[at-l] Trail History Clarification Requested

[daveh at psknet.com (Dave Hicks)]

I don't have numbers, but the examples Jim talks about are similar to
stories here in SW VA.

I have had USFS working level folk tell me that a proposed trail relo [a
series of bad PUD climbs to be replaced by a nice sidehill] was denied by
USFS management because it would have swung too close to the existing
corridor boundary and USFS thought it was an attempt by ATC to lay the
ground work for another land grab, either for a buffer, or view.

Chainsaw

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim and/or Ginny Owen" <spiriteagle99@hotmail.com>
To: <rickboudrie@hotmail.com>
Cc: <at-l@backcountry.net>
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: [at-l] Trail History Clarification Requested


rick boudrie wrote:
>If I understood Jim Owen's post correctly, he is saying the AT was aquired
>"very often by condemnation thus breaking faith with the people who
>welcomed the trail in the first place."
>
>Can anyone provide additional information on this?  If possible, with more
>than an anectdote about a person who was "screwed" by the ATC and NPS, but
>rather with information that addresses the degree to which the AT was
>aquired this way.  My interest is getting a handle on the "very frequently"
>part.

If you want hard numbers, they're only "somewhat" available - and you'd have
to work for them.  You could examine the land transfer records for each
county along the Trail.  I wouldn't speak for Maine - maybe it's different
there - but in NC, VA, MD, PA, NJ and NY - if the transfer record says it
was condemned, then you can put big money on an involuntary condemnation
rather than the rationalizations I'm seeing go by here - "voluntary"
condemnations are rarer than hens teeth.

Or you could dive into the ATC and NPS records - if they'd allow that.  But
even that wouldn't tell the whole story.


>I am less interested in hearing about how the NPS condemded land over which
>the trail passes in the Smokines and SNP and the BRP for reasons that had
>had nothing to do with the AT, than I am interested in the kinds of
>condemnations of land alluded to by Jim.

Why do you think that the Smokies and SNP condemnations had nothing to do
with the AT?  Go read some AT history --- there are a number of books that
deal with the AT in SNP.   And probably some that I don't know about that
deal with the Smokies.


>But have thousands  parcels of the AT been aquired by condemnation?
>Hundreds?  Scores?  Or just a few.   And to put things in perspective, does
>anyone have a notion to what percentage of Trail Miles these represent?

Lesse here - I personally know of 5 separate farms in NC that were taken
specifically for the AT - even though some of them were outside the AT
corridor - does that count?  And then there are at least 9 in VA the same
way.  And I don't even live in VA or NC.

The first time I ran into this was when a friend was "asked" to sell his
property on the ridge in VA - with the stated threat that if he didn't sell
at the offered price, he'd face condemnation proceedings.  That wasn't one
of the 9 though --- but I know of another couple dozen properties ranging
from a quarter acre to a quarter section (160 acres) that were "taken" the
same way - by coercion.

In PA, the trail was mostly routed through Gamelands and State Forests - but
not entirely.  You might want to watch the action in the future in the
Boiling Springs area.  And as we speak, I've been told there's some action
to "take" a large part of a Game Preserve - the one north of Caledonia State
Park, if memory serves.

Then, of course, there's Delaware Water Gap --- and most of the ridge north
to High Point State Park.

>And of these condemnations, how how many were instigated or associated with
>the AT project, thus breaking the faith of the people who welcomed the
>Trail in the first place.   We all know about the Smokies and SNP, but that
>I think that is a whole seperate kettle of fish.

Not at all - although there are those who'd like you to think so.


 >Like Jim Owen, I have
>learned to question what I read.  By doing so, please understand that I am
>not saying he is wrong or challenging his manhood.

And I didn't take it that way, Rick.  I AM sometimes wrong - after all, I
married Ginny with the understanding that while she's perfect - I'm not.
<VBG>

>He may well be right that the AT was aquired "very often by condemnation
>thus breaking the faith with the people who welcomed the Trail in the first
>place".  Perhaps there are
>numbers and data to back this up?

As for "breaking faith" -- how about the farm at Devil Fork Gap near Erwin?
  After voluntarily and without compensation giving up a right-of-way for
the Trail, two years later the owner was told they wanted "more".   So he
gave them a bigger buffer.  Then a couple years later - they wanted "more".
And this time they didn't ask nicely - they just told him they were gonna
condemn his farm.  After 6 months of negotiation, they hammered out an
agreement and the gubmint boys went back to Washington to "get agreement
from thier superiors".  And 6 months later he was told that the agreement
was void and the that they were gonna condemn his land.  So they went
through the whole cycle again.  And then again.   It went on like that for a
while - one nastiness after another for year after year.  Wanta make a guess
about whether that farm is still there?  You know better, don't you?
Breaking faith, Rick - the NPA and ATC have been no better about that than
Congress and the BIA were about keeping treaties with the Indians.

One more point - the fact that a land transfer indicates a "sale" - does NOT
mean it was a "willing" sale.  Yeah - some of them are - and a whole lot of
them have been coerced sales.

Bottom line - no -- there are no hard numbers - even in the ATC and NPS
records

So - what's your definition of "very often"?  And why do you think even
"once" is acceptable?

Walk softly,
Jim

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself with MSN Messenger 6.0 -- download now!
http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_general

_______________________________________________
at-l mailing list
at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l