Paulinskill Valley Trail (2011) - Rails-to-Trails Conservancy

Paulinskill Valley Trail
2010 User Survey
and Economic Impact Analysis

Contents
Executive Summary........................................................................2.
Historical Perspective......................................................................4
Location Analysis...........................................................................5
Paulinskill Valley Trail Area Demographics.......................................7
Paulinskill Valley Trail Map..............................................................8
Qualitative Values of the Paulinskill Valley Trail...............................9
Survey Results..............................................................................10
Methodology and Analysis...........................................................14
Comparative Analysis...................................................................16
Paulinskill Valley Trail User Estimates.............................................2.0
Economic Impact.........................................................................2.1
Trail Maintenance, Surface and Security.......................................2.4
Appendix A—Trail Counter Data..................................................2.6
This report was developed with assistance from the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources, Bureau of Recreation and Conservation, Community and Conservation Partnerships Program.
We would like to thank the following photographers for sharing their photos with us for this report: Boyd Loving (front cover and pages
7, 15,17, 18, 19, 2.1, 2.2. top, and 2.5); Teresa Rose (page 6); Kim Darst (page 2.2. bottom); Susan Data-Smatak (page 2.3 top and bottom).

Paulinskill Valley Trail 2010 User
Survey and Economic Impact Analysis
Carl Knoch, Manager of Trail Development
Northeast Regional Office
March 2011
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy
Northeast Regional Office
2.133 Market Street, Suite 2.2.2.
Camp Hill, PA 17011
tel 717.2.38.1717 / fax 717.2.38.7566
National Headquarters
2.12.1 Ward Court, NW, 5th Floor
Washington, DC 2.0037
tel 2.02..331.9696 / fax 2.02..2.2.3.92.57
www.railstotrails.org

Executive Summary
The Paulinskill Valley Trail is a multi-use trail that
runs 27 miles in New Jersey from Brugler Road in
Knowlton Township, Warren County, to Sparta
Junction in Sussex County.
During 2010, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (RTC)
conducted this study of the users of the Paulinskill
Valley Trail under a grant from the F. M. Kirby
Foundation. This study utilized a survey methodology
previously tested on Pennsylvania trails and
documented in RTC’s Trail User Survey Workbook
(www.railstotrails.org/resources/documents/resource_
docs/UserSurveyMethodology.pdf).
This survey was designed to monitor trail user
characteristics and economic impact.
Survey forms were available at six locations along
the Paulinskill Valley Trail from the beginning of
June through October 2010. Completed responses
were mailed back to RTC. In all, 374 completed
survey forms are included in this analysis.
ZIP codes indicate a large majority of trail users
on the Paulinskill Valley Trail are from the local
communities in Warren and Sussex counties (72.8
percent). Trail users from other New Jersey counties
represented 16.5 percent of the sample. The
remaining trail users came from other states (9.7
percent).
The majority of respondents (45.3 percent) reported
using the trail more than twice a week. Nearly 10
percent were on the Paulinskill Valley Trail for the
first time.
The age profile of users is similar to that seen in
other trail surveys, with the majority of users (62.5
percent) in the range of 46 to 65 years old.
The male/female ratio is also typical of what we
have surveyed on other rail-trails, with 50.3 percent
male and 49.7 percent female.
The Paulinskill Valley Trail is used primarily for
walking and bicycling, with biking slightly more
2. / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

common (39.7 percent) than walking (33.3
percent). Another 6.2 percent of respondents
indicated horseback riding as a primary activity.
Most survey respondents (41.2 percent) spent one
to two hours on the trail. More than 35 percent of
respondents spent more than two hours on the trail.
This time-on-trail breakdown is fairly typical on
trails that exceed 20 miles in length in rural areas.
More than half of survey respondents (55.4 percent)
indicated they considered their use of the trail to
be for health and exercise. Only a little more than a
third (36.8 percent) indicated they considered their
use of the trail recreational. These responses further
validate the high percentage of respondents who use
the trail more than twice a week.
Most respondents (63.5 percent) learned about the
trail primarily through “word of mouth” or because
they drove by the trail. Another 10.3 percent cited
information from Rails-to-Trails Conservancy and
their trail-finder website, www.traillink.com.
The survey included seven questions about expenditures
in order to develop a profile of trail user
spending habits. Seventy percent of respondents
indicated they had purchased some form of durable
good, also known as a “hard good,” for use while
on the trail (shoes, bike supplies, etc.), with users
spending an average of $371.91 per person in the
previous 12 months. Consumable goods, or “soft
goods” such as snacks and drinks, were purchased
by 36.5 percent, for an average of $9.93 per person,
per trip. Lodging was the third factor examined for
economic analysis. Slightly less than 3 percent of the
Paulinskill Valley Trail survey respondents indicated
they paid for lodging at a hotel or bed-and-breakfast
for an average of $104.44 per night; the largest
percentage of respondents (59.3 percent) indicated
they stayed with family or friends at no cost.
Overall maintenance on the Paulinskill Valley Trail
was rated good to excellent by 80.3 percent of
respondents, and safety and security along the trail
was rated good to excellent by 80 percent.
Eighty percent of respondents felt the trail surface
was good to excellent.
The respondents’ willingness to donate a voluntary
annual fee to help maintain the trail was divided,
with 59.4 percent in support and 40.2 percent
opposed.
The segment of trail used most often by
respondents was around Blairstown. The Airport
Road, Footbridge Road and East Crisman Road
access points accounted for nearly 40 percent of
respondents (39.6 percent). Lowest usage was at
the far western edge of the Paulinskill Valley Trail
at Brugler Road. This access point may become
more popular as knowledge of a connection to the
pedestrian bridge across the Delaware River between
Columbia, N.J., and Portland, Pa., becomes more
widespread.
The Paulinskill Valley Trail is part of an evolving
130-mile trail network across the state of New
Jersey. The Liberty-Water Gap Trail, when
completed, will stretch from Liberty Park on the
Hudson River in Jersey City to Columbia on the
Delaware River. Liberty-Water Gap Trail signage
appears all along the Paulinskill Valley Trail at
trailheads and road crossings. However, only 41
percent of survey respondents acknowledged
awareness of the Liberty-Water Gap Trail.
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 3

