Extending the Appalachian Trail to Alabama

[Magic City Matt]

SO the Birmingham News ran this article today about a commission being created to help spur the extension of the Appalachian Trail to Alabama.

http://blog.al.com/birmin...n_trail_expansion_ge.html

I know a lot of you have some strong opinions about this but let try to keep the debate civil.

Why do you think we should or shouldn't extend the trail to Alabama.


M

[Firedog]

Why not? I don't know much about the management of the AT but it seems that if it works well in other states, it would work here as well. Surely it would generate more interest and commerce for Al. Maybe if the legislation written would insure continuous funding for maintenance and improvements.
Carl W.

[WolfVanZandt]

They were talking about extending the Appalachian Trail into Alabama when I was a kid. The only dispute I've ever heard was about right of way. As far as I'm concerned, they should try to find a way to link it to the Florida Trail so you can walk from Canada to Key West.

[Joshua Szulecki]

Well, the mountains do end in Alabama...

[grillmastertoo]

Not knowing all the details, i would think it would be a great thing....
What are the cons on this project?

[MississippiRob]

I see it as nothing but a positive for AL and the Pinhoti in general.

[Bearpaw]

It would probably be a nightmare for the folks who take care of the Pinhoti.  To become part of the AT would open the PT to a whole new host of regulations, standards, and headaches.

I worked as a volunteer for the Cumberland Trail from 2000-2007 and the trail had made good progress in its building when I started.  Then late in 2000, then-governor Sundquist made the CT a Tennessee State Park.  He meant well, but it may have put the nail in the coffin for the CT to ever be finished.  More restrictions, regulations, waits for congressional approval, the whole gamut.  State funding was minimal; the trail is still primarily funded by private donations.  The cost FAR outweighed the benefits.  Ten years after I began, the CT still needs over 100 miles of trail to be finished.  It was supposed to be completed in 2008.  Maybe, with luck, it will be finished by 2020.

Joining the ATC would entail similar changes, mostly negative for the Pinhoti Trail.  Right now, its welfare is largely in the hands of those locals who take care of it all the time.  Add a much larger, more cumbersome organization, with MANY more Washington eyeballs on it, and you can expect the PT to lose a good deal of it Alabama influence.  The pluses likely would NOT outweigh the roadblocks, political infighting, restrictions, and the loss of local influence.

The PT is already an outstanding trail and it already connects to the AT via the BMT.  Market it as the warm-up to an AT thru-hike.  But don't let it lose its identity as a unique Alabama trail.

[Cuffs]

this same conversation is going on over at WB.  This is quoted with permission, by Sgt. Rock.

I understand how you guys feel, I felt the same way for a while myself. I am from Alabama originally and could see how having the AT going down into Alabama would be a source of pride for the state and open up hiking opportunities in Alabama to people that haven't considered it.

But then I got involved in the BMTA as a maintainer and was there when they opened the rest of the trail between US64 and Davenport Gap. I've thru-hiked the BMT and I write the BMT thru-hikers guidebook. I now think that this would be a terrible idea because not every trail should be like the AT.

The problems for people like me who maintain the BMT are a few. The BMT was specifically built to NOT be like the AT:

- We have only got two shelters: 1 was built on private land where the BMT crosses his land, and the section is a few miles long - so it was to avoid having people hobo camping in someone's back yard. The other we inherited because of the route through the Smokies.

- The style of trail maintenance is more in tune with leaving the trail narrow and a more wild feel than the AT. The AT maintainers would shudder at the way we leave the trail. And it is meant to be that way.

- Right now you get the feeling of solitude on the BMT precisely because we don't have any outhouse. There aren't signs all over the place telling you where the water is, and overall there are less "structures" like bridges (lots more fording on the BMT), blazes, etc.

The BMTA does not want to change that. They want the BMT to have it's own character and feel. If the BMT became part of the AT, there would be shelters, outhouses, and more bridges, etc. Basically the BMT would turn into something it is not supposed to be.

I don't know ANYONE in the BMTA that would like to have some in Alabama get their trail incorporated into the AT just so a couple of people in Alabama can now claim the AT goes into their state.

