ATC trail guidelines

[weary]

What's the modern day "purpose" of the trail? Here's what the ATC thinks the purpose is. I lifted this from the ATC site, because it struck me as a fair summary of goals. ATC says the following is intended to guide maintaining clubs in their trail management activities.

Question: Do these guidelines reflect the modern realities of the trail? What do WhiteBlaze members think?

THE APPALACHIAN TRAIL EXPERIENCE
(As adopted by the Board, 4/19/97)

The Appalachian Trail is, first and foremost, a footpath open to any and all who travel on foot.

Its sole purpose as a recreational resource is to provide an opportunity for “travel on foot through the wild, scenic, wooded, pastoral, and culturally significant lands of the Appalachian Mountains.” Except in isolated instances where historically recognized nonconforming uses are allowed by legislative authority, the footpath of the Trail should not be used for any other
purpose.

The lands acquired and managed for the Appalachian Trail, not only protect the footpath itself, but provide primary protection of the Trail experience. The Trail experience, as used in this context, is intended to represent the sum of opportunities that are available for those walking the Appalachian Trail to interact with the wild, scenic, pastoral, cultural, and natural elements of the environment of the Appalachian Trail, unfettered and unimpeded by competing sights or sounds and in as direct and intimate a manner as possible. Integral to this Trail experience are:

• opportunities for observation, contemplation, enjoyment, and exploration of the natural world;

• a sense of remoteness and detachment from civilization;
• opportunities to experience solitude; freedom; personal accomplishment; self-reliance; and self-discovery;

• a sense of being on the height of the land;

• opportunities to experience the cultural, historical, and pastoral elements of the surrounding countryside;

• a feeling of being part of the natural environment; and

• opportunities for travel on foot, including opportunities for long-distance hiking.

Other recreational uses of these lands may be compatible if they do not require any modification of design and construction standards for the Trail footpath or Trail facilities; cause damage to the treadway or Trail facilities; require an engine or motor; or adversely impact the Trail experience
or the cultural, natural, or scenic resources of the Trail.

Some recreational uses may affect the Trail experience because of an inherent conflict between different user groups’ expectations in a specific environment. Some might affect the Trail simply because they result in increased use of Trail lands. Other uses might affect the opportunities for solitude and reflection that certain sections of the Trail provide. The potential for conflict between other uses and the Trail’s sole recreational purpose increases as the users’ sense of remoteness and distance from the developed environment increases.

While some activities may be appropriate along a rural or pastoral section of the Trail where other aspects of civilization are clearly evident, they may be entirely inappropriate in a designated wilderness, primitive area, or other remote area, where they may affect the experience significantly for people who may have hiked to that location."

[The Old Fhart]

Also keep in mind that the ATC doesn't prohibit, ban, or discourage certain activities.
http://www.appalachiantrail.org/hike/plan/cars.html
Special Use Permits- ATC Jan 2, 2004
"SUP rules (an extremely valuable tool, that has in the past protected Trail resources from commercial abuse) say that anyone taking money for a service involving Forest Service lands (including roads) must obtain a permit to do so; profit is not a factor. The nonprofit huts in the White Mountains, for example, operate under a SUP. Permit-holders must pay a fee (up to $150 in the case of shuttles) and, more prohibitively, carry fairly high-premium insurance."

Notice the key phrase "from commercial abuse", not regulated commercial use. As the above points out, commercial use of the trail will continue under law.

http://www.appalachiantrail.org/prot..._3advertis.pdf
"At the same time, ATC recognizes that many A.T. hikers value the services (e.g., lodging, restaurants, outfitters, and shuttles) that are available in many communities along the Trail. Those services may be commercial in nature or offered by Trail enthusiasts acting on their own initiatives, who provide free or for-cost assistance to hikers. Both commercial businesses and Trail enthusiasts make significant contributions to the over-all experience of hiking the A.T. and are important to many hikers, especially long-distance hikers."(emphasis mine)

Note that the ATC recognizes the importance of the above mentioned commercial uses and will send you a list of shuttle services, or give you info on other services if you ask. If they disapproved, they wouldn't be posting this information.

Let's not confuse what is done ON the trail with what is done OFF the trail. We must keep in mind that the A.T. exist in one of the most developed areas of the country and the ATC recognizes the fact that the A.T. does not exist in a vacuum.

[Rocks 'n Roots]

ATC makes it more than clear that the main purpose of the AT is remote, detached, and primitive experience of woodlands. Old Fhart's clumsy avoidance of what is otherwise plainly evident in ATC's writings clangs loudly to those who hear what ATC is saying and why. The problem with the AT is that its creator was more than clear on describing the AT's main function as a wilderness experience for urban people. But wise Benton also foresaw the shrivelling of open space we are currently experiencing in our country. The loss of wilderness definition happened when MacKaye left his own creation because of the narrow mindedness of Trail Community members back during the Trail's construction. As we can see on the internet, that same refusal to acknowledge basic wilderness organization still exists today. ATC missed making its purpose clear when it stopped quoting Benton. It's obviously still pushing Benton's purpose, only in an ineffective overly-diplomatic way that allows those who wish to deny this purpose room to do so (as seen on this site). ATC needs to let MacKaye back in and spell it out more clearly. Baxter picked up on MacKaye's message. Baxter Park banned cell phones. But, if you read ATC's guidelines above, the conflict cell phones create with the AT is spelled out right there. The reason you don't see the usual trolls in this thread is because its serious content is all right there. It's something that hecklers avoid because they aren't really interested in discussing it in the first place...


