No children under 6 allowed above timberline in Baxter Sate Park.

[D2maine]

The Deeds of Trust direct that not one square inch ever comes under control of the Federal government.
The Park hosts the AT. The AT doesn't have say in any Park matter.
As the Director's letter to the ATC stated, the AT could easily end at the boundary.
Doing so wouldn't 'violate' the Deeds, there's a strong argument that doing so would actually enforce them.

the at was invited in by baxter himself - the argument to keep it there is far better than the snowmobile in the park argument. not saying the feds could or would take over at all, but there is an argument to be made that the trail belongs in the park because baxter himself wanted it so.

[D2maine]

The Deeds of Trust do not mention 6 year old children.


Also, please recall that the AT was established by an Act of Congress to have Baxter Peak as its Northern terminous.

Is an an an act of Congress Subordinate to the Deeds of Trust?

the act of congress does not in any way shape or form confer ownership of all AT land to the feds...

[Last Call]

Baxter STATE Park has zero say or authority in where the A.T. ends....it ends where the A.T.C. says it ends.

[Last Call]

Wait....you mean to tell me they allow snowmobiles in B.S.P.? (clutches pearls)

[TJ aka Teej]

Baxter STATE Park has zero say or authority in where the A.T. ends....it ends where the A.T.C. says it ends.

Baxter isn't a State Park.
the ATC has no say or authority on anything the happens in Baxter.

[D2maine]

Wait....you mean to tell me they allow snowmobiles in B.S.P.? (clutches pearls)

do you know anything about the park or do you just talk out your azz?

[Last Call]

do you know anything about the park or do you just talk out your azz?

Only trying to be helpful!

[T.S.Kobzol]

Azzome!

...yes. They are allowed from north gate to South Gate on the road only.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rickb]

Baxter isn't a State Park.
the ATC has no say or authority on anything the happens in Baxter.

Absolutely correct.

The ATC does not have any authority.

When the Appalachian Trail was created by an Act of Congress, the authority, such that it is, was conferred upon the Department of the Interior, and by extension to National Park Service.

As a politically savy organization (for the most part) excersizing restraint where appropriate (as in BSP) has been a wise strategy.

[D2maine]

Absolutely correct.

The ATC does not have any authority.

When the Appalachian Trail was created by an Act of Congress, the authority, such that it is, was conferred upon the Department of the Interior, and by extension to National Park Service.

As a politically savy organization (for the most part) excersizing restraint where appropriate (as in BSP) has been a wise strategy.

you have been trying this point for years and it simply is not true - the trails act did NOT give ownership of all AT lands to the feds. for years after the act the nps and atc negotiated with landowners for right of way and for transfer of ownership. the fact is Baxter could never have granted the feds either because the deeds were clear no fed control no way no how.

if the feds tried to take baxter by eminent domain or some other legal trick they would face not only the state of maine but every other state park and landowner that has the trail crossing its borders.

the best argument for keeping the trail in baxter is as long as keeping it does not violate the deeds - Baxter himself wanted it there and his actions and words are very very closely consulted on issues that are not directly in the deeds of trust.

[Lone Wolf]

this is possibly the stupidest thing i have read on the internet in weeks congrats.

i understand your thing is to try and make inflammatory statements to get a rise out of people, but this idea is only a good idea to somebody that enjoys cutting their nose off to spite their face. Not only because of baxter but you would skip a bunch of good hiking between whitecap and abol bridge.

whatever. i'm very serious. it wasn't inflammatory entitled maine guy

[D2maine]

whatever. i'm very serious. it wasn't inflammatory entitled maine guy

smiley face or no its a stupid idea for a bunch of reasons, if you want it off K fine but at least come up with a better idea than that

and really LOL at entitled

[Lone Wolf]

Baxter isn't a State Park.
the ATC has no say or authority on anything the happens in Baxter.

in 91 the state of maine went on strike on july 1, the day Maineak was finishing his 56 day speed hike. the gate was wide open. no rangers. we reached the sign at 8:40 PM. the rangers work for the state

[rickb]

if the feds tried to take baxter by eminent domain or some other legal trick they would face not only the state of maine but every other state park and landowner that has the trail crossing its borders.

THe Department of Interior would be crazy (and they are not crazy) to do that. Not going to happen.

That said, an Act of Congress gives them the authority to do so.