And this is the basic truth: The BMT has been connected to the AT since 1979. That section that they (these guys, not the ATC or the Pinhoti people) want to incorporate has been available for AT hikers to use for over 30 years now. Anyone that wants to hike it can, and has been able to for many decades - but unless you pay attention here on WB and listen to a few people like me, no one is beating the door down to want to hike the extra miles. The only thing adding it to the trail does is create a situation where AT purists will now have to get on in Alabama because that is now the "official" trail.

But the saving grace in all this is the fact that the AT is designated by Congressional act. You cannot just talk to the AT and convince them to move the Terminus sign. Congress would have to amend the designation of the trail and start buying land if that were to happen. Normally I would say it wouldn't every have a chance. But lately, if someone's vote was needed for some bill and this got to be his or her pet project, I would say we would have a chance to have this shoved down our throats.
________________ __

the ATC does have it's maintenance standards and all. The BMT is not to those standards and I prefer it is a more wild, remote feeling trail. If the BMT were moved under the ATC for that section, then the ATC is the governing body in the eyes of the government and thus would set standards for the BMT section that would be incorporated if these guys get their way.

If you wanted to lessen the impact on the first 250 miles of the AT(the BMT is almost 300 miles long but gets to about MP250 on the AT) , then the ATC could simply change the "official" hike policy for 2000 miler status to say the BMT is an authorized substitute for the first 250 miles of AT. I would encourage that. I don't encourage taking over other trails just so the terminus of the AT can be moved to Alabama.

That said, if these guys from Alabama think this is such a great idea, they only need to build themselves a few more miles of trail to connect the Pinhoti and the AT, then they could call the trail they build themselves whatever they wanted to. I don't suppose they feel so enthusiastic about the plan that they would go out and build 65 miles of trail themselves. Better to take the credit for getting the AT extended - probably less work and more kudos.


If someone wants to hike from Alabama to Maine, there is nothing stopping them. They don't have to rename all the trails to "AT" for the hike to somehow become possible.
Again, funny thing is, even though it is possible there aren't a bunch of people lining up to hike the trails that way.

The Pinhoti does connect to the AT using the BMT. You can hike it now if you want to and I highly encourage people to do it. I like both the Pinhoti Trail and the Benton MacKaye Trail. I need to get back and do some more hiking on the Pinhoti and check out some of the completed sections.

But no one needs to wait for the Pinhoti and BMT to be absorbed into the AT.

Thanks Rock, couldnt have said it better!


SGT Rock

[jaybird]

I would encourage everyone to read the history of the A.T. (below).  Its northern and southern terminus's have been fluid over the years, with Benton MacKaye's original vision being a trail between the 2 highest points in the Eastern U.S. -- Mt. Mitchell, NC and Mt. Washington, NH.  The original vision called for "possible side trails to Mt. Katahdin, ME and down into Alabama."  The Maine "side trail" is now officially designated A.T., and that happened early on, due to the influence of political leaders.  The southern terminus eventually was moved from Mt. Mitchell to Mt. Ogelthorpe, GA.  I've even heard one story that it was Mt. Rogers, VA, for a time somewhere in between this period.  Then, overdevelopment caused the southern terminus to be moved 10 miles northward to the current Springer Mountain.  The southern "side trail" is still just that, and may stay just that.  But, who's to say that political pressure, or hikers starting further south won't eventually cause the southern terminus to be moved again.  Federal dollars would more than make up for the paltry amounts the Forest Service and trail clubs are currently given for maintenance.  Time will tell.  But, the mention of Alabama is there in the original vision of the A.T.  And, so far, it's the only section not officially designated A.T.  Kind of makes you feel like a red-headed stepchild.

=================================
History of the Appalachian Trail

The A.T. began as a vision of forester Benton MacKaye He envisioned a trail that would offer the urban dweller an escape. The Appalachian Trail opened as a continuous trail in 1937. It was designated as the first National Scenic Trail by the National Trails System Act of 1968.

Shortly after the turn of the 20th century, the conservation movement in America was launched by President Teddy Roosevelt. In the northeast many proposals had been made prior to 1921 to create a "super" trail. but it was Benton MacKaye's "An Appalachian Trail: A Project in Regional Planning" published in the Journal of the American Institute of Architects in October of 1921, that really sparked the conservationist into action.

