unofficial trail maintenance etiquette?

[arlohike]

I went up the Primrose Path last weekend and it was in pretty good shape, except for a small tree that had fallen directly along the trail on a steep section, requiring a clumsy scramble up through the branches. Once I got above it, I was able to drag it partially off the trail. But if I'd had a simple pruning tool, I could have removed a couple branches and cleared the path much better with a few minutes of effort.

Would that be considered a public service, or some kind of nature vandalism? Is the answer different for officially maintained trails versus volunteer or lost trails?

Finally, does anyone routinely carry simple tools for this purpose?

[retired jerry]

I often carry a small folding saw (Corona, 6 inches, 5.5 ounces). Any branch that gets within 3 feet of the center of the trail. Cut off 6 feet from the center of the trail, or flush with the trunk it comes from or flush with ground.

Occasionally some lopers.

Usually, the authorities are appreciative. Maybe Washington State parks not so much.

Probably, officially, they say not to? They don't want the liability. Sometimes people abuse things.

They don't want you to do major trail re-construction. Or at least they've asked people not to post here about it.

Metolius River - before:

after:

That trail is pretty good from Bridge 99/Lower Crossing 13 miles down river to where it ends at the road.

[drm]

For general trail clearance, most land managers don't mind. Anything that could conceivably called trail construction would be different.

If cutting something, be absolutely sure that it is fully cleared from the trail. A branch that crosses the trail is a nuisance. A branch with a pointed end that sticks part way into the trail because somebody didn't trim it far enough back can cause injury. I was poked by such a branch hanging down once from above and it drew some serious blood. It obviously had been cut recently, leaving a sharp point at just below 6' above ground level - very nearly the height of my eye, which it missed by 2 inches. The whole branch would have been easier to see and would have given me a bruise if I hadn't, instead of a bleeding wound.

[retired jerry]

and, if you don't cut it off at least 3 feet from the center of the trail, someone else will have to come after you and cut it back properly

if you cut it back properly, then it will save our limited trail maintenance dollars for bigger things

[K.Wagner]

I agree with what has been said here. I have been caught by well meant but poorly thought out branch ends my self. Fortunately nothing serious, but came close.

In Washington, the DNR (ie: the state's land manager) is pretty adamant that there is not to be any unauthorized "trail improvement" which includes trimming back branches or moving a rock off the trail. Doesn't stop me though, guess they'll have to be there to catch me.

[Aimless]

if you don't cut it off at least 3 feet from the center of the trail, someone else will have to come after you and cut it back properly

Officially, this is true, although "after you" may stretch out to quite a bit after, depending on how often the trail is scheduled for maintenance. But even if you do a minimal job of clearing the path it will allow people who come after you to stay on the trail's main tread and not create a 'use' trail around the obstacle. That's worth quite a bit in my opinion.

[Crusak]

I've always carried a folding saw in my pack for such situations. Currently I'm carrying the Bahco Laplander saw and it does a decent job on small stuff (it's got an 8" or 9" blade).

Good topic and plenty of good responses. I suppose if you're going to cut back limbs or trees that block the trail, then do it right. But don't do it half way or the wrong way (see the multiple threads on plastic doggy doo-doo bags to see what the "wrong way" is )

[rcPDX]

It's really annoying to have to re-cut logs after someone did a crappy job of cutting them. Sometimes it's more difficult to re-cut. There have been times when it was significantly more dangerous to do the proper cutting after someone cut logs inappropriately. I'm thinking of a root-wad on the switchback above the Herman Creek Bridge specifically.

Do it right or let those of us who know what we're doing do it.

[BurnsideBob]

I sometimes carry a #6 Felco, less frequently a Corona 24" lopper. These are good for green material up to 5/8" and 1 1/4" diam respectively. The former can fit in a front pocket, the latter in the ice axe loops on my day pack.

I usually don't take tools on off trail routes or unofficial trails. The idea of 'improving' these types of routes is worthy of discussion, like whether to duck or not duck a route. I'm of the 'don't duck' camp.

One of the more perplexing things I've run into was a brushed out off trail route. I thought, "hey, wouldn't this be a make sense route", but the route turned out to be horribly brushy so it did not make sense at all. As I crawled under the brush towards an opening I realized the stub I had almost run my face into had been cut. For about 200 feet there was a cleared path--probably done about 5 years earlier based on regrowth and weathering of cuts. Then it was back to brush followed by a cliff band.

So someone put some sweat equity in 'improving' that route, but that didn't make it a good route, and I've been happy to go a longer but less brushy way since.

Happy Trails!

Burnside

[BigBear]

I agree with the ideas generally expressed thus far. If its a branch you can cut quickly or with a snip, it's not a problem. However, if you are breaking out the chainsaw or cutting a lumber-worthy log, then USFS will be concerned with safety of the cutter and others on the trail. USFS also has a problem with shovels and picks cutting a trail, but don't have a concern if the simple scooting of boots smooth out a spot.