Historical Perspective*
The New York Susquehanna and Western Railroad
right-of-way, the foundation for the Paulinskill
Valley Trail, extends from near Columbia, N.J., on
the Delaware River in Warren County, along the
banks of the Paulinskill River to Sparta Junction in
Sussex County.
The New York Susquehanna and Western Railroad
abandoned the corridor in August 1962. The
tracks and ties were removed, and in 1963 the city
of Newark purchased the right-of-way. The city
planned to use the right-of-way to lay a water pipeline
from the proposed Tocks Island Reservoir to
their watershed area near West Milford. When the
plans for the reservoir fell through, Newark put the
right-of-way up for sale.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection (NJDEP) held a public meeting in
Blairstown on June 13, 1985, to announce their
intention to purchase the site. Local community
members came out in droves. The most outspoken
voices were anti-trail. There were a fair number of
trail supporters present, but they were not prepared
for anything like the storm of opposition they encountered.
Such strong opposition set proponents,
including the NJ DEP, reeling. Landowners with
property adjacent to the trail had organized, calling
themselves the “Railroad Right-of-Way Repurchase
Association.”
Trail opponents also had the backing of many other
local landowners, some of them long-time citizens
of Warren County, as well as the state senator, two
state assemblymen, the three freeholders from
Warren County, and all the politicians from the
bordering towns—mayors, councilmen and planning
board members.
The task for trail proponents was to prove that
strong local backing, especially political backing, did
exist in the trail’s home district. Under Len Frank’s
leadership, an ad hoc committee began meeting.
Frank was a long-time leader in the local Sierra
Club chapter and was well-prepared to coordinate
this effort.
4 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Proponents began leading hikes on the trail to show
what a wonderful experience the trail could deliver.
Information booths were manned at the county fairs
in Sussex and Warren and at the Sussex Air Show.
Roberta Bramhall created large displays with huge
maps of the trail accented by many photographs.
Eventually, proponents became organized as the
Paulinskill Valley Trail Committee (www.pvtc-kvsp.
org), soliciting memberships at $10 a year. With this
money, they printed a pamphlet to help promote the
trail cause.
In the summer of 1986, the Sussex Voice issued a
readers’ poll on the trail project.
The poll was printed just in time for the Sussex Fair
in August 1986. The poll consisted of nine questions.
Copies were printed and used at the Paulinskill
Valley Trail Committee booth and the Voice booth
at the fair. The poll was promoted vigorously, and
as a result of the 650 responses, 90.6 percent were
in favor of the trail. A second readers’ poll in 1987
delivered 968 responses with 92.5 percent in favor.
In 1988, the trail committee printed their own
poll under the sponsorship of the County Federation
of Sportsmen’s Clubs. This poll resulted in 614
responses with 97 percent in favor of the trail.
Public backing for the trail had been amply demonstrated,
but there was still insufficient political
support. The trail committee wrote to and contacted
elected officials without results. Wally Wirths of
Wantage in Sussex County contacted the Sussex
Freeholders, and told them about the trail and the
results of the polls. The three freeholders drew up
and signed a resolution that the state should buy
the corridor. This political support helped persuade
Governor Thomas Kean, and he authorized NJDEP
to purchase the corridor.
Through the efforts of the Paulinskill Valley Trail
Committee, the trail was purchased by New
Jersey Green Acres and became a state park on
October 3, 1992.
*History excerpted from articles written by Len Frank and Bill Weiler courtesy of The Paulinskill Valley Trail
Committee.
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 5