The original proposal was for a footpath to run from the highest point in the northern Appalachians being Mt. Washington and New Hampshire, to the highest point in the southern Appalachians being, Mt. Mitchell in North Carolina. Within a year work began on "America's Footpath within two years members of the New York-New Jersey Trail Conference completed and opend the first section of the Appalachian Trail in the Palisade Interstate Park, from Pennsylvania to Connecticut across theBear Mountain State Park in New York.

By 1925, at a meeting in Washington, DC, leaders of local hiking clubs founded the Appalachian Trail Conference (ATC) which expedited the dream towards reality. Major William A. Welch, ATC's first chairman and manager of the Palisade Interstate Park was to oversee the construction and management of the Trail. At this meeting, the group also decided that the Trail's route would run 1700 miles from Cohutta Mountains in Georgia to Mt. Washington in New Hampshire with possible extensions to Katahdin, Maine to the north and Birmingham, Alabama to the south.

Little was known by the ATC about the North Georgia mountains and they mostly planned the trail by referring to maps. So Roy Ozmer, woodsman and friend of Georgia Ranger Arthur Woody was put in charge of exploring the area from Virginia to Georgia. Togther knowing the area, they felt that extending the Appalachian Trail to Mount Oglethorpe, east of Jasper, was a better choice for the end of the trail. Woody assisted personally in the construction of the route in Georgia from Bly Gap to Mount Oglethorpe, which was completed in 1931.

Construction accelerated in the late 1920s. Myron Avery who was Potomac Appalachian Trail Club (PATC) co-founder, and the chairman of ATC durring 1931-1952, tirelessly recruited volunteers for the Trail and scouted, blazed, and built many miles himself. By the end of 1934, more than 1900 miles of the AT was complete.

As the Trail continued to take shape it became clear that Avery and MacKaye had very different visions of the Appalachian Trail . Avery saw it as a trail for people to enjoy outdoor recreation. MacKaye's saw the trail as a connection between working communities. The Skyline Drive project in Shenandoah National Park further highlighted their differences. Avery saw it as good publicity for the AT and thought the road would speed the trail's construction (In fact Civilian Conservation Corps workers did build a section of trail around the Drive). MacKaye believed that roads had no place on wilderness ridges and saw such roads as business conspiracies to make money as they destroyed wilderness. MacKaye no longer wanted to be associated with the AT project; he focused his energy instead on the Wilderness Society which he co-founded in 1935.

On August 14, 1937 the trail was completed.,with the clearing of the last 2 miles between Spaulding and Sugarloaf Mountains in Maine. At the time the trail stretched from Mount Katahdin in Maine's Baxter State Park to Mount Oglethorpe in Georgia. The trail, as envisioned, was a "ridge-line" trail, going from high-point to high-point, along the highest route available becoming a continuos footpath connecting Georgia and Maine.

Because of hurricanes, war and neglect, the trail was being reclaimed by natureand fell into disrepair. A hurricane in 1938 destroyed large portions of its New England path as it swept up the coast and did heavy damage to the Trail. With the advent of WWII a year later, volunteers and fuel were in short supply . Then the connection of the Skyline Drive to the Blue Ridge Parkway in the 1940's displaced a section of the trail 120 miles long.

In the early 1950's interest renewed in the trail and it was not until 1951 that the Appalachian Trail was continuous again. The designation of the Appalachian Trail as a National Scenic Trail was a long political battle lasting 15 years, ending with President Lyndon Johnson signing the National Trails System Act in 1968. This act, originally intended to protect the land near the Appalachian Trail was rewritten to include any footpath designated as a National Scenic Trail. Today "America's Trail" and others in the National Scenic Trail System, with few exceptions, are on land that is federally protected.

Through the years development, such as ski resorts, mountain subdivisions, highways, and logging, has forced the Trail's route to change. In 1958 overdevelopment near Mt. Oglethorpe in Georgia necessitated the movement of the AT's southern terminus 20 miles north to Springer Mountain.

