Re [at-l] RANT PATC''s Ongoing tradition of public serviceand volunteerism for sale

[bullard@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Jim Bullard)]

At 12:21 AM 1/27/2003 -0500, Dave Hicks wrote:
>It is not "perks" that frost me.
>
>For all I care, they can sell all the "perks" anyone is willing to buy, at
>whatever price folk are willing to pay -- as long as the money goes to the
>trail system and related recreational activities.  Raising money for these
>uses is a good and necessary thing.
>
>As I said in my original rant, "It is their blatant equating of 'paying to
>use a cabin, or to go on a trip,' with being part of AT trail builder's
>'ongoing tradition of public service and volunteerism'."  IMHO, "public
>service and volunteerism" is not / or should not be for sale.

Giving money to a trail organization is a 'public service' (especially if
it's more than the minimum required to belong).  I see your point, but it a
question of semantics.  If somebody donates money for trail maintenance
I'll accept that as a public service.

>There has been more and more discussion of getting volunteers out of the
>trail business and just raising money (taxes, dues, user fees, etc.) to pay
>folk to do the work.  BTW, that is not (to the best of my knowledge) the
>PATC official position -- albeit their behavior seems to be headed that way,
>IMHO.

Ah yes, getting volunteers.  Somehow it's easier in this society to get
someone to part with bucks than hours.  You may recall that I mentioned
losing my volunteer helpers.  I did the job alone many times but it's
easier with a friend or two.  I remember back in the '60s seeing Popular
Science articles on how technology would give us all prosperity and
leisure.  We are more prosperous but we seem to have less leisure and that
makes it tough to roust volunteers.

>This is my last post, as I have probably said too much already.

Not at all.  Volunteering is important.  I hope to do more of it in
retirement.  I'd like to find a way to convince more people to do it.

Saunterer