Locational Analysis
The Paulinskill Valley Trail is located in Warren and
Sussex counties in northwestern New Jersey. The
trail begins in Knowlton Township near Columbia
and extends 27 miles roughly north and east to
Sparta Junction in Sussex County, just outside of
Newton. For most of its length, the trail follows the
banks of the Paulinskill River. At Warbasse Junction
near Lafayette, the Paulinskill Valley Trail intersects
with the Sussex Branch Trail.
The Paulinskill Valley Trail passes through a primarily
rural landscape. The state-owned portion of the trail
begins just outside of Columbia in Knowlton Township.
In December 2010, Knowlton Township completed
an extension of the Paulinskill Valley Trail
to the pedestrian bridge between Columbia and
Portland, Pa., across the Delaware River just south
of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation
Area. This extension utilizes a dirt road through
the NJDEP Columbia Wildlife Management Area.
From Columbia Lake, a pathway leads to NJ Route
46. Crossing the Paulinskill River on the highway
bridge, a ramp takes the trail down to water level,
where the path has been constructed in the river
bottom to take users under the highway. A ramp up
to street level leads to Washington Street and meets
the pedestrian bridge at Green Street.
The only community the trail passes directly
through is Blairstown (population 5,747) in Warren
County. The trail passes through a large parking lot
for Blairstown’s Footbridge Park. Heading north of
the parking lot and across the footbridge over the
Paulinskill leads to the business district. The trail
also passes by the Blairstown Airport, which is a
renowned location for gliders.
The trail runs around the outskirts of Newton
(population 8,244), the Sussex County seat. To
reach the central business district requires a road
ride of a couple of miles. The most direct route is
County Route 622 to Mill Street.
The woodlands the trail passes through provide
ample opportunity for the enjoyment of nature’s
bounty. More than 100 different species of birds have
been identified along the trail during the Paulinskill
Valley Trail Committee’s annual bird census. These
rich woodlands are also home to more than 100
different species of wildflowers that have also been
identified by members of the trail committee.
With the Paulinskill River in such close proximity,
the trail offers ample opportunities for fishing. The
state stocks the Paulinskill with brown and rainbow
trout. Some of the property along the river is private,
so visitors should be aware of posted areas.
The trail also helps to highlight some of the history
of Warren and Sussex counties. Foundations of
creameries and ice houses that were served by the
railroad can been seen along the length of the
corridor. The trail utilizes eight of the original
railroad bridges across the Paulinskill. Original
whistle and mileage markers can also be seen along
the route.
Paulinskill Valley
6 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Paulinskill Valley Trail
Area Demographics
The Paulinskill Valley Trail is located in Warren and Sussex counties in New Jersey.
Paulinskill Valley Trail Region Demographic Profile (by county)
Warren County
Sussex County
Population (2.009 est.) 109,638 151,118
Median Household Income (2.008) $74,72.1 $79,393
Households (2.000) 38,660 50,831
Persons per Household (2.000) 2..61 2..80
Persons per Square Mile (2.000) 2.86.1 2.76.7
Paulinskill Valley Trail Region Population Projections (projected by County)
2000 (actual U.S. Census) 2010 2015 2020 2030
Warren County 102.,438 116,437 12.0,759 12.7,792. 132.,502.
Sussex County 144,166 161,881 N/A 178,635 N/A
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 7

Paulinskill Valley Trail Map
8 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Qualitative Values
of the Paulinskill Valley Trail
The best way to summarize the qualitative values of the Paulinskill Valley Trail is to let trail users describe how
they feel about their experience. The following are verbatim comments taken from the 2010 Paulinskill Valley
Trail User Survey forms.
The trail is one to the greatest assets to my area & I treasure it!!!
Love this trail. Don’t know where I would run without it!
What a great idea converting these RR’s to rail trails! The P-skill is a beautiful bike ride from one end to the other!
And a lot safer than riding on roads!
More benches or seating along the trail would be helpful.
We purchased our property 10+ yrs ago so we could live right on the trail. We hike & bike many times several times a
day. We have purchased extra bikes to accommodate friends/family visitors.
Add markers to indicate mileage, also a bench or two would be nice.
Horse riders should clean up droppings!
Trail could use some maintenance.
Also enjoy horseback riding on trail.
I love walking my dog on the trail. My 7 yr. old son rides his bike along with us. We can’t wait to go on the trail
again!
Totally enjoy the beauty and solitude of the trail.
Need mileage markers — Horse riders clean up after horses.
This trail was a major draw for me to move back to the area. Truly one of the finest parts of the state.
Need more signs as to yielding to bike, joggers, horses.
Needs a lot of work on the western end of the trail!
Too many horses on weekends!! They leave a mess too.
We love living in an area with easy access to the trail.
We have tried to walk the entire trail in segments. This is the greatest trail — finding the order of the trail from
beginning to end with places to park cars — the map overlaps are confusing — one clear map with clearly marked
segments showing parking and mileage between segments is needed very badly.
The trails are a community treasure.
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 9

