[at-l] Land Aquisition was Graymoor---

[kahley7 <kahley7@ptd.net>]

"Clifford R. Haynes" wrote:
> 
> Lets put the shoe on the other foot if Graymoor had refused hikers and the
> At in the beginning they wouldn't have this problem today.

Ya know, this is an aspect that scares me.  

If we ever want more trails built, conflicts like this and Saddleback
really don't help.  I've told the story before....
Gram was approached.....hmmm..back in the 70's, and asked to allow
access to the abandoned railbed that cut thru the family's acreage
for a rail to trail project.
As hikers, the cousins were pretty much for it cause ....well
we were hikers.  Gram's NO was adamant.  She said
"First they want to use it, then they'll want to own it"
She wasn't the only one who felt like that and the rail trail didn't
happen.  Shame...cause it would have given us a straight route
from the cabin to the MST and avoided a road walk or parking hassles.

Am I right, in my memory, that part of the reluctance of the Maine
landowners to the International AT is based on previous experience
with the AT?

Maybe we should all be writing to our legislators to up the
budget for trail land acquisition and just pay a premium.  Seems
like some sort of extra compensation should be offered over market
value if the government is forcing the sale.
* From the AT-L |  Need help? http://www.backcountry.net/faq.html  *

==============================================================================