Concerns Voiced at Q&A Meeting on the Great Redwood Trail Project
Press release from the Buckeye:
On May 23rd, 2024, The Buckeye hosted a Q&A meeting regarding the Great Redwood Trail at the Loleta Fireman’s Pavilion with 37 attendees that included landowners from Humboldt, Mendocino and Trinity Counties, Tribal representatives, and local first responders. Representatives from Humboldt County Farm Bureau, the Great Redwood Trail Agency Board and Senator McGuire’s office were also present. The purpose of this meeting was to allow interested parties to gather information, ask questions and provide input regarding the Great Redwood Trail.
The Great Redwood Trail is a 320-mile, multi-use rail-to-trail project connecting California’s San Francisco and Humboldt Bays that winds through the Eel River Canyon with proposed spurs accessing Carlotta and Blue Lake. Currently there are sections of the trail that are open and being used in Humboldt County including Eureka Waterfront Trail, Humboldt Bay Trail, Arcata Rail-with-Trail and the Annie & Mary Trail. The majority (81.8%) of the trail passes through privately owned land.
A panel of elected and appointed officials included Sheriff Honsal, CAL FIRE Unit Chief McCray, Humboldt County Supervisors Rex Bohn and Michelle Bushnell, GRTA Executive Director Elaine Hogan as well as Buckeye Chair Gary Rynearson provided their comments regarding the GRT, then answered questions from the audience and other panel members.
Attendees heard firsthand from elected officials their concerns around safety, emergency response time, funding, fire risk and property rights. GRTA Executive Director, Elaine Hogan, said that those issues would be addressed farther down the road and the GRTA was committed to being good neighbors. She added that the GRTA does own the right-of-way North of Willits through the railbanking process, and it is the job of the GRTA to construct the trail. Hogan recognized that the GRTA needs to do direct outreach with affected landowners and asked for understanding of where the GRTA is at in the process.
Gary Rynearson spoke on behalf of the Buckeye reporting that the organization has been involved in the Technical Advisory Group and submitted comments and recommendations to the GRT Draft Master Plan. The Buckeye has expressed concerns around illegal trespass, risk to livestock and wildlife from trail users’ dogs, wildfire risk from campfires, illegal hunting, access for construction and maintenance of the trail, inaccessibility for fire and rescue personnel, rerouting of trail to avoid unbuildable sections, increased staff needs for sheriff, CAL FIRE and CDFW, and additional unfunded requirements for rural fire/emergency services.
Sheriff Honsal stated that the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Department had neither the staff nor the funding in place to respond to emergencies in remote areas where the trail is proposed. Both Sheriff Honsal and Chief McCray expressed the importance of emergency response during “the golden hour” for public safety which would often not be possible with the remoteness of the trail and current resources. Sending aid to remote areas of the trail would pull resources away from departments that are already short staffed. The GRTA has proposed using call boxes, camp hosts and trail rangers but here needs to be a guarantee that these safety measures will be implemented and supported by ongoing budget allocations, stressed Honsal.
Both Michelle Bushnell and Rex Bohn said they support the trail if landowner concerns are being addressed as they see the potential benefits for the community. A concern from Supervisor Bohn was that many of the questions being brought up by landowners at the meeting are the same questions from 6-7 years ago and there doesn’t seem to be much progress in getting those questions answered. Supervisor Bohn also said it would be hard to financially support the trail when we cannot even maintain our local roads.During the Q&A portion of the meeting attendees were able to ask panel members about their concerns around fire risk, liability, cost of the trail, environmental concerns, rerouting, access, trespass, looting, theft and homelessness. Attendees expressed the need to identify solutions to the listed concerns before the project moves forward. Community members are also concerned that the trail will not generate the projected amount of revenue (estimated at $120 million annually) and that the trail will add to the state’s deficit without having funding secured. Questions were raised about the projected cost of the trail which has not yet been identified by the GRTA. Many landowners said that they do not want the trail going through their property and will do what they can to stop it. Tribal representatives also voiced concern that allowing a trail to pass through sensitive cultural sites was not something they wanted.