2010 Survey Results
10 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Question 1
What is your ZIP code?
37.5% Warren County
35.3% Sussex County
5.9% Morris County
2.7% Essex County
2.2% Bergen County
5.7% Other New Jersey counties
9.7% Other states
Question 2
How did you get to the trail?
65.8% Drive
12.3% Bike
10.7% Walk
6.1% Run/jog
5.1% Horseback
Question 3
How often, on average, do you use the trail?
3.5% Daily
21.3% More than twice a week
20.5% Twice a week
7.2% Once a week
16.3% A couple times a month
5.3% Once a month
16.0% Few times a year
9.9% First time
Question 4
Please identify your age group.
0.8% 15 and under
4.0% 16–25
7.0% 26–35
13.4% 36–45
34.3% 46–55
28.2% 56–65
12.1% 66 or older
Question 5
Were any children 15 years of age or younger with
you on your trail experience today?
12.5% Yes
87.5% No
Question 5a
How many children in each age category?
22.7% Under 5
34.9% 5 to 9
42.4% 10 to 15
Question 6
What is your gender?
50.3% Male
49.7% Female
Questions 7
What is your primary activity on the trail?
33.3% Walking/hiking
39.7% Biking
12.2% Jogging/running
6.2% Horseback riding
8.7% Pet walking
2.7% Other
Question 8
Generally, when do you use the trail?
11.6% Weekdays
31.6% Weekends
56.8% Both
Question 9
What time of day do you generally use the trail?
37.3% Morning
27.8% Afternoon
3.9% Evening
31.0% Anytime
Question 10
How much time do you generally spend on the
trail on each visit?
1.1% Less than 30 minutes
22.1% 30 minutes to 1 hour
41.2% 1 to 2 hours
35.6% More than 2 hours
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 11

Question 11
Would you consider your main use of the trail to
be for…
36.8% Recreation
55.4% Health and exercise
6.6% Training
0.3% Commuting
1.0% Other
2.6% Walk the dog
16.5% Other: Socialize
Question 12
Have you used other rail-trails in New Jersey?
67.8% Yes
32.2% No
Question 13
How did you find out about the trail?
43.1% Word of mouth
12.0% Roadside signage
20.4% Driving past
2.1% Newspaper
3.1% NJDEP
7.0% Rails-to-Trails Conservancy
3.3% www.traillink.com
6.2% Other website
1.7% Bike shop
1.2% Tourist information
Question 14
Has your use of the trail influenced your purchase
of…?
17.2% Bike
15.9% Bike supplies
10.4% Auto accessories (bike rack, etc.)
16.9% Footwear
14.6% Clothing
1.6% Fishing equipment
23.9% Nothing
Question 15
Approximately how much did you spend on the
items above in the past year?
The average for those who indicated they had
made a purchase and provided a dollar amount
was $371.91 (n=219).
Question 16
In conjunction with your most recent trip to the
trail, did you purchase any of the following?
22.6% Beverages
11.1% Candy/snack foods
6.7% Sandwiches
2.6% Ice cream
11.7% Meals at a restaurant along the trail
0.0% Bike rental
3.5% Other
41.7% None of these
Question 17
Approximately how much did you spend per person
on the items above?
The average for those who indicated they had
made a purchase and provided a dollar amount
was $9.93 (n=162).
Note that this is an average amount spent per person,
per trip.
Question 18
Did your visit to the trail involve an overnight stay
in one of the following types of accommodations
(n=35)?
7.4% Motel/Hotel
7.4% Bed-and-Breakfast
59.3% Friend or relative’s home
22.2% Campground
3.7% Other
Question 19
How many nights did you stay in conjunction with
your visit to the trail?
Average number of nights per stay was 1.7.
Question 20
Approximately how much did you spend on overnight
accommodations per night?
Average expenditure per night for those who provided
an amount was $104.44 (n=9).
Question 21
In your opinion, the maintenance of the trail is…
30.7% Excellent
49.6% Good
15.4% Fair
4.3% Poor
12. / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Question 22
In your opinion, the surface of the trail is…
25.6% Excellent
55.0% Good
14.0% Fair
5.4% Poor
Question 23
In your opinion, the safety and security along the
trail is…
28.8% Excellent
51.8% Good
16.2% Fair
2.8% Poor
Question 24
Which section of the trail do you use most often?
4.9% Brugler Road
8.3% Station Road
13.3% Airport Road
14.9% Footbridge Road
11.4% East Crisman Road
9.4% Spring Valley Road
7.8% Cedar Ridge Road
7.7% Newton Swartswood Road
7.0% Newton Halsey
8.7% Morris Farm
6.9% Warbasse Junction
Question 25
Are you aware of the Liberty-Water Gap Trail?
41.0% Yes
59.0% No
Question 26
Would you be willing to pay a voluntary fee to
help maintain the trail?
59.8% Yes
40.2% No
8.7% Rosston
41.7% Ford City
32.5% Kittanning
6.0% Cowanshannock
1.3% Lock & Dam #8
4.2% Templeton
5.5% Other
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 13