[Cuffs]

The original vision called for "possible side trails to Mt. Katahdin, ME and down into Alabama."  

Thats what the Pinhoti and Benton MacKaye Trails are, side trails.

The southern "side trail" is still just that, and may stay just that.  But, who's to say that political pressure, or hikers starting further south won't eventually cause the southern terminus to be moved again.

Of all the hikers I have had the honor of knowing, promising thru-hikers and many of whom are accomplished thru-hikers multiple times over, have never expressed any interest in starting anywhere other than Springer Mtn.

Federal dollars would more than make up for the paltry amounts the Forest Service and trail clubs are currently given for maintenance.  

Its trail clubs that do the building, relocating and maintenance from Georgia to Maine.  They are all made up of volunteers.  Where the AT passes thru federal lands (national parks) is any money given towards maintenance.

Im still interested in knowing what the ATC's position on this topic is.  I have yet to know of anyone who has asked them...

Heres part of my post over on WB on the topic...  Pete Rodgers was interviewed for the article and stated that he would not support any movement of the terminus...

"Pete Rogers of the Coosa CCC. Well, lets just say hes a male anatomy appendage. Ive been to the fire tower on Flagg several times. He and his group are not in it to restore the tower and cabins to their original glory. They did minor upgrades to the tower, like installing a satellite dish so they can take their buddies up there for game-day parties. Unless you have extensive liability insurance documentation, they refuse to let anyone near the tower. As only one of the 2 fire towers in the state (the other is at Cheaha State Park) built by the CCC, this is a historic location and could be better cared for and maintained by a historical society or such."

[jaybird]

Thats what the Pinhoti and Benton MacKaye Trails are, side trails.

Yes, but you missed the point.  It's the only originally called for side-trail still designated as such.  All the other got "promoted" to A.T. status.  Why can't we?

Of all the hikers I have had the honor of knowing, promising thru-hikers and many of whom are accomplished thru-hikers multiple times over, have never expressed any interest in starting anywhere other than Springer Mtn..

I think that may be because that's what everyone else is doing.  The romanticism of the trail says hike where the recognition is.  Times change, people change.  When people start looking at a larger challenge, I believe the terminus will move itself.

Its trail clubs that do the building, relocating and maintenance from Georgia to Maine.  They are all made up of volunteers.  Where the AT passes thru federal lands (national parks) is any money given towards maintenance.

Where the trail passes through National Forests and National Parks, there is money given for maintenance.  The FS of Alabama gets a small amount for Pinhoti maintenance.  It doesn't begin to cover the costs, and that's where the volunteer groups so wonderfully come in.

Im still interested in knowing what the ATC's position on this topic is.  I have yet to know of anyone who has asked them..

I've asked them.  They take the position that it remain a side trail.

Heres part of my post over on WB on the topic...  Pete Rodgers was interviewed for the article and stated that he would not support any movement of the terminus...

"Pete Rogers of the Coosa CCC. Well, lets just say hes a male anatomy appendage. Ive been to the fire tower on Flagg several times. He and his group are not in it to restore the tower and cabins to their original glory. They did minor upgrades to the tower, like installing a satellite dish so they can take their buddies up there for game-day parties. Unless you have extensive liability insurance documentation, they refuse to let anyone near the tower. As only one of the 2 fire towers in the state (the other is at Cheaha State Park) built by the CCC, this is a historic location and could be better cared for and maintained by a historical society or such."

I'm sorry anyone feels that way about Pete.  He's a good man.  He and the Coosa County Conservation Commission deserve major kudos for the work that they've allowed on the Weogufka State Forest land that they have a long-term lease from the state for.  He allowed a large group of hikers to come to the tower and go up, as well as build a roaring fire inside to welcome Nimblewill Nomad on his second Odyssey through Alabama back in 03 or 04.  He was very welcoming to the 20 or so of us who were there, along with the ABC 33/40 cameras.  I feel confident in knowing that he'd do the right thing if given the chance.

[MississippiRob]

Hmmmm, now I see the other side of the coin. This could be a less than great thing for the Pinhoti. But I still can see where some pluses could be had by making it part of the AT. But, fact is, it does connect to the AT already so I guess it doesnt matter if it is called the AT or not.