An attorney for the Wailaki Tribe stated that “we do not want this trail, and this is a slap in the face to our people.” Hogan said that it is important to the GRTA that the trail does not deepen past wounds and hoped that the trail could be healing for Tribal members. Hogan expressed that the GRTA wants to be part of the dialogue with the tribes. It was clear that more tribal consultation was needed, and Supervisor Bohn spoke up and offered to set up a meeting with Wailaki tribal members and landowners where Mendocino and Trinity counties would be included.Attendee, Julia Brownfield, Supervisor elect for Trinity County strongly stated that she does not support this trail, adding it is disrespectful to ranchers and generational landowners.
A common theme from the audience members and Humboldt County officials was consideration of rerouting the trail to avoid the remote and culturally sensitive Eel River Canyon section of the proposed GRT. It was understood that the GRTA only has control over the railroad right-of-way and rerouting would likely require agreements with the state and county for the use of public roads and parks, and private landowners in some locations. The Buckeye offered to work to help identify and present to the GRTA potential alternative routes to avoid the remote and sensitive sections.
Another common area of support was to extend the comment period for the PEIR (Program Environmental Impact Report) Notice Of Preparation scoping document for an additional 60 days. The new deadline to submit comments on the PEIR scoping was extended from May 31 to June 10th and the new deadline to submit comments on the Draft Master Plan is July 3rd. At https://greatredwoodtrailplan.org/#peir information is provided on how to submit your comments to the Draft Master Plan. Comments can also be sent directly to the GRTA board or Executive Director, Elaine Hogan at [email protected].
The Buckeye will continue to actively participate in the development of the GRT and will work to help identify potential alternative routes to avoid the remote and sensitive sections. The Buckeye Conservancy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit with the mission to promote stewardship of working landscapes through shared experience, hands-on education, and collaboration and a vision that working lands and open spaces in Northwestern CA are conserved in perpetuity for future generations. To learn more about the organization, how to support or get involved with The Buckeye please visit us as thebuckeye.org
-or
contact our Executive Director
Christie Moore
[email protected]
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
So far… est ballpark cost about $380 million dollars. That is a million dollars a mile.
Probably be double or triple that by the time the er… ‘construction’ actually takes place.
Then add a few million dollars more to take care of it each year.
>”Community members are also concerned that the trail will not generate the projected amount of revenue (estimated at $120 million annually)…”
Yup. Backpackers typically don’t bring much money along. What you carry in a 35 lb pack is good for a week or more. At the end of the trip, they might buy a hamburger and a shake, then head back home. (At least that’s what I did… in my earlier days.)
Coupled with ongoing cost of maintenance… the trial will be an economic loser.
—
Go figure.
A lot of that money is going towards cleaning up after the railroad. Between the crap in the Eel River Canyon and all the sidings where oiling and maintenance were done, it’s a huge toxic mess.
Hikers do eat, a lot. They don’t bring much money because they have credit cards (they’re lighter). After a week or two on the trail, a motel/hotel/hostel is welcome for the laundry facilities, hot showers, and soft beds. Not everyone, but most.
As Supervisor Rex Bohn points out, all the questions being asked about McGuires Folly, er, I mean the GRT, were being asked 6 or 7 years ago and there’s still NO answers.
Concerns around safety, emergency response time, funding, fire risk, trespass, theft, vandalism, property rights and more aren’t new.
In response, “GRTA Executive Director, Elaine Hogan, said that those issues would be addressed farther down the road.”
Which means there are no answers, even after publication of the 500+ page trail plan that wasn’t a plan.
The GRT, especially through the Eel River Canyon, is an expensive boondoggle designed to promote the political fortunes of State Senator Mike McGuire.
Actual benefit, if any, to the community will be purely incidental.
How do other, existing, wilderness trails handle these problems? Do those existing trails add value to the communities they pass through?
I’m not aware of any trails constructed through areas of comparable length that are anywhere near as geologically unstable as the Eel River canyon.
Are you?
Most are built on stable ground.
Some of the issues are similar and might have similar answers but some are not.
The risk of a fire rapidly getting out of control is going to greater in a canyon than on a ridge top.
Darn, if only there was a way to put in a three foot fire break that would provide access to firefighters. Oh well.
