, 166–177, 207, 208, 213, 217, 246 leisure see recreation Liechtenstein 80 limits of acceptable change see carrying capacity literary trails 18, 46–47, 161, 250 litter 150, 224 Little India Heritage Trail (Singapore) 46 Lithuania 68 location 107–110, 117, 164, 197–198, 202, 214, 254 lodging see accommodations, campgrounds long-distance trails 13, 58, 60, 70, 72–77, 92, 96, 103, 111, 116, 119, 122, 175–176, 185, 189, 202, 226, 230, 243–245, 250, 253 see also scale looting see vandalism loyalty 114–116 Luxembourg 166

Japan 17, 25, 45, 228, 236 Jesus Trail (Israel) 55–57 jogging see running Journal of Heritage Tourism 247

Maine Maritime Heritage Trail (USA) 44 maintenance 153, 185, 194–195, 198, 207

302

Tour ism and Trail s

Malaysia 7, 105 Malt Whiskey Trail (Scotland) 53, 113 managing trails/routes 58, 68, 181, 194–196, 199, 200–202, 204, 254–255 maps 5, 18, 42, 45, 58, 77, 116, 181–182, 202, 225, 229 maritime routes/trails 18, 44, 232 see also water trails markers, trail 40, 89, 99, 116, 181, 192, 194, 202–205, 217 see also signs market characteristics 16, 84, 95, 97–107, 125, 157, 181, 205–206, 209–210, 221, 233, 251, 255 marketing 2, 14, 43, 45, 54, 86, 111, 114, 160, 180–181, 189, 191, 221–222, 229–230 material culture see cultural heritage medium-distance trails 78, 96, 189 see also scale men see gender message boards 204, 221 see also signs Mexico 12, 28, 53, 135 Michigan Heritage Water Trail Program (USA) 67–68 microclimates 71 Middle East 25, 32 migration routes 1, 18, 20, 21–22, 24, 28–32, 250, 251 mindfulness 114 mines/mining 12, 37, 47, 78, 141 Mining Education Trail (Germany/Czech Republic) 12 Mississippi River 69 mixed routes (cultural and natural) 77–94 mobile phones 42, 58, 205 see also technology mobility 1, 91 Modernist Walking Tour 11 Moldova 80 monitoring 16, 180, 185, 227–229, 254, 256 Monsal Trail (UK) 93–94 Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trail (USA) 28–29, 33, 227 motivations 117–121, 251 motorcycles 4, 129 see also vehicles, motorized motorways see highways Mount Fitzwilliam Trail (Canada) 131–133 mountain bikes 75, 116, 117, 144, 146, 147, 149–150, 155, 217 mountains 70, 72–73, 115, 126, 175, 189, 208

multi-use trails 22, 117, 172, 208 museums 8, 10, 12, 19, 41, 43, 44, 47, 49, 51, 96, 122, 124, 160, 207–208, 217, 229, 238, 249, 250 music trails 46–47 National Connecting and Side Trails (USA) 166 National Cycle Network (UK) 78, 157 National Forest Service (USA) 83, 128, 166, 189, 217, 235 National Geographic Society 84 National Geologic Trail (USA) 166 National Hiking Trail Council (South Africa) 177 national parks 9, 11, 14, 48, 61, 70, 78, 82, 92, 97, 138, 154, 168, 186, 208–209, 218–219, 242, 244 National Park Service (USA) 28–29, 31, 77, 151, 166, 189, 242 National Parks and Recreation Act (USA) 28 National Heritage Corridor (USA) 39 National Historic Sites (Canada) 168 National Historic Trails (USA) 11, 26–27, 28–29, 166 National Recreation and Park Association (USA) 4 National Recreation Trails (USA) 11 National Register of Historic Places (USA) 231 National Scenic Byways (USA) 30, 83–84, 174–175, 231 National Scenic Trails (USA) 11, 77 National Trails System (UK) 12, 108, 111 National Trails System (USA) 28, 166 National Trails System Act (USA) 18, 77, 91, 166, 173 National Water Trails System (USA) 68, 166 native people see indigenous people Natural England 107 natural landscapes 65, 66, 72, 76, 78, 93, 117, 140–141, 152, 175, 187, 189, 199, 217, 228–229, 244, 254 Nature of New Zealand Programme 76 nature preserves 6 nature trails 11, 15, 17–18, 41, 59, 60–77, 94, 103, 109, 122, 188, 211, 217, 242, 251 types 63–73, 95–96 see also ecotrails neogeography 230 see also social media

