Desire paths. Shortcuts. Environmental catastrophes. However you choose to see them, the College of William and Mary’s campus is littered with them and possibly even haunted by them. Many of these unofficial paths line campus, worn down from students repeatedly trying to get from point A to point B a bit quicker. Desire paths often ignore infrastructure like sidewalks or stairs that are in place, and can wear away natural vegetation. Some of these paths are steep, narrow, or so wide that they are indistinguishable as paths, but most seem to save precious time during a busy student’s day.

Here, I evaluate and document several desire paths on campus. In doing so, I am adding to the existing compendium of the College’s desire path knowledge, first formally collected by Evelyn Hall ’25 in 2022. Since her report, paths have been created, forged, paved, and some remain lost to time. These are their stories. 

“Is this even a desire path?”

Some desire paths are less obvious than others — if I hadn’t used these myself or read about them in Hall’s work, they would be unknown to me. Some of these may not constitute true desire paths either, but they seem too important to gloss over.

The most inconspicuous desire path on campus: A tiny break in the bushes near Zable Stadium would remain unbeknownst to me had I not sought out the fastest way to get from the Bryan Complex to Commons Dining Hall. The path itself is probably two feet long at most, but saves its user from having to walk all the way around the corner of the sidewalk in front of the griffin statue. 

• Time saved: 2/5 - It’s not much of an inconvenience to keep walking on the sidewalk instead of cutting through the bushes.

• Accessibility: 1/5 - Assuming this is even a desire path, you really have to wedge through the bushes and risk getting caught or brushed by one.

• Flood resistant: 5/5 - It’s mulchy, so there’s low risk of a soupy path.

• Aesthetic: 2/5 - The path is ugly and almost too short to rate. Also, the bushes look kind of menacing.

• Overall: 2.5/5 

This seems too good to be a desire path: The wooded strip from Sadler Center to Bryan in between the Sadler visitor parking lot and the Zable parking lot. 

• Time saved: 2/5 - I’ve taken the stairs up to Zable to get to Sadler faster than slow walkers using this desire path, proving it doesn’t really save that much time. It’s only efficient if you’re a fast walker.

• Accessibility: 4/5 - Some trees are closer together and you have to watch for roots, but the path is mostly pretty wide and flat.

• Flood resistant: 3/5 - Mostly reliable but massive puddles will form closest to Bryan that you have to scramble around.

• Aesthetic: 5/5 - It’s beautifully wooded, and if you just focus on the ground you can pretend you’re on a small hike. The trees and colors are gorgeous during all seasons.

• Overall: 3.5/5

Desire….field…?: The patch of grass by the picnic table to get from Chandler Hall to the Sunken Garden path. There’s not a defined path, but Hall and I have both seen students forego the brick walkway to take the shortcut.

• Time saved: 3/5 - It’s an attractive option for those in need of six more seconds.

• Accessibility: 5/5 - It is a gentle hill with lots of open space.

• Flood resistant: 2/5 - The path is marshy at best, but can be a squishy walk after a rainstorm.

• Aesthetic: 2.5/5 - Not a defined path, but that’s not necessarily a detractor. Pine needles on the ground give it an outdoorsy feel.

• Overall: 3.1/5 

Definite desire paths, dubious desirability:

The tiny path around the back of Tucker Hall that leads from the door to the brick path next to the road. Despite its various drawbacks, I can’t stop using it — it’s like an addiction.

• Time saved: 1/5 - You’ll save maybe a second of time.

• Accessibility: 5/5 - No obstacles or elevation.

• Flood resistant: 0/5: It completely floods whenever it rains a little bit, and remains totally unusable because of the large puddles that form.

• Aesthetic: 0/5 - It’s not pretty and looks even worse next to the brick path less than five feet away.

• Overall: 1.5/5 

The path that snakes along the benches by the chalkboard circle outside of the ISC. 

• Time saved: 1.5/5 - You could possibly save a fraction of a second by taking this path instead of staying on the brick or walking through the chalkboard circle.

• Accessibility: 4/5 - It’s pretty flat but you have to brush up next to the benches, which is a social nightmare if people are sitting down.

• Flood resistant: ⅗ 

• Aesthetic: 2.5/5 - My notes say “it’s aight.”

• Overall: 2.75/5 

Echoes of the fallen: Since 2022, the desire path that used to cut a diagonal between two paths to Earl Gregg Swem Library has been filled in with gravel, making it official. 

The top three desire paths on campus, ranked

#3: The hill from McGlothlin Street Hall that leads down to the Sunken Garden is a fan favorite, but the statistics don’t entirely line up. Its impracticality isn’t absolved by its whimsy.

• Time saved: 2/5 - It’s just not that much faster than taking the stairs and walking around.

• Accessibility: 2/5 - About as steep and narrow as a reasonable desire path can get, but there are no root or rock obstructions.

• Flood resistant: 2/5: This path becomes the ultimate Slip n’ Slide after a bit of rain, but that could be a plus, depending on how adventurous you’re feeling.

• Aesthetic: 5/5 - Really encapsulates the romance of attending a small, antique liberal arts school. Feels a little tucked away, surrounded by trees and bushes on the upper level.

• Overall: 3.25/5 - A classic to be sure, but there are more impressive options.

#2: The newly formed desire path next to the new music building was inevitable, rendering it my favorite one. Not only does it stand in defiance to the construction of another ISC addition, but it calls into question the design of the construction itself. Musically inclined students ignore the makeshift gravel walkway, favoring this muddy, perfectly shaped path to get from the ISC to the Music Building.

• Time saved: 4/5 - The other way around is long and anti-Pythagorean. Saves at least a couple of seconds.

• Accessibility: 5/5 - Incredibly flat and wide, with no obstacles in this desire path.

• Flood resistant: 2/5 - Gets incredibly squishy, but doesn’t form deep puddles like other paths on this list.

• Aesthetic: 3/5 - It’s not the most sightly because of the yellow grass and proximity to a building, but it has been described as being “akin to the plains of the west,” evoking a romantic and pioneering connotation.

• Overall: 3.5/5 - My personal favorite, but lacking some infrastructure.

#1: Without further ado, with a whopping 18 points, the best desire path on campus is the small cut from the Mcleod Tyler Wellness Center down to Campus Drive. It’s relevant to mention that a post on Yik Yak featuring this path received 413 upvotes as of March 12, 2024, indicating that many students echo this praise. 

• Time saved: 5/5 - This may be the only campus desire path to save literal minutes of a student's time. It shaves minutes off the commute from the Wellness Center to the Crim Dell, or even from Sadler if you go to the back of the Wellness Center and then down the path.

• Accessibility: 4/5 - The path is a bit steep, but there are no major obstacles.

• Flood resistant: 4/5 - After a storm, the path is not even swampy — just a bit soft. .

• Aesthetic: 5/5 - The path is a gorgeous interlude under the trees that places you either at the Zen Garden next to the Wellness Center or mere feet away from the Crim Dell.

• Overall: 4.5/5 - This path is a staple of the College, and perhaps even the greater Williamsburg community. It truly gives me pleasure that this desire path’s existence will be recorded and preserved in physical media for generations to come