As to the geologic instability, I’ve been told that the railroad cut off the “toes” of the landslides, making them more likely to keep sliding instead of stabilizing; taking out the railroad will help them stabilize. And when it does slide, do you know how hard it is to move a three foot dirt path? I’ve done it, so I can tell you; not at all.
The PCT crosses mountainsides that make the canyon look like the soul of stability, and hikers just walk over the slides.
Well, now you’re just talking sense.
This comment section is for people to dream up ridiculous scenarios
and complain about them as if they’re inevitable.
A three foot fire break?!?
You’re kidding, right?
Even without a “firenado” burning embers and more can carry 1/4 mile or more.
Having three feet makes it easier to widen it. Embers are a different matter.
Only 1/4? Embers from the Carr fire carried over whole ridges. The August complex embers went miles. And remember Santa Rosa? The Kmart burned down that was 4-5 miles away from the actual fire line. I remember. Friends of mine were some of those evacuated. A three foot break won’t stop heat and flames. Might stop a rock. Maybe.
But you cannot put in yet more “toe cutting” trails, either. GRT must accept the fact that there are some portions that are just not suitable for a trail, of all things. If you do not address these issues now, you will. I don’t think you’ve unburied 50 yards of rock all by yourself. You had help. A lot of it. You make it sound simpler than it actually is and PCT is your only example. That instability will never end. You and I might be in physical shape to hike the PCT still, but a hell of a lot of folks are not, nor ever will be. The money to maintain it will end, as the GRT only has to get it built, not maintain it forever, and it’s up to the myriad of other little groups to pick up the tab. But I feel you are just uh….railroading everyone else’s genuine concerns and we should just get over it. Am I right?
You don’t have to dig out anything, you can just go over it. The GRTA is looking for ways to fund trail maintenance. You asked for an example of unstable geology with a trail, I gave you one; you didn’t say you wanted more. Anyone not wanting to hike the canyon is free not to; they can hike other sections.
“Everyone else’s genuine concerns” seem to be based on willful ignorance and misinformation. I’m offering facts and a positive view of this project.
If you are wondering what a serious slide can look like: https://lostcoastoutpost.com/2024/feb/26/video-watch-cliffside-near-centerville-beach-slide/
The lost coast trail is of comparable length and remoteness from services.
Those questions were not being asked 6 or 7 years ago. The NCRA was still fighting for the right to rebuild the rail with exemption from CEQA 7 years ago. Bohn as usual is being hyperbolic.
The only viable alternative for the GRT to bypass the Eel River Canyon is the Pacific Coast Bike Route along 101. It is well established and has campgrounds and services.
The Mail Ridge/Bell Springs route is sometimes steep, not paved on the Mendocino side and in poor shape in Humboldt, poor sight lines, virtually no services. And similar objections to trail development might be raised by residents there.
I think Bell Springs is a legititmate consideration.. Improvement would be far less expensive than the Canyon route.. Emrgency access would be very much easier.. Rsidents might profit by establishing campsites and bathrooms as well as food services.. The only petroglyph site on the route has been destroyed.. Hikers are used to hills and the road has a long history as an Indian trail and the first road south from Eureka settlement.. A large number of problems solved with the Bell Springs alternate plus it is quite beautiful up there..
It would certainly be cheaper and easier to upgrade the Mail Ridge route. It is beautiful. But are backpackers going to trudge along the county road for dozens of miles? They’ll vote with their feet for elsewhere. And it’s really not safe for bicycles.
But the GRTA only owns the railroad right-of-way. Also, I’ve ridden on and next to a highway many times and it never doesn’t suck.
Important to remember too that the trail must follow the right of way of the railroad, otherwise the entire right of way unravels. Breaking the railbanked section from Willits to Blue Lake without newly negotiated easements in line with regulations from the Surface Transpiration Board would threaten the Humboldt Bay trail and other sections already completed. Existing easements would revert back to private property and individual property owners would get to decide whether they want to keep existing segments of trail or not.
Guess the trail will only have sections.