Methodology and Analysis
Utilizing Rails-to-Trails Conservancy’s Trail User
Survey Workbook template as a starting point, this
survey form was refined with input from the superintendent
of Kittatinny Valley State Park, which
manages the Paulinskill Valley Trail. The sample
was self-selecting, meaning trail users could pick
up survey forms that were available at each of the
trail’s primary trailheads between Brugler Road and
Warbasse Junction. The survey forms themselves
were folded into a postage-paid self-mailer that was
addressed to Rails-to-Trails Conservancy’s national
office in Washington, D.C. Survey collection
was conducted from the beginning of June 2010
through the beginning of November 2010.
For the purpose of this analysis, 374 survey forms
were completed. Because several questions called
for multiple responses, and some survey respondents
did not answer all of the questions, the percentages
presented in this analysis are based on the total
number of responses to each individual question.
(Disclaimer: As a self-selecting survey, these findings
are not absolute, and no one can predict with any
certainty how trail users will act in the future. That
said, the findings track very closely with similar
surveys and other published reports, as well as
anecdotal evidence).
The Ghost Town Trail and the Perkiomen Trail were
chosen for comparison because they share similar
characteristics of length and type of surrounding.
The Ghost Town Trail is a multi-use trail that runs
36 miles east to west between Ebensburg in Cambria
County and Black Lick in Indiana County. The
Ghost Town Trail is co-managed by Indiana County
Parks and the Cambria County Conservation
Authority. The trail is primarily rural, running
parallel to Blacklick Creek and game lands and
passing through the town of Ebensburg, as well as a
few small residential communities.
The Perkiomen Trail is a 19-mile multi-use trail in
the southeast section of Pennsylvania. The Perkiomen
Trail is managed by the Montgomery County
Parks Department. Surrounded by suburban communities
and interstate highways, the trail passes
through several small towns as well as rural areas, all
within 30 miles of Philadelphia.
Like the Paulinskill Valley Trail, both the Ghost Town
and Perkiomen trails demonstrate characteristics of
a local community trail.
For the purpose of this analysis, the data from
the Paulinskill Valley Trail User Survey will be
compared with data collected in a 2008 survey
of users on the Perkiomen Trail in Montgomery
County, Pa., and a 2009 survey of users on the
Ghost Town Trail in Indiana and Cambria counties
in Pennsylvania. The data collection methodology
and the survey questions from the Perkiomen and
Ghost Town trail surveys are in most cases identical
to those in the Paulinskill Valley Trail survey.
14 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Distribution of survey respondents based on ZIP code.
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 15

Comparative Analysis
The age profile for the users of the Paulinskill Valley Trail is very similar to the age profile of users of the Ghost
Town and Perkiomen trails. The highest percentage of users of the Paulinskill Valley Trail fall in the 46 to 55-
year age range, which is slightly higher than the comparable trails in this analysis. The Paulinskill Valley Trail
had the lowest percentage of users under the age of 35. In all three of the studies, the majority of trail users
are over the age of 45.
What is your age group?
35
30
25
20
15
Percent
10
5
0
66
Paulinskill Valley Trail
Percent
Comparison with other trails
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
66
Paulinskill Valley Trail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
As with most rail-trails, the primary activities on the Paulinskill Valley Trail are walking and bicycling, with
cycling the most common; the length of the trail lends itself to all-day cycling adventures. Horseback riding is
also a very popular activity on the Paulinskill Valley Trail. There are a number of stables close to the trail that
provide easy access.
What is your primary activity?
Comparison with other trails
40
70
35
60
30
50
25
40
20
30
15
10
20
5
10
0
0
Walk Bike Run Equestrian Pet Other Walk Bike Run Other
Walk
Paulinskill Valley Trail Paulinskill Valley Trail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
Percent
Percent
16 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

All three trails in this comparison pass through a combination of natural ‘wilderness’ areas as well as residential
and retail areas. The Paulinskill Valley Trail passes through the smallest percentage of populated areas and has
the second-longest distance of unbroken trail. The most dramatic difference in time spent by users of all three
trails can be seen in the number of people who are on the trail for more than two hours. The Paulinskill Valley
Trail has the second-largest percentage of people on the trail for two hours or more. This result is typical for
trails of this length, and where cycling is a primary activity.
How much time did you spend on each trail visit?
Comparison with other trails
45
50
40
35
40
30
25
30
20
15
20
10
10
5
0
2 hrs
0
2 hrs
Percent
Percent
Paulinskill Valley Trail Paulinskill Valley Trail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
Nearly 60 percent of users of the Paulinskill Valley Trail purchased consumable items in conjunction with
their trail visit. For the purpose of this survey, these purchases included items such as snacks, water, ice cream
and meals. This percentage is slightly lower than what we see on the Ghost Town Trail, yet higher than on
the more populated Perkiomen Trail. The percentage of purchases relates to the length of the trail and the
environment through which the trail passes (as in feeling a need to be prepared by carrying some nourishment
on more remote or longer trails). The Ghost Town Trail is isolated from services in many places, while the
Perkiomen is always within easy distance of food and water. The Paulinskill Valley Trail is somewhere in the
middle with the amount of available retail establishments from which to purchase items.
Number of people who purchased “soft goods”
Comparison with other trails
Percent
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
0
Yes No Yes No
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Paulinskill Valley Trail Paulinskill Valley Trail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 17