I do see where some better regulation of the Pinhoti would help the trail (like not having fire ring every 100' in some areas). But, I hate to have the Federal Government involved in anything. Not sure where to stand on this one.

Oh well, I leave tonight to start hiking it from Porters Gap to Cheaha. I will think about it on the way.

[Bearpaw]

Let's take a look at a few realities.  Right now there are about 80 miles of road walk on the Pinhoti Trail.  The ATC will NOT go for this as they vigorously reroute trail as much as possible away from roads.  This sometimes means a mile or more of PUDS (pointless up and downs) within sight of a road, simply to move it off a road.  Sometimes this is for safety's sake and other times it is simply for aesthetics.  But the current 80 miles of road walk will have to be rerouted before the Pinhoti will match up with the ATC's philosophy of what the AT should be.

Secondly, the current PT connects with the AT via 69.4 miles of the Benton MacKaye Trail.  Many folks with the BMT have noted that they are proud of the rougher, more "wilderness" feel of the BMT versus the AT and do NOT wish to conform to the ATC's guidelines, resulting in another 70-miles worth of reroute so the PT can join the AT at Springer Mountain.  Don't kid yourself that the AT will be rerouted away from Springer.  It would not have been rerouted from Mt. Oglethorpe if private development had not threatened the corridor.

So now we're up to 150 miles worth of new foot-trail that would have to be built for the PT to be connected with the current AT at Springer.  Without DRAMATIC outside support, and average of 5-10 miles of trail might be built per year. 

The Cumberland Trail Conference in Tennessee builds most of its trail in March with labor from college students who come to build as a part of the Alternative Spring Break program.  Any where from 50-100 students with 10-20 local experienced leaders may be part of the volunteer work force on any of the five given weeks.  A smattering of Americorps workers round out the effort.  Locals are brought in during the May/June "Big Dig", but this constitutes less than 20% of the trail mileage built in a year.  For technical work (bridges or big sections of rock steps or paths through boulder fields) weekend backpacking work trips of locals are arranged.  With this formula, the CT is growing at a rate of 5-7 miles per year in the areas where environmental impact studies, private land negotiations, and state agencies (other state parks and wildlife management agencies) have not gridlocked further building.

So realistically, without MAJOR outside support, the Pinhoti Trail might begin to conform to what is expected of the Appalachian Trail corridor in 20 years or so.  Of course, this also excludes the building of shelters every 8 miles on average.  So be prepared to add another 30 or so shelters to that corridor, another major expense for lumber and privies, not to mention skilled volunteers to build them.

So maybe 25 years is a more realistic estimate.  And in the meantime, it will be locals who provide the donations and hours of service.  I don't hear any one in the article addressing any of these issues.  Until they do, the Pinhoti becoming a part of the AT will not likely be even a consideration, let alone an action, for the ATC.

And of course, after you reroute 150 miles of a 300-mile trail, is it even the Pinhoti Trail any more?

[jaybird]

So maybe 25 years is a more realistic estimate. 

Hey, I'm only 41, so 66 would be a good year!  You have to dream and think big and not just say "no," the obstacles are too big.  Just because it hasn't been done before doesn't mean you shouldn't try.

I think you might be quite surprised at the ATC official stand and what is actually thought by those on the inside. 

Hey Cuffs, how much of those map sales are you going to donate to land purchases and shelter construction? 

[Cuffs]

None, I despise shelters.

[WolfVanZandt]

Well, best I can tell, the southernmost 1000+ ft mountain in teh Appalachians is near Weogufka, Alabama, but the southern most named rises are Mount Baber near Collerine, Alabama, and Parker Mountain, near Jones, Alabama. Both are about 20 miles from Selma.

If they can make it down that far, it oughta be a cinch to connect with Tallahassee. Ther5e's plenty of nothing down south of here.

 

[SGT Rock]

I'll start this by saying I am from Alabama. Born in Decatur and graduated from Decatur High School. My mother only just left Decatur in November and a good deal of my family still lives in Fair Hope. I'm a Crimson Tide fan always, which can be a difficult burden living just outside of Knoxville, Tn with all these rabid Vols fans - they think the Vols and Alabama are big rivals, I keep trying to explain that the only game that counts is with Auburn. I hiked the Pinhoti in February 2000 and loved that it had a different feel than the AT. It's a little longer now I hear, which means I need to get back to the home state and do some hiking.

