The Partnership to Restore the Franconia Ridge Loop did more than rebuild deteriorated sections of trail. At its best, it demonstrated a different approach to designing and constructing trails for the conditions we now face in the White Mountains.
Many of our steep legacy trails were laid out more than a century ago, when use was dramatically lower and our understanding of sustainable trail design was very different. Today, the Franconia Ridge Loop receives 45,000–50,000 visitors between May and October, while increasingly intense rain events put additional stress on trails already carrying extraordinary levels of foot traffic.
Repairing these trails in place is no longer enough. Many White Mountain trails need to be fundamentally redesigned to reflect the realities of terrain, geology, ecology, and steadily increasing visitation. At the same time, trail design must recognize the diverse ways people move through the landscape today, whether hiking, trail running, mountain biking, or using mobility devices such as wheel chairs. Sustainable trails must be resilient not only to natural forces, but also to the evolving ways people experience the outdoors.
Here are some of the things I believe the Franconia Ridge Loop project got right.
Trail Realignment
Many of the White Mountains’ steep legacy trails follow, or come close to following, the fall line, the direction of steepest descent down a slope. Unfortunately, that is also the direction water wants to travel.
At relatively low levels of use, these trails can persist for a very long time. As I discussed in my essay Trails and Time, however, at moderate and especially high levels of use, the combination of water and thousands of boots accelerates erosion. The result is familiar throughout the White Mountains: trails that gradually become deeply eroded channels filled with exposed rocks and roots, with sediment carried downslope toward streams and rivers.
The most important solution is often not to keep repairing the old trail, but to change its alignment.
By moving a trail onto the side slope and allowing it to climb more gradually across the contour, we can dramatically reduce the distance that water travels down the tread and create opportunities for water to leave the trail naturally. A properly designed side-hill trail is consequently less susceptible to erosion and requires less intensive maintenance.
That sounds simple. In practice, on the steep, rocky terrain of Franconia Notch, it is anything but.

Reverse-Grade Drainage
Realignment by itself does not solve the drainage problem. Even a side-hill trail has a grade, and water will follow that grade downhill unless we give it somewhere to go.
Traditionally, White Mountain trails have relied heavily on waterbars: stone or wooden structures placed across the trail to intercept water and divert it from the tread. Properly constructed and maintained, they can work. The problem is that waterbars collect sediment and debris and therefore require frequent cleaning.
That creates an enormous maintenance burden. A steep legacy trail can require scores or even hundreds of drainage structures, some needing attention multiple times during a season. With increasingly intense rain events, keeping every drainage structure functioning becomes extraordinarily difficult. We should not blame trail adopters and trail crews when that system begins to fail. We should ask whether we can design trails that require less intervention in the first place.
One of the most important techniques used in the Franconia Ridge project is therefore reverse-grade drainage.
Instead of continuously climbing, the trail briefly levels and descends before beginning to climb again. This creates a natural low point where water can leave the trail. Combined with an appropriately outsloped tread, water drains from the trail largely through its shape, rather than depending upon a structure that must continually be cleaned.
The best drainage structure, in other words, can be the trail itself.
Using Steps Without Building a Staircase Up the Mountain
There is a complication.
An ideal side-hill trail with frequent grade reversals can require a great deal of horizontal distance to gain elevation. In the convoluted, rocky terrain of the White Mountains, we simply do not always have that space.
Many modern professional trail builders therefore regard stone steps as something to use judiciously rather than as the first solution to a steep slope. But avoiding steps entirely can require very long realignments, while simply building a staircase straight uphill recreates many of the drainage problems we are trying to solve.
The Franconia Ridge project has demonstrated an important compromise.
Rather than constructing long, continuously steep staircases, we can use small clusters of stone steps to gain elevation relatively quickly, followed by longer sections of trail at a much lower grade, often around 10–12 percentwhere the terrain permits. A reverse grade can be incorporated at the top of a step cluster before the trail resumes climbing.
These combinations can often be incorporated into a climbing turn, allowing the trail to gain substantial elevation while maintaining sustainable grades and drainage over most of its length.
Professional trail builder Peter Jensen has refined this approach over many years, and it has been used extensively in the Franconia Ridge Loop restoration.
The result is not a trail without steps. It is a trail in which steps, grade and drainage work together.

