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

[datto_atl@yahoo.com (Datto)]

> negotiating in good faith. We went through 10 years
> of that. As the local
> ATC representative, it was clear that nothing short
> of taking them to court
> was every going to get a solution.

You mean nothing short of taking the Friars to court
was going to get the 1000' easement as the Appalachian
Trail's pound of flesh for the Friars making a mistake
with the pumphouse years ago.

> take our lumps and force them to negotiate (which
> turned out very well as
> far as the trail is concerned).

This is precisely the kind of attitude the ATC has
acquired in recent years that seems to me to be
despicable and terribly damaging to the Trail.

Just exactly how does it benefit the Trail for the ATC
to alienate, via national television no less, would-be
land owners who might have once considered negotiating
with the ATC? And all this for a pumphouse? 

That's the part of the ATC leadership that just
doesn't get it. The part that doesn't understand the
idea of winning the battle and losing the war. Just to
prove it's high and mighty organization has purpose
and is powerful. That was certainly the result of
having the issue portrayed by the television media on
the morning news shows. A high and mighty,
heavy-handed Appalachian Trail organization. No wonder
the public thinks the Appalachian Trail run completely
by the government.

Come to think of it, maybe it would be best to see if
the Friars might be interested in running the
Appalachian Trail. They seem to get it-- the Friars
have a great vision for their rehab expansion, the
ability to understand nuance and appreciate things
like electronic media.

> far as the trail is concerned). This long
> explaination is what I mean by you
> having no concept of how the world works and what
> trades you have to make to get the job done.

Some would say I've done a fair amount of large-scale
negotiation in the past.

One thing that always seems to hold true. The best
deals are the ones that are win/win negotiations
rather than one side coming to the table with a club
and a list of demands.

> There are no members of the ATC board who are not
> end-users of the AT.

In my view the ATC is an organization for trail
maintainers. The ATC actually sees their divine role
as one who is responsible for maintaining the Trail
(and the ATC does an excellent job doing just that).

There is no current organization:

1) representing the true constituency of the
Trail...meaning hikers (of all types -- day hikers,
weekend hikers, section hikers and thru-hikers). Those
are the people this whole thing is about -- the
hikers. The rest play supporting roles. The ATC
doesn't currently understand this concept -- the ATC
leadership still thinks it's all about trail
maintaining. 

2) providing the strong leadership necessary to carry
the Trail through for the next 100 years. The
visionaries, the media handlers (who first have to
understand and appreciate the effect from/of the
media), people who think the experience of the Trail
is something more than a civil engineering project.

> Complaining on this list will never change
> anything.

Being an architect, maybe I should see if the AIA
Journal is interested. Seems they had the guts to
publish some guy's wild ideas back in 1921.

Datto


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/