I once thought this would be a good idea. In 2004 the Army sent me to Knoxville, TN. I got involved with the BMTA and started maintaining it. I have a section in the Slickrock Wilderness. As I got involved in the BMTA I learned the background of the trail and why it was started, and why it has been kept more wild and there are no club built and maintained shelters on the trail. The idea was to NOT be like the AT. To give hikers a different experience to the AT. So far we have done good in keeping it like that. I changed my mind a few years back. All trails do not need to become like the AT. It is a good thing that hikers have a variety of trails and experiences to choose from.

Seems this fellow has put the desire of some people in the Alabama hiking community's person pride in getting the terminus of the AT moved to Alabama. Seems to forget there is another trail involved in all that. And also seems to want to lose the unique character and identity of the Pinhoti at the same time.

Yes, but you missed the point.  It's the only originally called for side-trail still designated as such.  All the other got "promoted" to A.T. status.  Why can't we?

Probably CAN. But as my granny would say: should you?

I think not.

I think that may be because that's what everyone else is doing.  The romanticism of the trail says hike where the recognition is.  Times change, people change.  When people start looking at a larger challenge, I believe the terminus will move itself.

Actually many have the option already. Nothing stops anyone from hiking from Flagg Mountain to Katahdin and beyond. Nothing.

So the only question is: do you force people to walk a section of trail the can, but don't.

See many people want the 2000 miler designation. That is what they hike the AT for. Most of them would gladly loop off 175 miles of trail to get done quicker - trust me I moderated an AT website for years.

If they hike hike the BMT and the Pinhoti, they do it for other reasons - mainly because they want something different, to get away from what the AT is and the "scene". By changing the "official" trail the basic result is your force people that have no desire to hike that extra piece now, to hike it. And you move that "scene" to where it isn't, and I don't know if you really want that "scene". I'd rather someone come hike the BMT or the PT because they want to, not because some guy thinks it a great idea to get the terminus moved to help his pride.

As you said, if the people are looking for bigger challenges they will change where they start from. But they already have that option now. So the people that want that bigger challenge already take that bigger challenge, and those that don't - don't. Making people change their hikes so some Alabama hikers can thump their chest with pride that the AT now starts in Alabama is pretty selfish.

Where the trail passes through National Forests and National Parks, there is money given for maintenance.  The FS of Alabama gets a small amount for Pinhoti maintenance.  It doesn't begin to cover the costs, and that's where the volunteer groups so wonderfully come in.

Afraid not. Most of the maintaining clubs still have to come up with their own money for projects. So to add structures and such will cost the local club money. The ATC is in the business of protecting the established trail, and occasionally gives money to local clubs as grants for some projects.

If this guy wants federal money, the his efforts would be better spent petitioning for federal money than asking for some of the limited resources of the ATC.

I've asked them.  They take the position that it remain a side trail.

And as a member of the BMTA that is the way we prefer to stay. If you want to link the Pinhoti to the AT, I suggest you also plan to build about 65 more miles of trail. I don't know anyone in the BMTA (the ones that show up to meetings anyway) that would agree with this proposal. Anyone ask us yet how we feel about the AT getting laid over the trail we specifically try to make un-like the AT for good reasons?

He and the Coosa County Conservation Commission deserve major kudos for the work that they've allowed on the Weogufka State Forest land that they have a long-term lease from the state for.  He allowed a large group of hikers to come to the tower and go up, as well as build a roaring fire inside to welcome Nimblewill Nomad on his second Odyssey through Alabama back in 03 or 04.  He was very welcoming to the 20 or so of us who were there, along with the ABC 33/40 cameras.  I feel confident in knowing that he'd do the right thing if given the chance.

Then the right thing is to not force this on the builders of the trails who, if they wanted to work on the AT, could have been working on the AT all this time.

