[at-l] Re: A Few Comments about the ATC---

[optimyst at gmail.com (Richard C Evans)]

I think Walt got it right.  The ATC is connected.  The folks on the
current board aren't some out of touch group.  We're hikers and
maintainers and AT lovers.  My quixotic involvement came about due to
my ALDHA involvement and happening to be a CPA.  The nominating
committee casts a wide net.  That's not to say that communication
doesn't need to be improved, but the board's decisions were not made
without a huge influence from all of the trail's constituencies.  The
process was fairly exhaustive (and exhausting.)

Even for the new board, I'm confident that they will put the interests
of the trail and the membership first.  But there will be an
adjustment period while the membership gets used to seeing a new
emphasis placed on fundraising.  It is a necessary thing and I don't
think the organization should have to be timid or apologize about it.
Money is as necessary to the ATC as food is to a thruhiker.

If I remember the statistics, over 80 candidates were considered by
the nominating committee for the new board.  I think the 15 directors
chosen will do the membership proud.  I'm especially excited that Hawk
Metheny will play such a pivotal role as chairman of the Stewardship
Council.  I hope nobody is going to suggest that Hawk is out of touch
or isn't "one of us."

I don't understand the "land grab" comment at all.  What, is that just
for developers to do?  Are we supposed to watch as development works
its way ever closer to the narrow trail corridor?  Do we want the AT
to be a path through suburbia, or do we want to work hard to protect
the natural experience as best we can?  To the extent we can tap into
new money sources, a significant chunk of that (my suggestion is 50%)
should go to strengthening the corridor, keeping it free from
additional noise and sight pollution, free from ATVs and free from
invasive species.

One can think of ATC as old and venerable at 80 years of age, but if
we think of the generations of hikers to follow us, don't they have a
right to an undiminished AT experience too?  There will be many
chapters of the AT story to follow and the ATC has an important
mission to uphold.  Land protection is an important part of that,
justifying the new name.  With this new chapter just about to begin,
it seems to me that we are finishing the crawling stage, and are now
ready to stand up and walk, ready to take on the developers and other
threats to the Trail.  This is an organization coming into its own,
just beginning to feel its strength, not a frail old has-been barely
able to protect the existing corridor.  Just wait and see if I'm
right.

Revenues for 2004 were about $4.8 million.  Only about 22% of that
came from membership dues.  Our federal partners kicked in 33% but
expect to see that source decline.  The balance of ATC's revenues came
from donations, merchandise sales and investment income.  It's not
enough.  We spent more than we took in.  By the way, most of the
consultants were paid for out of Park Service grant monies, not our
members' dues.  In 5 years, I expect revenues to at least double, and
I expect to see a capital campaign targeting tens of millions of
dollars for our endowment and land trust.

Some of you know of my legendary frugality from my involvement with
ALDHA.  Being a cheapskate comes very naturally to me and that's the
right posture to take with ALDHA whose folk mission is very
non-financial in scope.  (I compare the $10 cost of the Gathering to
my $269 registration fee for the upcoming biennial conference and I
can certainly appreciate the magic of an ALDHA Gathering.) But my
frugality (and yours) has no place in the ATC, for the mission of the
ATC requires us to protect a trail that is under constant threat from
commercial and residential development, pollution, etc.  I'm quite
happy to put my hat in my hand and beg for $$$$ for ATC.  The cause is
just and the need is great.

The new name resonates with new trail users.  The new name also
positions us to compete for new (and major) sources of funds.  The
fundraising burden will not be only on the backs of current
supporters.  We have a compelling story to share with casual users and
friends of the environment.  With the programs being developed now, I
think that a tripling of membership is really a very conservative
goal.  The next few years should be an exciting time.

I hope Walt and I have addressed your concerns, anklebear.  And anyone
with concerns should really consider coming to Johnson City in July. 
Meet the new board. Meet the new staff.  Hear the plans.  Express your
concerns.  It is your ATC.

Happy trails,

Solar Bear



On 5/28/05, Leslie Booher <lbooher@pure.net> wrote:
>  
> Solar Bear, I am very appreciative of your responses and your insights. 
> They have made me feel far more in touch with what's happened in Harpers
> Ferry than anything that they've sent out.  Thank you for doing that.  
>   
> I admit, as you may have read in the ATN a couple of issues ago, that I am
> firmly against the name change.  I think it paints us as something that I
> don't think we should be. 
>   
> For a number of years, I have thought that the ATC was in the land-grabbing
> business, and I don't like anything about that.  I think we're taking on far
> too much land and using our resources unwisely there.  "Conservancy" buys
> right into that model.  
>   
> I am curious to see how they're (we're) going to go about getting, what is
> it, three times the number of members as we have now?  I also have to admit
> to having more of a "they" feel about the ATC nowadays; when I first joined
> 15 yrs. ago, and when I became a life member about 8 yrs. ago, I had a very
> "we" feeling about the organization.  I felt that I was a part of what was
> going on.  That feeling evaporated slowly over the past few years, even
> though I have moved geographically closer. 
>   
> What has taken the place of the "we-ness" of the ATC for me has been AT-L
> and ALDHA.  Getting to know actual hiking people keeps me in touch, not with
> the higher organization, but with the hikers on the ground.  How can we plug
> in as a PAC or some kind of lobbying group with the "Conservancy"? 
>   
> anklebear