[at-l] (Guest Post) "so called"

[wdaniels@bestweb.net (Walt Daniels)]

> I see this issue as one similar to that surrounding
> the Graymore Friary -- somebody at the ATC decides to
> stomp their feet and throw a hissy fit about an issue
> that doesn't amount to an ant hill of a problem.
>

The ATC had absolutely nothing to do with NPS proceeding toward condemnation
on Graymoor. NPS did that entirely on their own. Graymor in fact brought it
on themselves for refusing to negotiate in good faith. In the past, they
agreed to innumerable solutions and then refused to sign when the time came.

If it is an ant hill then you should be willing to accept the NPS policy of
no advertising on NPS land. Is that what you want? Or would you rather have
ATC negotiate for a softer solution?


> Then the ATC/NPS/Justice Department/Gument finds
> themselves looking like jerks just to prove a point
> and the whole thing gets out of hand.
>

To use your metafore: Why do jerks like you refuse to understand how the
world works.

> Why is it the current and recent past ATC leadership
> seems to want to get themselves into meaningless
> confrontations with neighbors along the Trail?
>

Because ATC is trying to protect the trail experience for all users. (and
they aren't meaningless).


> I wonder how many thousands of dollars were wasted by
> the ATC/NPS/Justice Department/Gument on legal bills
> and administrative costs surrounding that whole Friary
> issue...
>
ATC did not spend any money on the Graymoor issue. I spent several hundred
hours of voluteer time working toward solutions acceptible to all parties.
Just try negotiating with someone who yes to many options and then refuses
to sign the papers at the end of the day. It is very frustrating.