Trail building: a valuable exercise worth supporting

There was a time in our local history when trails were seen as a relic of the past, typically constructed by our native Indians.

More recently, we began to see them in a different light. North America's most famous hiking trail, the Appalachian Trail, is a continuous marked footpath that goes from Katahdin, Maine, about 80 kilometres west of the New Brunswick border, to Springer Mountain in Georgia, a distance of about 2,160 miles. Its origins have been traced by some Americans to an article in the October 1921 issue of the Journal of the American Institute of Architects, titled An Appalachian Trail: A Project in Regional Planning.

The trail that follows the Appalachian skyline must have been in the minds of at least some of those involved in creating the Bruce Trail four decades later.

It was back in 1960 that a visionary named Raymond Lowes envisioned a trail that would follow the Niagara Escarpment from Niagara Falls to Tobermory in a proposal to the Federation of Ontario Naturalists.

As "The Bruce" continues to be improved, other trails are springing up just about everywhere, the biggest single project being the Trans-Canada Trail, which ultimately will cross all 10 provinces.

In the last couple of decades, many of the trails opened in Ontario have been along abandoned rail lines. Examples in this part of the province are the Caledon Trailway between Palgrave and Terra Cotta and the Elora-Cataract trail, which follows a former CPR branch line and passes through Erin, Hillsburgh, Orton and Fergus and includes a delightful section around Belwood Lake and across the Shand Dam. Similarly, the Caledon Trailway follows the route of a CNR line that once ran between Hamilton and Allandale (now part of Barrie), and which today survives as part of a CN bypass and the full length of the South Simcoe Railway, the popular steam train between Tottenham and Beeton.

"Take a hike!" may once have been intended as an insult, but today it's more likely seen as an invitation to combine healthy exercise and adventure while communing with nature, be it on foot, on horseback or perhaps atop a mountain bike.

These days, the main issues to be addressed involve access and cost.

Access is an issue that surfaces in more ways than one. Should limits be placed on the type of trail use? On the other hand, should trails generally be accessible to those with physical disabilities?

In terms of limits, some trails (such as those in Mono Cliffs Provincial Park) are off-limits to horseback riders. Most, if not all, prohibit motorized vehicles.

However, that sort of accessibility can come with a big price tag. For example, two bridges planned for an eastward extension of the Vicki Baron trail are expected to cost about $400,000.

Similarly, the ideal trail might be seen as one that features a hard surface (usually asphalt). But while that would trim maintenance costs, it means a huge initial cost and the question then arises as to where the money will come from.

Sadly, we're in an era when just about every level of government has been placing less reliance on broadly based taxation and more on fees for service. But is the user pay system really appropriate when it comes to things like parks, roads and trails?

As for parks and trails, there does not seem to be any consensus as yet as to when, and to what extent, them user-pay concept should be employed.

On the one hand, some of Ontario's most impressive parks are free and hopefully always will be, a couple of examples being Toronto's High Park and the Toronto Islands.

On the other, our provincial parks and conservation areas now get most (if not all) their revenue from user fees. Incredibly, the day use fee in the provincial parks this year is $11 per vehicle, and rental of a campsite for the night can cost you more than $30.

Thus far, trails have been financed mainly through donations and we haven't yet heard anyone suggest toll trails.

However, if it's generally agreed that trails are good for us, is there really a good argument against them being financed by governments?

We think a good argument could and should be made for local governments becoming involved in the management of conservation areas that are close to urban centres.