Not a continuous yrail
There is absolutely nothing stopping people from hiking this trail in the summer months and/ or rafting on the eel through the canyon. We have a few rafters come through in early summer before the water gets too low. That is the best time to raft/ hike. Soon after, the algae blooms take over from the heat and cows roaming all over the river bed. What would be the point of putting a trail in? It would only be for a couple months out of the year, and the most dangerous time for fires. Hikers and rafters are not looking to spend money, and the homeless campers don’t have any money. Leave the eel
Wild. It will just be a huge waste of money.
Hikers do like to spend money; after a week in the wild, many will pay money for real food (and lots of it; “hiker hunger” is a real thing), a washing machine, a hot shower, and a clean bed.
Why would any homeless person want to hike 50 miles from services and handouts, set up camp, and hike 50 miles back to get those services and handouts? That makes no sense.
The river is for the fish, the local swimmers and the rafters who come through a couple months out of the whole year. Any more , would ruin it. There’s no money in it for anyone. Just a huge expense that will ruin our river. Leave the canyon natural, keep the garbage out.
BAN-GRT
With all the bitching about emergency services, private land, and cultural resources, you’d think the country had no other long-distance remote trails….
Looking at other trails takes time and a bit of work. Bitching takes less.
Estimated……..$120000000? Estimated. No real fact. I’d like to hear How they came up with this number and where they think it’s gonna come from cause it sounds like a bunch of bullshit.
I believe that information is in the draft master plan. I don’t care enough to look it up for you.
EDIT: Remember that a large portion will go towards cleaning up the railroad’s trash (rails, rail cars, ties, etc.) and toxic mess. And a lot of that will be in the Eel River Canyon that everyone wants to be left “wild”.
GRT in the river canyon will not work . Period. It will hardly ever be used by outsiders. People can go now, no one is stopping them , but they don’t. Mountain lions and bears all over that land. So much of it is private as well. And in the summer, the canyon is often filled with smoke from distant fires. Foolish idea .
It won’t be long and wolves will be roaming the proposed GRT route also…
That is, IF they aren’t ALREADY there…
The imagined concerns of this project are getting sillier and sillier.
Take the trail to the train station!
Glad to hear from locals who actually live near where this trail would be and the reasons they oppose it. The “we’ll figure out the details later” will not fly with this crowd. They know how remote it is, just trouble all around. There’s no funding to rescue Bay Area weekenders but most importantly the fire danger is so high during the season the trail will get most use. Goodbye homestead.
That reminds me of the story of the Kim family tragedy in Oregon years ago. https://www.oregonlive.com/oregonianextra/2007/11/kimfamily.html
Prime example of “know before you go” or….don’t challenge nature, go the other way.
A concern that needs to be on the table is an obvious one: who gets airlifted when CalFire is busy on a fire? Can LifeFlight get there in time (they use mostly prop type planes, not helicopters) to save a life? They have already spoken up repeatedly on that and a variety of issues, and I have yet to see a published response. All I keep reading is what was (again) said in this article: deal with it down the road.
No. Deal with it now before shovels hit the dirt.
Perhaps all wilderness trails, which are much more remote than this rail line, should be closed in case hikers might need emergency assistance? Let’s close the beaches and oceans, lest some errant boater or tourist has trouble. In fact, if we close stores, we won’t have shoplifting….
Yes…let’s close the Pacific Crest Trail…which goes through all kinds of wildness and climates. 2600+ miles of it. Also the Continental Divide Trail and the Appalachian Trail. Hell, close off any hiking in the Trinity alps Wilderness or any other in the Klamath Knot.
Hell, by the sound of it, pedestrians should be banned in Eureka.
Stakeholders? Why is this term used all the time during negotiations between the government and private entities? Hmmmm. Psych 101. Do you really think you are a stakeholder? If you do, anyway….let’s put it this way, one side has an F16 and nuclear weapons, you have a bow and arrow. Good luck. Vote accordingly.
How about loose dogs killing wildlife?
How will that be dealt with?
You can bet theyllbe shot by ranchers.
They need to supply ALL law enforcement and emergency personnel.
As well as supplying emergency personnel to respond to accidents on AP rd.
