LSt week I got an on-line survey from ATC. I made sure to let them know how I felt about their constant plea for money and involvement in politically correct social issues. I answered the question about if I'll renew my membership with a No. We're life members and don't need to renew.
Welcome to the AppalachianTrailCafe.net!
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation
ATC Survey
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.
-
-
LIhikers wrote:
LSt week I got an on-line survey from ATC. I made sure to let them know how I felt about their constant plea for money and involvement in politically correct social issues. I answered the question about if I'll renew my membership with a No. We're life members and don't need to renew.
It reminds me of a bumper sticker my dad use to have, "If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns". So while people like me who practice LNT stayed off the AT this summer per their wishes, a bunch of cluess newbies have bombarded it. Much better if they had kept ridge runners, rangers, and experienced hikers out there to help show how things should be done.The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
Richard Ewell, CSA General -
After much contemplation, I renewed my membership for the 32nd time (shoulda got Life years ago!) becasue I believe they handled the pandemic correctly -- placing primary importance on the lives and health of hikers and the townspeople hikers come in contact with. I'm sure this was a difficult decision that they knew would be unpopular with their members. Our polititions could learn a few things from the ATC.
The issues I have with the ATC pale in significance to the pandemic.2,000 miler -
max.patch wrote:
I believe they handled the pandemic correctly -- placing primary importance on the lives and health of hikers and the townspeople hikers come in contact with.
The reaction.....although sensible initially.....is clearly overblown as we've learned more about the virus. But yet they stand their ground. Somewhat foolishly imo.
The real problem....is too many hikers to start with. Same problems every year.....each year norovirus runs rampant. They never gave a crap about that..... Unhealthful conditions on AT. People getting sick.
But, in spite of it, the trail is very busy, people ARE using shelters and privies. In high numbers. Just not many thru hikers.
So say, as we expect, covid never goes away completely. What then? Tear down shelters....reduce #s..?
Decisions decisions.The post was edited 2 times, last by Muddywaters ().
-
“Of all sad words of tongue or pen,
the saddest are these, 'It might have been.”
John Greenleaf Whittier -
-
Hope you stay on as a boundary monitor LIHikers.
In some ways what the ATC did is the typical type of extortion I see in local planning boards. Elected Town officials or some citizens group will oppose a development until the developer gives them something they want, new side walks, a playground, whatever.
In the case of the ATC, I do not know enough about this pipeline to understand how detrimental it would be to the trail experience. I mean, there will be plenty of things that do and will cross the trail, roads, power lines, and pipelines. Getting something in return for dropping opposition is rather ugly, but also business as usual in America today.
But I do believe that the ATC should be transparent in whatever their agreement and reasoning was in this matter. The contributors to the ATC need to know and decide if this is the sort of behavior they want to be supporting.“Of all sad words of tongue or pen,
the saddest are these, 'It might have been.”
John Greenleaf Whittier -
IMScotty wrote:
Hope you stay on as a boundary monitor LIHikers.
In some ways what the ATC did is the typical type of extortion I see in local planning boards. Elected Town officials or some citizens group will oppose a development until the developer gives them something they want, new side walks, a playground, whatever.
In the case of the ATC, I do not know enough about this pipeline to understand how detrimental it would be to the trail experience. I mean, there will be plenty of things that do and will cross the trail, roads, power lines, and pipelines. Getting something in return for dropping opposition is rather ugly, but also business as usual in America today.
But I do believe that the ATC should be transparent in whatever their agreement and reasoning was in this matter. The contributors to the ATC need to know and decide if this is the sort of behavior they want to be supporting.
The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
Richard Ewell, CSA General -
IMScotty wrote:
Hope you stay on as a boundary monitor LIHikers.
-
Only 1 reason they wont disclose it...
Petition needs to be started with nps to replace atc personel due to malfeasance. At maintaining club levels too. Theres shenanigans afoot..... -
-
This wasn't new news.The deal was announced back in August, with few details about it.
There will be an upcoming podcast by Mighty Blue with one of the directors from the ATC who answered questions regarding the deal.On the surface, it would appear the ATC "sold out".However, Mighty Blue suggested we withhold judgement until we hear the whole story.
I will post a link to the podcast when it appears.its all good -
-
While the ATC has admitted that the pipline is detrimental to this area, they have said that the agreement will result in a "net gain' to the AT.
I guess we'll know in the fullness of time.
Seems to me if they have time to do a podcast, they have time to issue a press release and write an article in Journeys -- and Journeys would be much more appropriate than participating in a podcast. And of course they have a website where this can be discussed.
I'm not going to throw the ATC under the bus for the agreement as I don't know the details -- but I can rightfully criticize them for the lack of trasnparency.2,000 milerThe post was edited 1 time, last by max.patch ().
-
This was the August press release.
appalachiantrail.org/news/volu…-advance-at-conservation/
I'm not,in any way, defending this deal, but I do suspect it may amount to nothing more than making the best of a no-win situation. It's questionable whether the ATC had either the authority or the jurisdiction to prevent the MVP from being built.
I'm anxious to hear more about the details, and hopefully the podcast interview will shed some more light.
this is the original press release regarding the MVP from several years ago
journeys.appalachiantrail.org/…n-valley-pipeline-update/its all good -
-
-
“That kind of told us, ‘Hey, the AT will bear some impact from the
pipeline and we can’t stop it. … If all we are going to get is nothing,
let’s get the best deal we can,’” he tells The Trek. “This is not
necessarily where we wanted to end up from the beginning. The pipeline
was 80 percent built at the time we signed the agreement; the visual
impacts had already occurred; we made a decision that was the best
outcome for the trail at that point.”
thetrek.co/appalachian-trail/a…ine-agreement/?ref=sliderits all goodThe post was edited 1 time, last by hikerboy ().
-
-
-
Share
- Facebook 0
- Twitter 0
- Google Plus 0
- Reddit 0