This is from the act itself. Other sections deal with public lands.

g) The appropriate Secretary may utilize condemnation proceedings without the consent of the owner to acquire private lands or interests, therein pursuant to this section only in cases where, in his judgment, all reasonable efforts to acquire such lands or interest therein by negotiation have failed, and in such cases he shall acquire only such title as, in his judgment, is reasonably necessary to provide passage across such lands: Provided, That condemnation proceedings may not be utilized to acquire fee title or lesser interests to more than an average of one hundred and twenty-five acres per mile. Money appropriated for Federal purposes from the land and water conservation fund shall, without prejudice to appropriations from other sources, be available to Federal departments for the acquisition of lands or interests in lands for the purposes of this Act. For national historic trails, direct Federal acquisition for trail purposes shall be limited to those areas indicated by the study report or by the comprehensive plan as high potential route segments or high potential historic sites. Except for designated protected components of the trail, no land or site located along a designated national historic trail or along the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail shall be subject to the provisions of section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1653(f)) unless such land or site is deemed to be of historical significance under appropriate historical site criteria such as those for the National Register of Historic Places.
(h)

[Lone Wolf]

Baxter isn't a State Park.
the ATC has no say or authority on anything the happens in Baxter.

in 91 the state of maine went on strike on july 1, the day Maineak was finishing his 56 day speed hike. the gate was wide open. no rangers. we reached the sign at 8:40 PM. the rangers work for the state

[D2maine]

in 91 the state of maine went on strike on july 1, the day Maineak was finishing his 56 day speed hike. the gate was wide open. no rangers. we reached the sign at 8:40 PM. the rangers work for the state

still does not make it a state park, its a public land trust legally - there is a distinction. a distinction Baxter carefully crafted and had approved by several different state legislative bodies and Governors. Baxter state park may be the single most difficult piece of land to legally take in all of the US. Baxter was no fool and he most definitely had a vision for the park he built with his own money and used every legal construct he could to make sure those wishes were followed forever.

[D2maine]

in 91 the state of maine went on strike on july 1, the day Maineak was finishing his 56 day speed hike. the gate was wide open. no rangers. we reached the sign at 8:40 PM. the rangers work for the state

still does not make it a state park, its a public land trust legally - there is a distinction. a distinction Baxter carefully crafted and had approved by several different state legislative bodies and Governors. Baxter state park may be the single most difficult piece of land to legally take in all of the US. Baxter was no fool and he most definitely had a vision for the park he built with his own money and used every legal construct he could to make sure those wishes were followed forever.

[D2maine]

THe Department of Interior would be crazy (and they are not crazy) to do that. Not going to happen.

That said, an Act of Congress gives them the authority to do so.

This is from the act itself. Other sections deal with public lands.

g) The appropriate Secretary may utilize condemnation proceedings without the consent of the owner to acquire private lands or interests, therein pursuant to this section only in cases where, in his judgment, all reasonable efforts to acquire such lands or interest therein by negotiation have failed, and in such cases he shall acquire only such title as, in his judgment, is reasonably necessary to provide passage across such lands: Provided, That condemnation proceedings may not be utilized to acquire fee title or lesser interests to more than an average of one hundred and twenty-five acres per mile. Money appropriated for Federal purposes from the land and water conservation fund shall, without prejudice to appropriations from other sources, be available to Federal departments for the acquisition of lands or interests in lands for the purposes of this Act. For national historic trails, direct Federal acquisition for trail purposes shall be limited to those areas indicated by the study report or by the comprehensive plan as high potential route segments or high potential historic sites. Except for designated protected components of the trail, no land or site located along a designated national historic trail or along the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail shall be subject to the provisions of section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1653(f)) unless such land or site is deemed to be of historical significance under appropriate historical site criteria such as those for the National Register of Historic Places.
(h)

which still does not automatically give them ownership - just that they can try legal means to acquire land - trying this would pit the feds against every landowner and state on every section of any national trail against the feds. it would absolutely be disaster for hikers. there are a LOT of national trails with no complete right of ways and doing this would insure they never get completed.

[rickb]

Baxter State Park has been a great steward of the AT.

Despite some minor kurfufles, I have no doubt they will continue to be for a very long time to come.

The Feds will certainly respect the special relationship they have with the AT for reasons that go far beyond the all sacred deeds of trust.

[D2maine]

Baxter State Park has been a great steward of the AT.

Despite some minor kurfufles, I have no doubt they will continue to be for a very long time to come.

The Feds will certainly respect the special relationship they have with the AT for reasons that go far beyond the all sacred deeds of trust.

agreed the feds and Baxter will continue to co-exist for a long time, this whole issue is a tempest in a tea pot, Baxter has some rules, they are not hard or overly difficult to follow.

they also are still gracious enough to allow long distance hikers special access not allowed to the everybody else - because despite the bs found on the web they want the at in the park because baxter himself did.

they for sure will continue to do everything they can to control and run their park in a manner they see fit as per the deeds set forth in the establishment of the park and in the actions of and writings left behind by baxter, as they are legally bound to do. the place is awesome to visit and to hike - not only the big K but the entire park...