Old Fhart sounds like a lawyer seeking loopholes for the sake of downplaying ATC wilderness ethics. He should try reading and understanding the guidelines (and how they are directly derived from MacKaye) before seeking ways to undo them...

[saimyoji]

Here we go again....

[The Old Fhart]

the WORD from RnR:

ATC missed making its purpose clear when it stopped quoting Benton.
ATC needs to let MacKaye back in and spell it out more clearly.
Again, the AT Community comes off looking like a group of goofs...

RnR, you can’t imagine how please it makes the rest of us to know that you have nominated yourself God and you are the ONLY defender of “wilderness” ethics! The ATC quotes in post #2 makes it very clear where the ATC stands on the issues of shuttles, etc, and because that doesn’t support your psychosis you lump the ATC with the “group of goofs”.

First you say the ATC has made themselves very clear and have taken a strong stand on wilderness. When you asked for, and are shown, evidence directly from the ATC web site on where the ATC stands on the issues of shuttles and other off-trail issues, and it doesn’t support your delusional rantings, you criticize the ATC for being weak. You sound like a lawyer seeking loopholes for the sake of distorting ATC wilderness ethics. Those quotes from the ATC are not equivocation but clear and pointed statements on off-trail use. We eagerly await your next edict from on high….

[TJ aka Teej]

Do these guidelines reflect the modern realities of the trail? What do WhiteBlaze members think?

Yes, the guidelines reflect trail reality.
And this WhiteBlaze member thinks they're doing an excellent job, are pursuing a well defined mission, and deserve the support of every Trail enthusiast. That's one of the reasons I often find myself defending them and the Trail Community against the deluded rantings of the intentionally underinformed R&R. The best thing that ever happened in AT history was when the ATC and others escorted MacKaye and his work camp/asylums/farms/lumbermills/population relocation notions to the sidelines. Thank God we have the Appalachian Trail Myron Avery built and not the one Ben MacKaye proposed!

ATC - Join The Trail Community:
http://www.appalachiantrail.org/support/index.html

[orangebug]

I think that today's Pearls Before Swine might be fitting.

I don't know how to upload a graphic. Try http://www.comics.com/comics/pearls/ and look at Jan 30, 2005.

[weary]

.....ATC missed making its purpose clear when it stopped quoting Benton. It's obviously still pushing Benton's purpose, only in an ineffective overly-diplomatic way that allows those who wish to deny this purpose room to do so (as seen on this site). ATC needs to let MacKaye back in and spell it out more clearly. ...

RnR. Perhaps you could quote us the Benton Mackaye words that strike you as better than:

"(The trail's) sole purpose .... is to provide an opportunity for “travel on foot through the wild, scenic, wooded, pastoral, and culturally significant lands of the Appalachian Mountains.” .... The Trail experience...represent(s) the sum of opportunities that are available for those walking the Appalachian Trail to interact with the wild, scenic, pastoral, cultural, and natural elements of the environment of the Appalachian Trail, unfettered and unimpeded by competing sights or sounds and in as direct and intimate a manner as possible. Integral to this Trail experience are:

• opportunities for observation, contemplation, enjoyment, and exploration of the natural world;

• a sense of remoteness and detachment from civilization;

• opportunities to experience solitude; freedom; personal accomplishment; self-reliance; and self-discovery;

• a sense of being on the height of the land;

• opportunities to experience the cultural, historical, and pastoral elements of the surrounding countryside;

• a feeling of being part of the natural environment; and

• opportunities for travel on foot, including ... long-distance hiking."

Weary

[TJ aka Teej]

Baxter picked up on MacKaye's message.

That is untrue.

[TJ aka Teej]

RnR. Perhaps you could quote us the Benton Mackaye words

Newsflash! Devil ice skates today!

[SGT Rock]

Ya'll must either be lawyer or philosophers.

[peter_pan]

How many ultralighters can hike on the head of a pin while thruing the AT?

[SGT Rock]

Answer - the pin weighs too much and you won't use it that often. Don't carry one and bum it off Mt Dew. He loves to share gear with ultralight hikers so he can complain about them later

[peter_pan]

None...no one will carry the pin......

