Looks good! A few little things:
I find the first 3 trail categories (in the legend) to be a little too similar to be easily distinguishable. You'll lose a lot of older viewers (yes, we use trails too!) or anyone looking at it in poor lighting. A little tweaking of these trail designs could go a long way.
The sun angle on the relief is NE, which is non-standard and also counter-intuitive to some viewers. It also conflicts with the drop shadows, which do use the more standard NW illumination.
I would make the water names a darker blue. I've found that text colours often appear lighter than the same colours used in lines and areas. For example, rivers shown in cyan 100 can be named in cyan 100 / magenta 40, and the colours will appear to match visually.
My target audience is older viewers. I have gotten rid of the road/trail combo. That leaves me with a white, puple, and red trail. I understand the low-light dilemma, and when your in the backcountry it is almost always low light. I try to use as much contrast as possible to remedy this, i.e. a dark purple on a light gray and a white on a dark green.
With my hillshade I have use a combo of NW and NE. Trying to make the canyons pop as much as possible. However, my main goal was to cast a shadow on the Double Branch Hole canyon immediately adjacent to the west of my client's campground. It is a superior that they have over their competitors, and I want to emphasize it.
I was requested to remove all the water feature names on an early draft. In this version I have dropped them in the visual hierarchy, with the hopes of salvaging at least a few.
Thanks for the comments, I'll keep them in mind on the next version.
"Ah, to see the world with the eyes of the gods is geography--to know cities and tribes, mountains and rivers, earth and sea, this is our gift."