Tourism, Recreation and Trail Impacts - Tourism and Trails: Cultural, Ecological and Management Issues - page 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, van-
dalism, 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 destina-
tions (Reffay, 1980). Kaylen et al. (1993) surmised that part of people's con-
cerns 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 pro-
vide 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 green-
ways 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 repre-
sentatives 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 con-
structed 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.