[at-l] Wilderness is only part of it

[RoksnRoots at aol.com (RoksnRoots@aol.com)]

In a message dated 8/15/2005 9:32:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
rafeb@speakeasy.net writes:
*
*
*
<http://www.terrapinphoto.com/atl/at_virginia1.jpg>

Here's what I see:

        ***   I loved the Appalachian farm/homesteads I came across and 
consider them an asset to the Trail experience, but they are completely irrelevant 
to what we are talking about and just another one of Rafe's strawmen designed 
to steer us away from the main issue. I've read other entries by Rafe. He's 
not as dumb as he's playing here. This issue just happens to involve facts he 
wants to avoid. Hence we are touring pictures of farms instead of discussing the 
direct impact of cell phone use on the Trail. Rafe is now employing the 
tactic of developers and doing a sales pitch for why the Trail's wildness ethic 
doesn't deserve to be protected.  



1. This is not wilderness.

              ***   I see Rafe isn't showing us a deep stretch of Maine of 
some other remote section of Trail. He's seeking out the weaknesses in order to 
get his cell phone indifference in. 


2.  For me, this is not "disconnectedness."
It is, rather, connectedness -- with the
sort of life that urban folks don't get to
see, all that much.

         ***   It is, but you are conflating two separate issues. You're 
smarter than this Rafe, do you really think people don't see you doing this? Show 
me a picture of a deep stretch and then ask the same question.



3. Item 2 (IMO) is consistent with what
Benton MacKaye wanted in his trail.

           ***    Cell phone advocates are great MacKaye quoters and 
referencers when it comes to distorting his camp development plans. They somehow get 
amnesia when it comes to his wilderness plans. Plans ATC still upholds.



In other words?  What I see here is an
affirmation of what's good, rather than a
rejection of what's bad in the world.

         ***    Let me guess, this new age nonsense includes cell phone 
proliferation and its accompanying impact on the Trail?

           The Trail has both a very definite goal and plan to preserve a 
wild experience. Your submission above does nothing to reflect that. The Trail 
works like most other things. You start with a goal, work out a plan, and figure 
out what actions lead to that goal. The Trail's goal is to maintain a wild 
experience. By geographical circumstance the trail crosses occasional homesteads 
and active Appalachian Valley farms. Those features embellish the experience, 
but in no way do they cancel the Trail's main purpose, or all the planning 
and efforts intended to fulfill that purpose. Your Trail philosophy above 
strikes me as ignoring otherwise open and available facts long existing in plain 
view about the Trail. Those facts serve the Trail much better than your evasive 
sophistry.

           In the long run, as sprawl creeps closer, the Trail would be 
better off buying out those farms and letting the forest grow back. The AT could 
literally be one of the last wild places if things continue as they are. If your 
offering were true to the Trail in a functional way it would show how many 
homesteads just like this eventually became near-Trail sub-developments...







 *