Respondents to the Paulinskill Valley Trail User Survey reported spending an average of $9.93 while on the
trail, somewhat less than users on the Ghost Town and Perkiomen trails. Again, the distance traveled on the
trail, the amount of time spent and the environment through which the trail passes all influence the amount
of money spent on consumable goods. Other factors corresponding to the amount of spending while on the
trail can be the economy in general and the type of trailside retail (full-service restaurants versus quick-stop
snack shops).
Average $ spent per person on “soft goods”
10
$9.93
Average Dollars
8
6
4
2
0
$
Average Dollars
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Comparison with other trails
Paulinskill Valley Trail Paulinskill ValleyTrail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
$9.93
$11.09
$
$13.62
In the case of all three studies, use of the rail-trail has influenced purchase of durable goods by nearly 80
percent of respondents. For the purpose of these studies, durable or “hard goods” included bikes, bike
supplies, auto accessories (bike racks, etc.), footwear and clothing. The percentage of respondents to the
Paulinskill Valley Trail User Survey purchasing “hard goods” is comparable to other user surveys done in
Pennsylvania.
Number of people who purchased “hard goods”
80
100
Comparison with other trails
Percent
60
40
20
0
Percent
0
Yes No Yes No
80
60
40
20
Paulinskill Valley Trail Paulinskill Valley Trail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
18 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

The amount respondents reported spending on durable goods such as bicycles and clothing is averaged at
$371.91 per person on the Paulinskill Valley Trail. The difference in the amount spent by survey respondents
on these trails is less than $40. The percentage of respondents who reported purchasing durable goods varies
by only 12 percent between the three trails (Paulinskill, 76.1percent; Perkiomen, 81.5 percent; and Ghost
Town, 88.4 percent).
Average $ spent on “hard goods” per person?
Comparison with other trails
400
400
350
$371.91
390
$396.89
300
380
250
370
200
$371.91
360
150
$357.63
100
350
50
340
0
330
$ $
Average Dollars
Average Dollars
Paulinskill Valley Trail Paulinskill Valley Trail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 19

Paulinskill Valley Trail
User Estimate
During the summer and fall of 2010, passive infrared counters were placed at two locations along the Paulinskill
Valley Trail. The first counter was placed on the trail at the Spring Valley Road trailhead on June 1. This
counter was moved on August 10 because the trailhead was closed for construction. The counter was placed
on the trail at the Warbasse Junction Road trailhead on August 10, where it remained until November 4.
These counters collect data on the number of trail users passing the counter by detecting each user’s “heat
signature.”
In order to develop an annual user estimate for these two locations, the data collected was extrapolated to a
12-month estimate using a User Visit Model developed by Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. This model examines
data collected using electronic counters at 58 different locations on rail-trails across the United States.
Trail Counter Actual Estimated Adjusted for Adjusted for
Location Count 12-Month Missing Out-&-Back
Count* Counts Trips
Spring Valley Road
June 1, 2.010 to August 10, 2.010 3,703 14,453 17,344 9,12.8
Warbasse Junction Road
August 10, 2.010 to November 4, 2.010 4,768 18,077 2.1,692. 11,416
2.0 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Economic Impact
The economic impact of the Paulinskill Valley Trail
is comprised of a number of elements.
From the survey, the percentage of respondents who
have purchased “hard goods” (bikes, bike equipment,
running/walking shoes, etc.) was determined. Many
of these respondents also revealed how much they
spent on these types of purchases during the past 12
months.
Also, from the survey it was determined how much
trail users spent on “soft goods” (water, soda, snacks,
ice cream, lunches, etc.) while using the trail. Again,
the percentage of respondents who made these types
of purchases provides an important aspect for determining
the economic impact.
Very few respondents to the Paulinskill Valley Trail
User Survey indicated that an overnight stay was
part of their trail experience. Of the 374 completed
survey forms, only 35 indicated an overnight stay.
Of those indicating an overnight stay, 59 percent
were with family or friends and did not result in an
out-of-pocket expenditure.
Estimates of the economic impact of the Paulinskill
Valley Trail are presented in the following tables.
These estimates are based on the potential spending
of trail users who passed the Spring Valley Road and
Warbasse Junction Road trail counters. They do not
represent what the total economic impact for the
full length of the Paulinskill Valley Trail may be.
Hard Goods
Has your use of the trail influenced your purchase
of? (check all that apply)
Bike
17.2.%
Bike supplies 15.9%
Auto accessories 10.4%
Running/walking/hiking shoes 16.9%
Clothing 14.6%
Fishing equipment 1.6%
Nothing
2.3.9%
Approximately how much did you spend on the
items above in the past year? (enter dollar amount)
Average “hard goods” purchase $371.91
(n=2.19)
Soft Goods
In conjunction with your most recent trip to the
trail, did you purchase any of the following? (check
all that apply)
Beverages
2.2..6%
Candy/snack foods 11.1%
Sandwiches 6.7%
Ice cream
2..6%
Meals at a restaurant along the trail 11.7%
Bike rental 0.0%
Other 3.5%
None of these 41.7%
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 2.1