Inde x

Nepal 33, 134, 144–145, 150, 160 Netherlands 34, 38, 40, 68, 78–79, 80, 98, 111, 134, 155 networks 7, 14, 80, 84, 98, 160, 216 New Amsterdam Trail (USA) 11 New Zealand 17, 46, 47, 49, 70, 71, 72–76, 91, 97, 145, 174, 187, 191–196, 216, 236, 242 Niagara Falls 38, 51, 62, 69 Niagara Wine Route (Canada) 51 noise 146–149, 253 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) see non-profit organizations non-profit organizations 77, 80, 92–93, 154, 174, 189, 190, 197, 222 North America 17, 38, 64, 72, 78, 90–91, 111, 137, 173, 236, 251 North Sea Cycle Route (Europe) 78, 154–157 Northern Ireland 54, 85–90, 175, 177, 198, 219, 232 Northern Ireland Countryside Access and Activities Network 177 Norway 78, 139–140, 155, 176 nostalgia 29, 97, 113–114, 125, 152, 177, 250, 252, 256 not in my backyard (NIMBY) 162, 253 novelty 119 Oak Ridges Moraine Trail (Canada) 172 Ocean Drive scenic road (USA) 145 Oman 28 Ontario Craft Beer Route (Canada) 52 open space see greenways, parks, wilderness opportunity management 235–238 Oregon National Historic Trail (USA) 189, 230 Orient Express (Europe) 37 Otago Central Rail Trail (New Zealand) 93, 174 Otago Goldfields Heritage Trail (New Zealand) 47 outdoor experiences see recreation outdoor recreation see recreation outfitters see guides overcrowding see congestion ownership see landowners Pacific Crest Trail (USA) 76 paddleways see water trails Pakistan 25

303

parking 5, 66, 69, 79, 93, 111–112, 123, 145, 198, 207, 227 parks 4, 6, 13, 60, 64, 67, 77, 80, 110, 111, 124, 130–133, 139, 152, 162, 185, 197, 217, 232 see also national parks participation, visitor 96–97, 112–121 participatory development see community-based tourism partnerships see collaboration Path of Progress heritage trail (USA) 153 paths/pathways see footpaths peak bagging 230 see also collecting places Pebble Beach/Carmel Coastal Drive (USA) 86 Peranakan Trail (Singapore) 46 Peru 138, 231 Petrified Forest National Park (USA) 70 photographs 228–229 picnicking 118, 147, 161, 198, 205, 208 pilgrimage trails 2, 8, 13, 18, 22, 32–36, 51, 54–57, 58–59, 101–102, 121, 141, 250 pilgrims 1–2, 51, 101–102, 111, 115–116, 229, 251, 257 see also religious tourism planned trails/routes see purposive trails planning trails/routes 58, 79, 84, 86, 90, 153, 164, 179–196, 253–254 process/procedure 180–183, 239–240 point attractions 8, 86, 189, 211, 216 Point Pelee National Park (Canada) 220 Poland 47 POLAR model 239–242 policy 58, 71, 164, 165–180, 177, 212–213, 218–219, 253 popular culture 2 Portugal 13, 34, 49–50, 51–52 preservation see conservation promotion see marketing property rights 68, 164, 180, 185–187, 253 see also land acquisition, landowners property values 143–144, 145, 161–162, 253 protection see conservation Puerto Rico 231 Punta Gorda Trail (Belize) 18 purposive trails 14, 19, 23, 43–57, 154, 160, 165, 190, 197, 208, 247, 250 Pyrenean Iron Route (Andorra/France/ Spain) 47 Pyrenean Way see Haute Randonnée Pyrénéenne

