119-S-1135 Investigative Journalist Impact Analysis

Summary

• What the bill does: Adds the BST to the list of congressionally directed feasibility studies under the National Trails System Act; it does not establish a new trail unit. [1]Congress.gov — S.1135 — 119th Congress bill text and overview
• Process guardrails: By statute, studies evaluate feasibility/suitability in consultation with landowners and agencies and are to be submitted within three fiscal years after funding; designation would still require separate legislation. [8]LII / Cornell Law — 16 U.S.C. §1244 (National scenic and national historic trai…
• Administrative scope: NPS notes trail establishment commonly spans 6–15 years across four steps (study → possible designation → management plan). [9]National Park Service — NPS: How a National Trail is Established (process, typi…
• Immediate footprint: Feasibility studies typically proceed under categorical exclusion and do not authorize implementation; BLM reiterated this in a 2025 study announcement. [4]National Park Service — NPS ParkPlanning: Pike National Historic Trail Feasibil…[3]Bureau of Land Management — BLM press release: Alaska Long Trail feasibility st…
• Likely economic context: Outdoor recreation added $9.5B (3.4% of GDP) and ~71,900 jobs to Utah’s economy in 2023; NPS estimates park visitor spending contributed ~$3.1B of total output in 2024. [5]Utah Department of Natural Resources — Utah DNR: Outdoor recreation economy rea…[10]National Park Service — NPS (2025): Visitor spending effects—Utah 2024 output
• Environmental/Social cautions: Research links non‑motorized recreation to widespread wildlife disturbance and trail‑related soil loss if unmanaged; urban greenways often raise nearby property values (equity risks vary by place). [6]PLOS One (NCBI PMC) — Larson et al. 2016: Effects of Recreation on Animals (sys…[7]USGS Publications Warehouse — Marion & Wimpey 2017: Sustainable trail design an…[11]Journal of Park and Recreation Administration — Crompton & Nicholls (2019): Gre…[12]Environmental Research Letters (PubMed) — How well do we know green gentrificat…

Economic Effects

Evidence on costs/benefits related to a feasibility study now and potential future designation.

• Federal outlays: Comparable trail feasibility mandates have CBO scores of “less than $500,000,” spread over 1–2 years, subject to appropriations. [2]Congress.gov — CBO letter in H. Rept. 117‑578 (Buckeye National Scenic Trail Fe…
• No immediate regulatory changes: The study does not authorize construction or land acquisition; agencies emphasize that studies are planning documents only. [3]Bureau of Land Management — BLM press release: Alaska Long Trail feasibility st…
• Macro context in Utah: The outdoor‑recreation economy contributed $9.5B (3.4% of GDP) and ~71,898 jobs in 2023—tailwinds for trail‑related commerce (retail, lodging, guiding). [5]Utah Department of Natural Resources — Utah DNR: Outdoor recreation economy rea…
• Visitor‑spending channel: NPS estimates park‑adjacent spending generated ~$3.1B in statewide economic output in 2024, underscoring gateway‑community sensitivity to recreation flows. [10]National Park Service — NPS (2025): Visitor spending effects—Utah 2024 output
• Property effects: Hedonic reviews find homes near multi‑use trails often sell for 3–5% more on average, though impacts are heterogeneous and can be higher or negative in specific contexts. [11]Journal of Park and Recreation Administration — Crompton & Nicholls (2019): Gre…[13]Web search · turn 12 #5
• Local cost centers: Increased use can raise operations/maintenance and emergency‑response (SAR) costs that fall on counties; Utah operates a partial reimbursement program but notes high‑cost rescues can strain small tax bases. [14]State of Utah — Utah Search and Rescue Assistance (USARA) program—cost burden c…
• Readiness of corridor: Prior federal reporting for earlier BST legislation noted ~107 miles completed and proximity to population centers—indicative of latent demand but also of urban‑interface management costs. [15]Congress.gov — S. Rept. 117‑153: Bonneville Shoreline Trail Advancement Act (ba…

Social Effects

Distributional and community outcomes documented in the literature and Utah data.

• Physical‑activity gains: The Community Preventive Services Task Force finds park/trail infrastructure combined with programming increases use and moderate‑to‑vigorous activity (median +17% users engaging in MVPA). [16]U.S. HHS / ODPHP — ODPHP: CPSTF recommendation—parks, trails, and greenways inc…
• Built‑environment pathways: CDC reports that connected, accessible paths measurably raise everyday walking/biking across age and ability groups. [17]CDC — CDC: Designing activity‑friendly communities
• Access profile: The BST alignment skirts dense Wasatch Front communities; earlier Senate findings note segments serving areas where a large share of Utahns live—implications for broad accessibility if completed. [15]Congress.gov — S. Rept. 117‑153: Bonneville Shoreline Trail Advancement Act (ba…
• Equity/gentrification: Reviews show trail and greenway investments often increase nearby property values, with potential displacement risks in specific corridors; effects are localized and not inevitable. [11]Journal of Park and Recreation Administration — Crompton & Nicholls (2019): Gre…[12]Environmental Research Letters (PubMed) — How well do we know green gentrificat…
• Search‑and‑rescue exposure: Salt Lake County SAR reports ~65–75 rescues annually; statewide programs highlight that expensive missions can pressure county budgets despite reimbursement mechanisms. [18]Salt Lake County SAR (nonprofit) — Salt Lake County SAR—about/annual rescue vo…[14]State of Utah — Utah Search and Rescue Assistance (USARA) program—cost burden c…

Environmental Effects

Near‑term effects of the study versus potential long‑term effects if Congress later designates a national trail segment.