As Arcata is learning, when folks with money from out of the area cone here, they act like they are in the city still.
It ends up costing more in accidents than those folks end up contributing in taxes.
If they think AP road is gonna be good for tourism theyre fooling themselves.
Its going to keeo falling apart.
More traffic sounds horrible. The road will just wear down faster.
Not to mention the high potential for road rage incidents.
After one fire by a trail user youre gonna have locals running folks off. Im not willing to watch my nrighnorhood go up in flames so someone can go camping.
Imagine trying to evac all those folks in a wildfire while all of us try to leave too.
Nightmare.
Sounds like a crappy plan, I dont think the benefits are going to outweigh the problems/costs. Alderpoint VFD will end up constantly out on calls.
The tribes are right, the state has had years and years to clear the old trains out of the rivers. The Eel looks awful, are we going to let the state destroy the only partially healthy branch left????
Leave it alone.
No trail!
There are tons of wilderness trails that go through high fire danger areas.
It also seems like many commenters are imagining hordes of people flocking to the most remote reaches of this trail. In my experience, people are pretty darn good at assessing their own fitness and desire for remote wilderness adventures.
The vast majority of the people who might attempt to hike the eel river canyon stretch of this trail would be just as qualified to accomplish it successfully and respectfully as are the people who attempt the lost coast trail each year.
Defender of his good friend Mr. Bongio, Papa Rex should get the hell away from any tribal matters. He clearly has personal bias. He shouldn’t be taken seriously because what he did by defending Bongio was a joke. How the hell do you stand behind a man that implied to an entire room, live, that our local tribal governments, and their citizens, are Indian-givers? Papa don’t deserve their time and they shouldn’t be expected to answer to this spineless PoS BOS. >:(
How many times does the affected counties have to say they don’t want this trail? We Keep getting the plan shoved down our throat. Take all that money and fix things that have been deferred/back burnered for years, it’s a long list.
Just a reminder that if the GRT stays out of the canyon, the railroad debris stays in the canyon. I hear there are parts of the river where you can get sliced up like a ham if you get in the water.
Campgrounds could both provide income for property owners and reduce the risk of wildfires.The trail itself will serve as a fire break and access for firefighters.
The master plan is a 10,000 foot view of the trail; details of exact routing, amenities, obstacles and how to overcome them will be worked out for each section as it is designed. It would be crazy to try to design the entire trail in one go. For example, the Humboldt Bay Trail is being created in sections; first Arcata designed and built the Bay Trail North, then Eureka designed and (mostly) built the Eureka Waterfront Trail, and the County has designed and is building the final four. Then the Elk River Estuary extension was designed and built, and now the CR extension is being designed. It’s one long trail, designed and built in sections; in a few years you’ll be able to walk or ride from West End Rd. in Arcata all the way to College of the Redwoods, and I believe they’re starting to think about Fortuna. All of this is part of the Great Redwood Trail, but it will serve us locals more than tourists.
We’ll all be dead by the time a viable trail becomes reality. The state can’t even get a replacement for the last chance grade on the 101 until beyond 2040 and that’s the fast track plan. The NorCal coast is a low priority for California. There’s no slowing down progress on newsoms high speed money pit to nowhere.
And yet the Humboldt Bay Trail already exists and is expanding. By the end of the year I’ll be able to safely ride my bike next to the car sewer instead of in it.
The Last Chance grade is an entirely different conversation and the high speed rail is another entirely different conversation.
Since the PCT was mentioned: it still has issues 50 years later “acquiring” all the private property along it, which is its implied goal: federal, not silly landowner protections. The point of “protection” is that it needs to be under the auspices of the federal government, and anything nearby it.
https://www.pcta.org/our-work/land-protection/land-protection-qa/
90% of the trail is on federal land, and government has been trying for decades to get people to sell because it’s easier to deal with for legal reasons. Lots more trained and skilled forestry and trail folk than there are ranch land owners that have the knowledge to do the maintenance, but it has to be dedicated, and government jobs pay well, so the maintenance money is going to come from somewhere. But that matter still exists: government is coming for the land, and they have lots of time to wait people out.
Different circumstances; the state already owns the railroad right-of-way.