304

Tour ism and Trail s

Qinghai-Tibet Railway (China) 37 quality of life 97, 110, 151, 177, 187, 253 Queensland Heritage Trails Network 176 railbanking 92, 173 rails-to-trails see rail-trails Rails-to-Trails Conservancy 93, 154, 158 rail-trails 4, 60, 64, 90–94, 95, 103, 105–107, 111, 114, 117–118, 140–141, 142–145, 152, 153, 155, 157–159, 161, 172–174, 208, 250 Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act (USA) 91–93, 173 Railtrails Australia 93 railways 6, 18, 21, 47, 64, 91–94, 123, 140, 143, 152, 161, 172–174, 249–250 historic 18, 22, 36–38, 111, 124, 185 rainforests 11, 61, 71–72, 77, 189 recreation 1, 4, 6, 61, 63, 66–68, 73–77, 78–80, 83, 90–94, 96–103, 107–116, 119–125, 126, 136–140, 141–145, 152–154, 156, 166–174, 176, 184–187, 197–212, 216–222, 227–231, 235, 238, 242–245, 247, 251–255 recreation opportunity spectrum 235–238, 242 re-enactments 33, 227 registration boxes 221 regulations see policies religion 8, 32–36, 54–57, 65, 100–101, 250 religious routes see pilgrimage trails religious tourism 100–102 see also pilgrimage, pilgrimage trails renegade routes 128 see also braiding, widening rentals see equipment rentals resident perceptions 142–145 resort communities 85, 89, 94, 249 rest areas 206 restaurants 49, 53, 54, 89, 94, 149–150, 154, 159–160, 238 restrooms see toilets Rideau Canal (Canada) 38–39 Ridgeway National Trail (UK) 154, 232 right of way/access 5, 107, 173–174, 175–176, 186, 190, 198, 206 risks see safety Riverfront Heritage Trail (USA) 141 rivers 6, 9, 32, 64, 71, 73, 76, 126, 166–172, 236, 239 Rob Roy Way (Scotland) 244 Robert Burns Trail (UK) 46

rollerblading see skating Romania 47 roots, personal 8, 10, 113, 250, 256 Route 66 29–31, 114, 121, 230 Route of the Bounty (South Pacific) 44 Route of the Clockmakers in Franche-Comté (France) 47 rubbish see litter running 98, 108, 116, 118, 122, 198 see also hiking, walking runoff see flooding runoff coefficients 129 rural regions 5–6, 10, 13, 14, 24, 36, 53, 76, 78, 85–90, 92, 107–108, 110, 117, 120, 143, 145, 150, 152, 161, 162, 176, 186, 198, 251, 255, 256 Russia 39, 42, 255 RVs 102–104, 145 safewalks 111 safety 71, 73, 78, 79, 91, 111, 122–123, 147, 150, 151–152, 202–205, 220–221, 225, 235 Saimaa Canal (Finland) 39–40 Santa Fe National Historic Trail (USA) 189, 217 satisfaction 97, 107, 112–121, 125, 145, 216, 227–228, 239, 252 Saudi Arabia 33 scale 3, 4, 5–6, 8–13, 16, 29, 43–44, 49, 58, 70, 78, 96, 203, 243, 245, 249, 253–254, 256 skateboarding 98, 116 skating 109, 111, 116, 118, 122, 124, 160, 205 scenic byways 2, 4, 6, 9, 15, 24, 60, 82–90, 95, 101, 102, 104, 117, 118–119, 124, 137, 139, 145, 153, 154, 157, 160, 174–175, 197, 206, 226, 249, 251 scenic corridors see scenic byways scenic roads see scenic byways scenic routes see scenic byways Scotland 2, 6, 10, 49, 53, 113, 119–120, 155, 176, 243–245 Scottish Natural Heritage 244 seashore 86, 239 see also beaches seasonality 66, 216, 235 security see safety self-guided walks/trails 77, 181, 194, 210, 211 sense of place 18, 49, 63, 113, 151–152, 162, 187, 192, 253