• Study‑phase impacts: NPS feasibility work has been completed under categorical exclusions with no measurable environmental impacts; the study is analytical and consultative. [4]National Park Service — NPS ParkPlanning: Pike National Historic Trail Feasibil…
• Wildlife disturbance: A global review finds non‑consumptive recreation (hiking, biking, etc.) frequently yields negative wildlife responses (avoidance, reduced occupancy), especially without seasonal closures or buffers. [6]PLOS One (NCBI PMC) — Larson et al. 2016: Effects of Recreation on Animals (sys…
• Soils/erosion: USGS‑synthesized research shows trail grade, slope alignment, drainage features, and tread composition strongly predict soil loss; sustainable design can materially reduce impacts. [7]USGS Publications Warehouse — Marion & Wimpey 2017: Sustainable trail design an…
• Local maintenance signals: Salt Lake City launched BST rehabilitation to correct erosion and widening after decades of use—evidence of lifecycle maintenance demands along the urban interface. [19]Salt Lake City Public Lands Department — Salt Lake City Public Lands: BST rehab…
• Ignition risk context: Utah agencies report human‑caused starts comprise a large share of wildfires in recent years; nationally, human ignitions dominate wildfire counts and extend the fire season, underscoring prevention needs near popular corridors. [20]Utah Division of Forestry, Fire & State Lands — Utah FFSL (2024): Human‑caused…[21]Northwest Fire Science Consortium — Balch et al. 2017: Human‑started wildfires…

Temporal Analysis

Differentiating immediate outcomes from potential downstream consequences.

1. 0–12 months: If funded, the administering agency scopes the study, initiates consultations with landowners and local governments, and outlines evaluation criteria; no construction or land acquisition authority is conferred. [8]LII / Cornell Law — 16 U.S.C. §1244 (National scenic and national historic trai…[3]Bureau of Land Management — BLM press release: Alaska Long Trail feasibility st…
2. 1–3 fiscal years after funding: Statutory target to submit the feasibility/suitability report to Congress, including route concepts, ownership/management context, and preliminary cost considerations. [8]LII / Cornell Law — 16 U.S.C. §1244 (National scenic and national historic trai…
3. Multi‑year horizon (post‑study): If Congress designates a national trail, a comprehensive management plan identifying carrying capacity and partner roles follows; NPS indicates the full cycle from study to establishment often spans 6–15 years. [22]Web search · turn 3 #3[9]National Park Service — NPS: How a National Trail is Established (process, typi…

Unintended Consequences

Risks and secondary effects flagged in credible sources.

• Crowding and safety externalities: Gateway counties may face SAR, parking, and enforcement loads that outpace dedicated revenues without targeted funding mechanisms. [14]State of Utah — Utah Search and Rescue Assistance (USARA) program—cost burden c…
• Habitat fragmentation/disturbance: Increased human presence can compress sensitive wildlife activity periods and displace species from high‑quality habitat unless mitigated by seasonal closures, reroutes, or buffer zones. [6]PLOS One (NCBI PMC) — Larson et al. 2016: Effects of Recreation on Animals (sys…
• Resource degradation: Without sustainable grades, drainage, and tread hardening where needed, higher use can accelerate erosion and sediment delivery to waterways. [7]USGS Publications Warehouse — Marion & Wimpey 2017: Sustainable trail design an…
• Ignitions near WUI: Concentrated recreation along the Wasatch Front elevates the importance of prevention messaging and restrictions during high‑risk periods due to human‑caused wildfire patterns. [20]Utah Division of Forestry, Fire & State Lands — Utah FFSL (2024): Human‑caused…

Assessment

Analytical bottom line (not advocacy).

Neutral. The bill’s immediate effect is modest—authorizing a study that typically costs under $0.5M and carries minimal environmental footprint. Longer‑run outcomes depend on (i) the study’s feasibility/suitability finding, (ii) any subsequent congressional designation, and (iii) adoption of design and management measures that preserve wildlife values, control erosion, and fund local O&M/SAR. Given Utah’s recreation‑economy baseline, net benefits are plausible if mitigation and equity measures are built in; absent those, localized costs and ecological pressure could dominate in sensitive segments. [2]Congress.gov — CBO letter in H. Rept. 117‑578 (Buckeye National Scenic Trail Fe…[4]National Park Service — NPS ParkPlanning: Pike National Historic Trail Feasibil…[5]Utah Department of Natural Resources — Utah DNR: Outdoor recreation economy rea…[6]PLOS One (NCBI PMC) — Larson et al. 2016: Effects of Recreation on Animals (sys…[7]USGS Publications Warehouse — Marion & Wimpey 2017: Sustainable trail design an…