Risk Management Primer 

Answering the Questions Every Land Manager Asks

Written by Woody Keen, IMBA Board Member, Trail Dynamics

The word risk has several meanings as it relates to trail management. The first meaning is in the relationship of the trail user to the risks involved (both perceived and real risk) of traveling in an un-controlled environment. The second and perhaps more important meaning in trails management is the risks (incurred by land managers and private land owners) of providing access to recreational trails for a variety of uses.

Please note that I will try and avoid the terminology "liability", this term assumes guilt before any has been assigned. I prefer to use the term legal exposure. Our actions or lack thereof can increase or decrease our exposure to lawsuits.

Another important premise is that we cannot eliminate all risks (both definitions of the word); we can however identify them, reduce them (if desired) and create a management plan for dealing with them. A good management plan should be proactive instead of reactive. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

We talk all the time in land management about managing many different things. Several management prescriptions/modalities include: natural resource damage (limits of acceptable change), cultural resources management, timber management, fuels buildup and hazard management, job hazard analysis, etc. So it would follow that we also need to manage our trail systems and part of that plan would include a risk management plan.

In many ways, outdoor recreation users are in fact looking for some risks when we play outdoors. This concept can be identified by the introduction and popularization of terms like "adrenaline or extreme sports". Certainly no one wishes to be seriously hurt or killed when recreating, but we often want the thrill of feeling like some danger is present. This is certainly not a new concept as it relates to current trends in mountain biking. In fact, all forms of outdoor recreation have gone through an evolution in the last 10-15 years, and in many ways we are playing catch up in the realm of management. Whitewater kayakers are paddling much more difficult rivers (with much higher risks) than they were 5 years ago, rock and ice climbers are pushing the limits of human gymnastic skill, adventure racers are pushing the limits of mental and physical ability including very few hours of sleep over a 4 day expedition style race, trail runners are traveling 100 miles (and beyond).

Many recreation forms that we manage on public lands which have high inherent risks include: rock climbing, adventure racing, ice climbing, alpine climbing, mountaineering, whitewater kayaking and canoeing, sea kayaking, horseback riding, caving, backcountry skiing and snowboarding and many others.

Land managers are faced with an increasingly diverse range of recreational trail users and desired trail experiences. There certainly is a high need to begin the education process and the following is an introduction into terminology that pertains to risk management.

Recreational Use Statues

Most states have these to protect land owners and land managers for allowing recreational use of lands (Recreational use statutes for all 50 states.) On private lands the key concept is duty of care- if no fees are charged the duty of care is no more than if the person where trespassing. On public lands the key concepts are due diligence vs. gross negligence. Many states also have an Equine Liability Statute which recognizes that any and all activates involving horses are inherently dangerous.

Assumption of Risks/Perception of Risk

These are somewhat different in concept. Perception of risk is something that happens more on site, perceiving a big drop-off on a trail as being dangerous and therefore not getting too close to the edge. Assumption of risk is the legal concept that you assumed and perceived an activity was potentially dangerous and you willingly assumed those risk and participated anyway.

Failure to Warn

This is the classic McDonald's Hot Coffee case. The basic concept is that when someone gets hurt and was not forewarned that there was any risk some level of responsibility can be placed on certain responsible parties. Warning language can be important for high-risk trail areas, especially if the users themselves cannot perceive the risks present. There are many examples of warning language signs at trailheads that deal with all kinds of risks (i.e. signs at the Grand Canyon warning of hot and dry climates, so carry plenty of water, signs that state that you could die). If on the other hand, the risks are very evident perhaps the urgent need for warning language signs are reduced. An example of this would be the lack of warning signs at the base of rock climbing routes, which are in reality nothing more than vertical trails.

Attractive Nuisance

The concept of something that is very attractive yet carries a high level of risk. Examples: Swimming pools, Sliding boards. This principle is mostly a problem for children. The important key here is: if things are high risk, they need to appear that way. Never disguise risks.

Duty of care

This concept was introduced earlier when talking about Recreational Use State Statute. The duty of care expected can vary greatly according to several variables. As perceived risk of a recreational activity goes up, the level of duty of care expected should go down. A good example of this is the ski industry. The duty of care expected skiing in the patrolled area is quite different from that expected "out of bounds". Within the patrolled area, the ski patrol and risk management team try to identify most hazards and alert the skier, however when skiing out of bounds the skier is very much on his/her own. The buffer between patrolled area and out of bounds needs warning language indicating a change in management strategies.

In the trail world, the expected duty of care also changes as trail users get further away from a point of entry (trailhead and the car). A great example of this concept is as follows: the top of Niagara Falls has a full handrail height retainer to buffer people from the edge because it is close to the parking lot. In contrast, the top of Half Dome in Yosemite has no such handrail retainer due to the length and seriousness of travel required to get to that point. Bridges in front country trails and urban trail systems look quite different that bridges located further in the backcountry and even more primitive in wilderness areas.

Foreseeable hazards

Hazards that we as trail professionals and managers might perceive, but the average user would not see. The classic example of this is dead snags that serve as hazard trees close to trails.

Due Diligence

This concept refers to whether or not land management agencies are identifying and addressing problems with "due diligence". There must be a system for identifying and solving problems, short-term and long-term. In the short-term, it may be a quick fix to minimize the potential hazard; however, the long-term plan should address the source of the problem. Due diligence relates closely to foreseeable hazards. Due diligence is tied to a good management plan the that is followed. The opposite of this is gross negligence, ignoring a problem that has been identified.