Imagine if you built a beutiful house on the shores of Smith Lake in Alabama. Put your sweat and love into it. Then some guy from the neighborhood says "What a great place, this should be a state guest-house" and starts a movement to take over your place you just built. He says "You should be proud. All your hard work is going to be forever a part of the great state of Alabama's government buildings"

This sort of seems like that. People put their sweat equity into building trails that aren't the AT. And some good-idea-fairy decides that big brother should now take that and re-designated it in his idea of what it should be. We had names for people like that in the Army.

I'm sorry anyone feels that way about Pete.  He's a good man.

If he is a good man, then I imagine he will put personal pride in the project aside and not try to petition the government to change the nature of the BMT. And hopefully the Pinhoti too. There are better ways we could all spend our time than debating this.

And I am a good man too. I will fight the proposal tooth and nail. I know a lot of people that are in the middle of this (BMT middle) that will as well.

[Magic City Matt]

Thanks for your input Rock.

I agree that taking away a large chunk of the BMT for our own purposes is a bad idea. The BMT is a beautiful trail and is a great conector to the AT.
The primary difference between the BMT and the Pinhoti that I see is that while Tennessee is able to completely control and maintain a certain standard with the BMT we are forced to deal with Georgia and whatever standard they feel like living up to to maintain an AT connection. Thus the Pinhoti in Georgia is a mess. It is largely roadwalk, undermaintained, and serves mostly as a mountain biking attraction. It will never be up to the standard that we hold it to here in Alabama because 1: Georgia has no reason to care if we have a descent connector trail or not and 2: There is no budget for them to convert to woods trail and any funds for trail maintenance in GA get diverted to the AT and other trail systems not involving the pinhoti. I have talked with people who have said they would like to help work with the Pinhoti in GA but have been denied so that the mountain biking community there is not overrun with hikers on "their" trail.
Many people would like to see the AT extended so that some sort of standard is placed upon Georgia to maintain that portion of trail. I tend to agree with them, but maybe there is another way. Perhaps if we started putting more emphasis on the pinhoti itself Georgia would be forced to change their stance on it.

M

[SGT Rock]

I sort of see what the goal is. But...

The Pinhoti joins the BMT in GA. The GA section of the BMT was completed around 1980. There are a few road walks, but IMO the Georgia BMT maintainers are doing a great job. And the heart of the BMTA is still in GA. I'll also say that at least most of the road walks in GA are nice. I'd only move a few miles if I were king for a day. Road walks can be a nice change of pace.

I think there are probably some good maintainers in the GA area. I bet the ones I know would do just as good a job if they were maintainers for the Pinhoti Trail. I know at least one who tried being a PT maintainer for a while and got tired of it.

Alabama Pinhoti folks: Please don't screw up the BMT to make a point with the Georgia Pinhoti people.

[Cuffs]

Thanks for your input Rock.
The primary difference between the BMT and the Pinhoti that I see is that while Tennessee is able to completely control and maintain a certain standard with the BMT we are forced to deal with Georgia and whatever standard they feel like living up to to maintain an AT connection.

We have not been forced to deal with anything/one from the GA Pinhoti group.  Just as the BMTA had chosen to create and maintain a more rural trail, the GA Pinhoti group has chosen a multi-use trail.  Just as the AL Pinhoti groups have chosen to create an AT-like trail, remember, we do incorporate a multi-use trail for part of the Pinhoti...  The Chief Ladiga Trail.  If anyone is so caring, they should be petitioning to have this section removed and rerouted so as to not use this portion of trail.

. It is largely roadwalk,

there is approximately 45 miles of true road walk in GA over the 153+ miles of trail in GA.  Thats 1/3-ish by my math.

It will never be up to the standard that we hold it to here in Alabama

Again, thats because they have chosen to create a different type of trail.  Why are we (Alabamians) forcing our standards upon other trails?

so that the mountain biking community there is not overrun with hikers on "their" trail.

I have had similar response from the GAPT group.  I wanted to help them outon some trail maintenance, but it was largely for the benefit of the mountain bikers... so I declinced.


I agree with Rock, lets not ruin what we already have in the AL Pinhoti and the BMT so that 'some' may get their own personal satisfaction out of a trail.  They are each their own unique characters, let them keep that.