Inde x

services see facilities settings, trail/route 13–14, 17, 249 see also location settler trails/routes 28–32 shopping 49, 51, 156, 160, 207, 238 shops see shopping signs 61, 77, 85, 93, 99, 116, 121, 165, 195, 202–205, 207–208, 219, 226, 254 see also markers, message boards Silk Road (Central Asia) 12–13, 17, 21, 25 Singapore 46 skiers see skiing skiing 66–67, 92, 99, 111, 129, 147, 149, 160, 176, 199 ski trails 60, 66–67, 251 see also winter trails skywalks see forest canopy walks Slave Route (Africa/Europe/North America) 17, 31–32, 225 slavery 28, 32 Slickrock Bike Trail (USA) 154 slope 129, 181, 197–198, 206, 208, 214, 254 Slovakia 47, 99 Slovenia 47, 99 slow food 54 slow travel 256 smart phones see mobile phones snowboarding 149 snowmobiling 60, 66–67, 147, 149, 155 snowshoeing 2, 111, 160 social capital 14, 177 social impacts 79, 84, 141–153, 187, 215–216, 229, 253, 256 social media 58, 230 see also blogs socialization 63, 104, 118, 123, 153, 177, 227, 252 soil compaction 67, 126, 127–133, 135, 199, 228, 252 see also environmental impacts soil composition 129 soil displacement 128–129, 228 soil penetration resistance 131 South Africa 49, 50, 86, 177 Southern Heritage Drive (Australia) 11 South Pacific Whaling Route (South Pacific) 44 Southern Upland Way (Scotland) 244 souvenir hunting 134 see also environmental impacts souvenirs 86, 134, 226 Spain 11, 13, 33–36, 40–41, 45, 47, 49, 101–102, 141, 203, 251 Speyside Way (Scotland) 244

305

spirituality 2, 65, 100, 115–116, 121, 205 sports 99–100, 115, 125, 257 St Patrick’s Trail (UK) 54, 56 stakeholders 58, 139–140, 190, 235, 242, 243–245, 248, 256 see also community-based tourism, collaboration, government structural constraints see constraints structure, of trails see design substitution, trail 211–212 Sun Yat-sen Heritage Trail (Hong Kong) 19 supranationalism 24, 165, 253 surfaces, trail 93, 116, 197, 198–199, 208, 210, 219–220 see also planning suspended walkways see forest canopy walks sustainable tourism see community-based tourism, sustainability sustainability 62, 84, 112, 113, 141, 165, 169, 181, 184, 186–188, 213 Sweden 78, 79, 98–99, 155, 176 Switzerland 13, 34, 55, 78 Taiwan 134 tangible heritage see cultural heritage Taste of the Tropics Food Trail (Australia) 11, 54 taste trails see food trails technology 58, 97, 225–226, 229–230, 256 Tequila Trail (Mexico) 53 terrain 123 see also slope Thailand 7, 152 thanatourism see dark heritage themes/theming 58, 85, 95, 164, 165, 180, 187, 190–196, 206 Thornbury Millennium Trail (UK) 178 Thorsborne Trail (Australia) 159 Titanic Trail (UK) 232 toilets 76, 93, 117, 181, 198, 207–208, 210 towns see cities tour circuits 3, 7–8, 11, 16, 212, 249 tourism opportunity spectrum 236–238 tours 57 tracking technology see digital tracking tracks see footpaths trade routes 21, 24–28 traffic see congestion tramping see hiking, walking Trail of Tears National Historic Trail (USA) 32, 225, 230 trail use, reasons for 97–102 trails, definitions of 3–8