Approximately how much did you spend per person
on the items above? (enter dollar amount)
Average “soft goods” purchase $9.93
(n=162.)
Note that this is an average amount spent per person,
per trip.
Lodging
Did your visit to the trail involve an overnight stay
in one of the following types of accommodations?
(circle one response)
Motel/hotel 7.4%
Bed-and-Breakfast 7.4%
Friend or relative’s home 59.3%
Campground
2.2..2.%
Other 3.7%
How many nights did you stay in conjunction with
you visit to the trail?
Average number of nights per stay 1.7
Approximately how much did you spend on overnight
accommodations per night?
Average expenditure per night for those
providing an amount $104.44 (n=9)
The following chart takes the data provided above
and extrapolates the purchases for the trail users
who passed the Spring Valley Road and Warbasse
Junction Road counters. While “hard good”
purchases may not be made on an annual basis,
they represent a significant expenditure figure. The
purchase of “soft goods” does represent an annual
expenditure, because these purchases are made on a
per-trip basis by users. The percentage of trail users
paying for an overnight stay may vary significantly
from year to year.
2.2. / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Paulinskill Valley Trail Economic Impact Analysis
Annual User Est. (Rounded) Spring Valley Road (9,182.) / Warbasse Junction (11,416)
Category % Usage Avg. $ Avg. Life Avg. # of trips Avg. # of nights Spring Valley / Warbasse
Hard Goods* 70.0% $371.91 6 years 2.4.6 $16,195 / $2.0,136
Soft Goods 36.5% $9.93 $33,2.80 / $41,376
Lodging 2..9% $104.44 1.7 $47,2.2.7 / $58,780
Hard Goods = (% Usage X (Avg. $ ÷ Avg. Life) X (# Users ÷ Avg. Number of Trips)*
In the above example, the calculation for Spring Valley Road would look like this:
((.700 X ($371.91÷6)) X (9,182÷24.6) = $16,195
Soft Goods = (% Usage X Users Avg. $ X # Users)
In the above example, the calculation for Warbasse Junction Road would look like this:
(.365 X $9.93 X 11,416) = $41,376
Accommodations= (% Usage X Users Avg. $ X # Users x Avg. # Nights)
In the above example, the calculation for Spring Valley Road would look like this:
(.029 X $104.44 X 9,182 X 1.7) = $47,277
*Major “hard good” purchases such as a bike may be replaced every five to 10 years. Running shoes may be
replaced every couple months. For the purpose of this analysis, the average life of a “hard good” is assumed to
be six years. To get a figure that is usable on an annual user basis, the “hard goods” need to be broken down to
a per-trip figure. What this amounts to is working the average spending on a “hard good” down to a per-use
depreciation amount.
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 2.3

Trail Maintenance,
Surface and Cleanliness
One of the most important aspects of the trail user survey is that it allows the trail’s management organization
to receive feedback, both positive and negative, from trail users. The 2010 Paulinskill Valley Trail User Survey
can serve as a benchmark against which future maintenance, trail surface and cleanliness issues can be compared.
The questions on maintenance and cleanliness were also asked on the 2008 Perkiomen Trail Study and the
2009 Ghost Town Trail Study. To provide a basis of comparison for the management of the Paulinskill Valley
Trail, the responses from those studies have been included in this section of the analysis. No comparative
analysis is available for the question concerning the trail surface.
Opinion of trail maintenance
Comparison with other trails
60
50
70
60
40
50
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent Good Fair Poor
Percent
Percent
Paulinskill Valley Trail Paulinskill Valley Trail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
According to respondents to this survey, the Paulinskill Valley Trail is fairly well maintained. The high standard
set by the Perkiomen Trail represents a significant amount of work on the part of the Montgomery
County Department of Parks and Heritage Service. The Ghost Town Trail is also maintained by the county
department of parks.
Opinion of trail surface
60
Percent
50
40
30
20
10
0
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Paulinskill Valley Trail
More than 80 percent of respondents rated the
trail surface Excellent or Good. In the comments
there were references to specific sections of the trail
where surface repairs were needed. These responses
may have come from surveys completed after rain
storms or other natural occurrences that impacted
the trail surface. Some of the surface comments
may also be related to the many comments regarding
horse manure on the trail.
2.4 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

