The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is conducting a feasibility study to determine whether the proposed Alaska Long Trail should be designated as a National Scenic Trail under the National Trails System Act. If approved, this 500-mile trail would extend from Seward to Fairbanks, crossing diverse landscapes and public lands in Alaska. While this proposal has been promoted as a way to expand recreation, the designation threatens to limit motorized access, restrict multiple-use recreation, and impose unnecessary federal oversight on lands that BLM has little jurisdiction over because many are tribally or state owned. It is also important to note that there are tribes and local jurisdictions who have officially opposed a national scenic trail designation, which should disqualify the BLM from recommending the scenic trail to be designated.
BlueRibbon Coalition (BRC) opposes the designation of the Alaska Long Trail as a National Scenic Trail. We support multiple-use recreation and believe that existing trails and access should be protected for all users, including motorized recreationists. Many of the trail segments proposed for designation already exist and don’t need a designation to provide recreation value. Public lands in Alaska are vast, and trails should remain open to the broadest range of users rather than being restricted by a one-size-fits-all federal designation.
If the Alaska Long Trail is designated as a National Scenic Trail, it could:
Restrict Motorized Access: Many existing trails and routes that currently allow snowmobiles, ATVs, and other motorized use could face new restrictions or closures. This would disproportionately impact Alaskans who rely on motorized travel for access to public lands, including rural residents, hunters, and individuals with disabilities.
Create De Facto Buffer Zones: National Scenic Trails often come with management plans that extend beyond the trail itself, limiting activities on adjacent lands. This could lead to new land use restrictions that were never part of the original intent. For example, the Pacific Crest Trail was used to justify a non-motorized mile wide buffer zone in the recently decided Sierra and Sequoia National Forest Plans.
Impose Unnecessary Federal Oversight: The BLM manages only a fraction of the land along the proposed route, with much of it under state, municipal, tribal, and private ownership. A National Scenic Trail designation would introduce federal management where it isn’t needed and potentially conflict with local land-use priorities.
Reduce Local Input and Flexibility: Instead of preserving multiple-use recreation and local control, this designation would prioritize non-motorized recreation at the expense of other legitimate uses. Once designated, reversing these restrictions would be extremely difficult.
Comments on the proposal are accepted through April 14, 2025.