Steps Designed for Human Beings
Stone steps have been part of the White Mountain trail-building toolbox for decades. What has not always received enough attention is their rise and run: how high hikers must step and how much usable surface each step provides.
The White Mountains are famous for what are sometimes called “power steps” or “Paul Bunyan steps.” I confess that as a young trail builder, I helped build them. There was almost an assumption that hikers should have to make an extra effort to get up the mountain.
But hikers and trail runners respond to the trail in front of them. Faced with an awkwardly high step and an easier route around it, many people will unconsciously choose the easier route. Multiply that decision by tens of thousands of hikers and the result is widening, braiding and erosion alongside the constructed trail.
On the Franconia Ridge project, we have increasingly aimed for stone steps with a comfortable rise of no more than about 7–8 inches and, where the available stone allows, a run of roughly 14–16 inches.
That isn’t merely about making hiking easier.
A trail people naturally want to walk on is also a trail they are more likely to stay on.

Foundation Steps
Good stone stair construction begins at the bottom.
A secure foundation step at the foot of a stair cluster is essential. Without it, erosion can undermine the bottom of the staircase and destabilize everything above it.
This matters particularly because steep trail sections concentrate and accelerate water. The principle is straightforward: the steeper the grade, the faster water can flow; the faster it flows, the greater its erosive power.
We can see the consequences on older sections of both the Old Bridle Path and Falling Waters Trail. Some stone steps have been undercut by more than a foot. That represents an extraordinary amount of lost soil, but it also changes the effective height of the step. A once-manageable stone step gradually becomes another “Paul Bunyan step,” encouraging hikers to find a route around it.
A well-founded staircase, combined with drainage that keeps water from accelerating through it, is therefore fundamental to durable stonework.

Full-Bench Construction, Cribbing and Tread Preparation
A sustainable side-hill trail also requires a proper bench cut.
Rather than placing tread material on the surface of a slope, the trail is cut into the hillside to create a stable walking surface. Wherever terrain permits, a full-bench trail, with the entire tread excavated into undisturbed mineral soil, provides the strongest foundation.
On a lightly used trail, a relatively modest tread may gradually become established through use. That is not adequate for a trail carrying tens of thousands of hikers each year.
The organic surface layer must be removed and the tread prepared with suitable mineral soil and crushed aggregate where necessary. On our Old Bridle Path work, we sometimes literally mine the material, digging small pits nearby to find appropriate mineral soil and aggregate.
Skipping this step may produce a trail that looks finished when the crew leaves, but heavy traffic will quickly compact and displace organic material, exposing roots and rocks. Placing heavier mineral material directly over an unsuitable organic layer doesn’t solve the problem either. The underlying organic material eventually mixes upward into the tread, creating a soft, muddy and unstable surface.
Where the hillside is too steep to support the desired tread width through benching alone, stone cribbing can retain the outside edge, allowing the space behind it to be filled with suitable mineral material and creating a durable, stable tread.
Much of the quality of a trail, in other words, lies beneath hikers’ feet where they will never see it.

A Trail Width That Reflects Actual Use
One of the most visible changes on reconstructed sections of the Franconia Ridge Loop is that the trail is sometimes wider than the trail it replaced.
At first, that can seem counterintuitive. Isn’t the goal to make the trail’s footprint as narrow as possible?
Not necessarily.
On a trail carrying 45,000–50,000 visitors a year, people regularly meet and pass one another. If the constructed tread is too narrow for that behavior, hikers step onto its edges and into adjacent vegetation. The effective trail becomes wider regardless of what width appears on the construction plan.
Forest Service trail standards allow considerable variation in tread width depending upon trail class, designed use, terrain and management objectives. On portions of the Franconia Ridge Loop, we have used tread widths of up to approximately 60 inches, particularly where accommodating two-way traffic helps keep hikers on the constructed surface.
That leads to an important principle for heavily traveled trails:
Sometimes a somewhat wider constructed trail creates a smaller overall area of disturbance.
The trail should be designed not simply for an abstract standard, but for the way tens of thousands of people actually use it.

Toward a New White Mountains Standard
These are not all of the sustainable design and construction techniques used in the Partnership to Restore the Franconia Ridge Loop. But together they represent something larger than a collection of trail-building details.
They represent a change in philosophy.
Rather than repeatedly repairing a century-old trail in place, we can design the trail around water. We can use alignment and grade to shed water before it gains erosive force. We can use stone steps strategically rather than simply building straight uphill. We can construct steps that people naturally want to use. We can build a durable foundation beneath the tread. And we can make the trail wide enough to accommodate the number of people who actually hike it.
Perhaps most importantly, the project has demonstrated that heavily used White Mountain trails require a different standard of design and construction than trails receiving a few thousand visitors a year.
The Partnership to Restore the Franconia Ridge Loop has made an enormous contribution toward establishing that standard.
But if this is the standard we now know how to build, another question follows:
Did we apply it consistently across the Franconia Ridge Loop, and what have we learned about how to do better?
That will be the subject of the third and final article in this series: What We Could Have Done Better in the Franconia Ridge Loop Project.






























