Northern California’s Great Redwood Trail, an ambitious project transforming a former rail corridor into a long-distance recreational trail, has sparked significant controversy over tribal consultation and the protection of sacred sites. The planned route, which would stretch approximately 231 miles from San Francisco Bay to Humboldt Bay, traverses ancestral lands of Indigenous communities, some of whom allege that the state has sidelined their input in the trail’s development.

The trail, championed by state Senator Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg), aims to create a premier regional destination akin to the Pacific Crest Trail. Advocates highlight its potential to boost economic activity in rural North Coast towns such as Ukiah, Willits, and Cloverdale, which have faced declines in timber and cannabis industries. According to the Great Redwood Trail Agency, roughly 40% of the northern segment is either complete or under construction. The southern portion along a commuter rail line is managed separately by Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit and attracted over one million users last year.

However, tensions have emerged chiefly around tribal consultation. Members of the Kinest’e Community Coalition, representing Indigenous stakeholders, have voiced strong opposition to the trail’s current alignment. They allege that the planned route would allow public access over burial grounds and other sacred sites without adequate consent. Tribal representatives claim they had limited involvement in early planning stages and that the project failed to meaningfully engage them in decisions affecting their ancestral lands. For many, the issue is compounded by a history of displacement and restricted access to these territories.

Compounding the concerns is the state legislature’s exemption of the Great Redwood Trail from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in 2023. CEQA ordinarily mandates formal environmental review and tribal consultation for projects of this scope. The exemption was part of broader reforms aimed at expediting trail and housing developments, with lawmakers citing the need to avoid protracted legal challenges. Critics, including former Humboldt County Supervisor Steve Madrone, argue that bypassing CEQA undermines tribal trust and weakens safeguards for cultural resources. Madrone resigned from the trail agency board partly due to frustration over the exemption and lack of consultation with tribes and landowners.

The Great Redwood Trail Agency states it has conducted outreach through letters, calls, and emails and is committed to “comprehensive involvement” of tribes in planning, construction, and stewardship, even if not under CEQA’s legal framework. The agency maintains contracts and partnerships with several local tribes, including the Wiyot Tribe, Blue Lake Rancheria, and the Hopland Band of Pomo Indians, and has allocated $5 million toward tribal cultural resource preservation. Planned initiatives include forming a tribal advisory committee to enhance collaboration.

Environmental groups express mixed views. Some, like Alicia Hamann, executive director of Friends of the Eel River, support the trail’s potential environmental benefits, including cleanup of creosote-contaminated rail ties and restoration of fish habitats. Yet they acknowledge the need for stronger tribal input. Others, such as Alicia Bales of the Sierra Club’s Redwood Chapter, criticize current consultation efforts as insufficient, describing tribal involvement as advisory rather than decision-making.

While some tribes have engaged with the trail agency and are open to dialogue, Indigenous leaders like Lincoln and his daughter Tisansche Warren emphasize ongoing exclusion from their traditional lands and cultural sites. They question the fairness of granting unrestricted public access to areas where tribal members themselves still face restrictions.

As the project advances, balancing the trail’s economic and environmental promises with the cultural rights and concerns of Indigenous communities remains a central challenge. Stakeholders on all sides recognize the importance of collaboration, but mistrust rooted in historical trauma continues to complicate efforts toward a shared path forward.