The feeling of security that trail users have is influenced by the presence of other trail users, visual observation
of rangers, familiarity with the trail, and each user’s general perception of how safe the overall environment is.
From the chart, it appears that survey respondents to the Paulinskill Valley Trail User Survey feel somewhat
less safe than users of the Perkiomen Trail and the Ghost Town Trail.
Opinion of safety and security of the trail
60
Percent
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
0
Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent Good Fair Poor
60
50
40
30
20
10
Comparison with other trails
Paulinskill Valley Trail Paulinskill Valley Trail Perkiomen Trail Ghost Town Trail
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 2.5

Appendix A—Trail Counter Data
2.6 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

TRAFx REPORT:
Project: Paulinskill Trail User Survey 2010 Start: 2010-06-01 Location: Spring Valley Road Trailhead
Counter: Spring Valley Road Finish: 2010-08-10 Comment:
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2010-06-01
2010-06-03
2010-06-05
2010-06-07
2010-06-09
2010-06-11
2010-06-13
2010-06-15
2010-06-17
2010-06-19
2010-06-21
2010-06-23
2010-06-25
2010-06-27
2010-06-29
2010-07-01
2010-07-03
2010-07-05
2010-07-07
2010-07-09
2010-07-11
2010-07-13
2010-07-15
2010-07-17
2010-07-19
2010-07-21
2010-07-23
2010-07-25
2010-07-27
2010-07-29
2010-07-31
2010-08-02
2010-08-04
2010-08-06
2010-08-08
2010-08-10
Total Counts: 3,703 Daily Mean Weekday: 36.0 Total (1) : 3,703
Total Periods: 71 Daily Mean Weekend: 93.3 Total (2) : 0
Period Length: 1 day Mean Monday 30.7 Percentage (1) : 100.0
Mean: 52.2 Mean Tuesday 36.0 Percentage (2) : 0.0
Mode: 35.0 Mean Wednesday 31.5 Mean (1) : 52.2
Median: 43.0 Mean Thursday 40.6 Mean (2) : 0.0
Standard Deviation: 38.9 Mean Friday 41.2 Max/Min (1) : 167 / 3
Maximum: 167 Mean Saturday 93.2 Max/Min (2) : 0 / 0
Minimum: 3 Mean Sunday 93.5
Total Weekday: 1,836
Total Weekend: 1,867
Daily Max/Min Weekday: 75 / 3
Daily Max/Min Weekend: 167 / 21
FIVE PEAK PERIODS: 2010-07-03 (167), 2010-07-11 (167), 2010-07-18 (146), 2010-06-19 (139), 2010-06-26 (134)
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 2.7

TRAFx REPORT:
Project: Paulinskill Valley Trail User Survey 2010 Start: 2010-08-10 Location: Warbasse Junction Trailhead
Counter: Paulinskill_Warbasse Finish: 2010-11-04 Comment:
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2010-08-10
2010-08-12
2010-08-14
2010-08-16
2010-08-18
2010-08-20
2010-08-22
2010-08-24
2010-08-26
2010-08-28
2010-08-30
2010-09-01
2010-09-03
2010-09-05
2010-09-07
2010-09-09
2010-09-11
2010-09-13
2010-09-15
2010-09-17
2010-09-19
2010-09-21
2010-09-23
2010-09-25
2010-09-27
2010-09-29
2010-10-01
2010-10-03
2010-10-05
2010-10-07
2010-10-09
2010-10-11
2010-10-13
2010-10-15
2010-10-17
2010-10-19
2010-10-21
2010-10-23
2010-10-25
2010-10-27
2010-10-29
2010-10-31
2010-11-02
2010-11-04
Total Counts: 4,768 Daily Mean Weekday: 34.3 Total (1) : 4,768
Total Periods: 87 Daily Mean Weekend: 108.6 Total (2) : 0
Period Length: 1 day Mean Monday 41.3 Percentage (1) : 100.0
Mean: 54.8 Mean Tuesday 32.1 Percentage (2) : 0.0
Mode: 46.0 Mean Wednesday 31.8 Mean (1) : 54.8
Median: 41.0 Mean Thursday 28.8 Mean (2) : 0.0
Standard Deviation: 45.1 Mean Friday 38.5 Max/Min (1) : 188 / 0
Maximum: 188 Mean Saturday 106.8 Max/Min (2) : 0 / 0
Minimum: 0 Mean Sunday 110.4
Total Weekday: 2,161
Total Weekend: 2,607
Daily Max/Min Weekday: 173 / 0
Daily Max/Min Weekend: 188 / 19
FIVE PEAK PERIODS: 2010-09-04 (188), 2010-09-05 (179), 2010-09-06 (173), 2010-09-26 (152), 2010-09-11 (144)
2.8 / Paulinskill Valley Trail 2.010 User Survey

Rails-to-Trails Conservancy / 2.9

Northeast Regional Office
2.133 Market Street, Suite 2.2.2.
Camp Hill, PA 17011
tel 717.2.38.1717
fax 717.2.38.7566
National Headquarters
2.12.1 Ward Court, NW, 5th Floor
Washington, DC 2.0037
tel 2.02..331.9696
fax 2.02..2.2.3.92.57
www.railstotrails.org