306

Tour ism and Trail s

Trails for Health Program (USA) 63, 110, 152 trailheads 66, 72, 96, 154, 190, 198, 204, 206, 208, 221, 223, 248 train stations 64, 92, 152, 197 trains 12, 53 transportation, function of trails 4, 6, 13, 22, 36, 40, 61, 63, 64, 79, 90, 92–93, 94, 97, 98–99, 104, 108, 110, 111, 121, 125, 156, 174, 197 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (USA) 83, 183 Trans-Siberian Railway (Russia) 37 treetop walks see forest canopy walks trekking 134, 145, 150, 160 see also hiking, walking Turkmenistan 12 underwater trails see water trails UNESCO 10, 12, 25, 35, 39, 41, 62, 130, 231 United Kingdom 4, 5, 14, 78, 91, 97, 99, 174, 175, 177–179, 207, 209 see also England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales United States of America 4, 9, 11–12, 18, 20, 28, 29–31, 32, 36, 39, 44, 46, 49, 62, 65, 67–69, 70, 71, 76–77, 78, 83–84, 90–93, 97, 98, 100, 104–107, 117–118, 136–137, 141–142, 152, 153, 157–159, 165, 166, 172–175, 183, 185, 187, 189, 199–202, 207–209, 217, 232–234, 242 urban areas see cities urban renewal see gentrification urban trails see cities Uruguay 49 uses of trails see trail use utility easements 140–141, 252 Uzbekistan 12, 25 Valley of the Giants Tree Top Walk (Australia) 224 vandalism 134, 135, 138, 143–144, 149, 162, 253 vegetation 61, 71, 82, 92, 121, 126, 128–129, 131–133, 134–136, 139, 141, 175, 181, 191, 197–198, 216, 225, 239 damage to 67, 134–135, 149, 150, 199, 228, 252 invasive species 135–136

ruderal species 135 see also environmental impacts vehicles, motorized 4, 20, 22, 114, 150, 217 vehicles, off-road 4, 61, 144, 177 Verde Canyon Railway (USA) 37 video games 97 Vietnam 7 villages see rural areas vineyards see wineries, wine routes visiting friends and relatives (VFR) tourism 84, 85 visitor centers 61, 76, 85, 86–88, 208, 210, 219, 248–249 visitor-employed photography 228 see also data collection visitor management 16, 215–234 frameworks 235–245, 254–255 volunteered geographic information see social media volunteers 36, 154, 180, 184–185, 190, 209, 253 Wales 6, 111, 175 walking 3, 13, 14, 17, 22, 24, 32, 40, 45, 48, 63, 70, 74, 94, 101, 107, 109, 111, 118, 120, 121, 122, 125, 129, 146, 150, 155, 172–176, 194–196, 197, 205, 210, 217–218, 239, 244, 250, 255, 256 pets 149 see also hiking Walpole-Nornalup National Park (Australia) 220 warnings see safety water trails 4, 60, 64, 67–69, 94, 99, 137, 138, 160, 172, 181, 190, 205, 206, 208, 216, 232–234, 236, 251 types of 67 Way of St James see Camino de Santiago wear and tear 129, 138, 145, 149, 198–199 see also erosion, soil compaction webcams 229 websites see internet Welland Canal (Canada) 38–39 wellbeing see health wellness see health West Highland Way (UK) 119–120, 244 wetlands 69, 199 wheelchairs 78, 94, 116, 207–208 see also disabilities whiskey trails 52–53, 160 white-water rafting see kayaking

Inde x

widening, trail 128–129, 134, 150, 200, 208, 228 see also braiding wilderness 4, 9, 10, 16, 60, 61, 63, 65–66, 73–74, 78, 94, 104, 108, 117, 122, 123, 127, 133, 144, 146, 150, 153, 185, 206, 216, 228, 236, 239, 242, 249, 251, 253, 256 wildlife 6, 69, 82, 92, 93, 97, 118, 121, 126, 136–137, 141, 181, 190, 191, 197, 203, 224, 225, 235 behavioral changes 136–137, 252 endangered species 181 willingness to pay 154, 162, 232–234 see also fees wine routes/trails 18, 19, 48–52, 115, 120, 121, 160–161, 191, 206, 231

307

wineries 19, 49–50, 54, 160–161, 207 winter trails 99, 129, 155 see also skiing trails, snowmobiling, snowshoeing women see gender World Biosphere Reserve 62 World Heritage Convention 20 World Heritage Sites 10, 12, 35, 39, 41, 42, 53, 70, 86, 130–131, 212, 217, 219, 231 see also UNESCO World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) 24–25 World War Two 39, 46, 90, 247 Yemen 25 youth hostels see accommodations YouTube see social media