[peter_pan]

Rock,

you're quick boy...how fast do yopu hike when not on a pin? pan

[weary]

....The best thing that ever happened in AT history was when the ATC and others escorted MacKaye and his work camp/asylums/farms/lumbermills/population relocation notions to the sidelines. Thank God we have the Appalachian Trail Myron Avery built and not the one Ben MacKaye proposed! ATC - Join The Trail Community:
http://www.appalachiantrail.org/support/index.html

It is important to compare Mackaye's dream with the reality of what happened on the ground. What Mackaye wanted was the preservation of a broad swath of protected lands through the Appalachian highlands -- sort of a series of Baxter State Parks, with room for work camps, farms, lumber mills and the like.

It's not clear to me that had such a land preservation system been adopted that it would have been inferior to the narrow coridor through which Myron built his trail.

The AT Conference is changing it's name to Conservancy in part in a belated effort to achieve some of Mackaye's dream. Likewise it is to preserve some of Mackaye's dream in the face of modern development pressures that we created the MAT Land Trust.

www.matlt.org

Weary

[SGT Rock]

I hike real slow.

[Rocks 'n Roots]

First you say the ATC has made themselves very clear and have taken a strong stand on wilderness. When you asked for, and are shown, evidence directly from the ATC web site on where the ATC stands on the issues of shuttles and other off-trail issues, and it doesn’t support your delusional rantings, you criticize the ATC for being weak. You sound like a lawyer seeking loopholes for the sake of distorting ATC wilderness ethics. Those quotes from the ATC are not equivocation but clear and pointed statements on off-trail use. We eagerly await your next edict from on high….

People like Old Fhart are very dangerous for the AT because they sound like they know what they are talking about when they don't.

Old Fhart has done nothing but cherry pick out of context quotes and references while flagrantly ignoring otherwise obvious and accepted Trail terms. But his peppering serious discussion with words like "psychosis", "delusional ranting" and "holier than thou" etc are the sure signs of somebody who isn't serious (unless of course they are out to destroy organized AT wilderness for the sake of it)



When I read OF's replies I get the sense that he is manipulating context rather than dealing with the overall obvious. It's obvious Old Fhart ignores everything ATC has made more than clear in order to force context while ignoring the overall wilderness imperatives made clear in the guidelines. He's obviously reaching - but more dangerously he's trying to defeat the AT's main purpose - which makes him insidious, dishonest, and a detriment to the Trail. He simply ignores what he doesn't want to hear.

The ATC quotes he shows for commercial services are referring to those in towns and other places where traditional support has existed. They are talking about stores, hotels, restaurants, hostels etc. He, however, infers them in such a way as to cover ANY and EVERY commercial service. But, if you go back and read the ATC quotes he omits, it's clear motorized support, and support that diminishes the expected wild state of the AT, are excluded - not included as he suggests.


This is the same person who argued that he never said van support wouldn't make the JMT less wild after making the same argument about the AT. Of course his usual gimmick would have been to claim he was talking about the AT, not the JMT. But those are just the semantic word tricks he tries to fool us with. Any honest person would admit that nightly van support can do nothing but make the AT less wild while also violating some of the clearly spelled out guidelines above.

Old Fhart is nothing but a dishonest deceiver. His argument painfully ignores ATC's printed guidelines discussing services or intrusions in places where it decreases the sense of remoteness or isolation. If you're going to quote ATC Mr Fhart quote all of it or you're just making a dishonest argument...

Other uses might affect the opportunities for solitude and reflection that certain sections of the Trail provide. The potential for conflict between other uses and the Trail’s sole recreational purpose increases as the users’ sense of remoteness and distance from the developed environment increases.

Honestly, is ATC referring to Old Fhart's blunt hammer interpretation of commercial uses being allowed or are they spelling out a need to prevent conflicts with wilderness?

[orangebug]

"Sole purpose as a recreational resource"...

The ATC recognizes that there is a real world in which some of the AT is in relatively remote areas, while some of it is rural and even suburban. No where do they promote wilderness preservation, but a variety of recreational uses of the land, including long distance hiking.

There is nothing in MacKaye's initial proposal or the ATC's "experience" to penalize those who slackpack, section hike, day hike or otherwise use the trail for a recreational resource. They aren't going to endorse specific vendors along the AT, much as the USA doesn't tell you which gas station to use along I-95. They will object to sherpa vendors, but not to slackpacking services.

While complaining that OF "ignores what he doesn't want to hear," how about discussing your home on a barrier island and destroyed wetlands, or your fabricated quotes of me? You live in a shattered glass house.

[mdjeeper]

my take on the whole thing is that van support neither detracts from the "wild" aspect of the AT or does anything to enhance it. If you want the wild aspect, then when YOU go on the trail, dont stop in every town, dont use "supported" hike, sheesh so many people get so wound up about what someone else is doing instead of focusing on their own hike. the remoteness is there for those who want it, its up the individual to decide how remote he wants his hike to be, just because YOU can resupply every three days, does not mean that YOU have to, jsut because there is a road crossing (or nearby access on a side trail) does not mean that YOU have to use it. I for one think the ATC and all the other clubs/organizations that contribute to maintaining the AT have done a fantastic job