Alabama wants The AT
- Thread starter skiguy
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
Interesting. I wasn't aware that the terminus has changed (both north and south before).
I'd also say to truly encompass the entire mountain range, it shouldn't end at the top of Katahdin - or the top of any mountain for that matter.
I'd also say to truly encompass the entire mountain range, it shouldn't end at the top of Katahdin - or the top of any mountain for that matter.
Nor should the watch stop on the summit of peak #48 for the FKT for the NH 4000ers. But it does.
Tim
Tim
JoshandBaron
Well-known member
The IAT continues on from Katahdin to Belle Isle and even has some European sections.
Mike P.
Well-known member
The FKT time stops at the top, so records don't require living past recording it if someone else is your biographer?
I'll the author is taking some liberties with the Terminus moving. At inception, you took what you could get. Since the trail's inception, they have worked on making it longer, getting parts of it off roads, etc.
I'll the author is taking some liberties with the Terminus moving. At inception, you took what you could get. Since the trail's inception, they have worked on making it longer, getting parts of it off roads, etc.
Rhody Seth
Active member
I've a buddy who is hiking the AT but started with the Pinhoti trail first. Seems like they have a good hiking community along that trail so it would be interesting if they extended the AT into Alabama.
This debate comes up every few years. It would be difficult as the AT is National Scenic Trail managed by the National Park Service. It is legally described as Maine to Georgia and would require congressional action to amend. The problem would be is that the NPS requires a "cast in stone" legal right of way which is still debatable on even the current AT. Many trails even long ones exist on a handshake at best over private property. If it becomes National Scenic trail, the goal would be that the NPS has a right of way in fee along its entire length. When the National Scenic Trails act had NPS take over the AT corridor this was significant source of friction especially in the rural south where the government used various legal maneuvers to force landowners and people who thought they owned the land into handing over a formal right of way.
Years ago I was visiting Bob Peoples at Kincora (a very active trail maintainer in a particularly contentious area in rural Tennessee ) and he was discussing the hours over the years he had taken to help heal the divide between the "locals" and the AT even though it had been decades since the NPS heavy handedness in obtaining a ROW. In more than a few cases locals had been actively using land that was actually other peoples property or US government, the NPS didnt even know they were using it and made no attempt to secure a right of way. When the trail was formalized and the locals were informed that they could no longer continue on with the uses they had done for years it created major rift. For years along one particular stretch of trail, hikers were warned never to leave a car at several road crossings as they would frequently get vandalized and burnt.
There are several long distance trails in New England that exist only with the mercy of the landowner and on occasion when ownership changes the trail has to be rerouted. If some entity tried to formalize these routes my guess is the trails may no exist. My guess is any addition to the AT would need to come with a right of way formally established along its entire length and no doubt Georgia would contest the loss of the notoriety.
Years ago I was visiting Bob Peoples at Kincora (a very active trail maintainer in a particularly contentious area in rural Tennessee ) and he was discussing the hours over the years he had taken to help heal the divide between the "locals" and the AT even though it had been decades since the NPS heavy handedness in obtaining a ROW. In more than a few cases locals had been actively using land that was actually other peoples property or US government, the NPS didnt even know they were using it and made no attempt to secure a right of way. When the trail was formalized and the locals were informed that they could no longer continue on with the uses they had done for years it created major rift. For years along one particular stretch of trail, hikers were warned never to leave a car at several road crossings as they would frequently get vandalized and burnt.
There are several long distance trails in New England that exist only with the mercy of the landowner and on occasion when ownership changes the trail has to be rerouted. If some entity tried to formalize these routes my guess is the trails may no exist. My guess is any addition to the AT would need to come with a right of way formally established along its entire length and no doubt Georgia would contest the loss of the notoriety.
