ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
PART TWO: A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE APPALACHIAN TRAIL
PART THREE: PEOPLE OF THE APPALACHIAN TRAIL
PART FOUR: CONCLUSIONS
ENDNOTES
PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION INDEX
MAP
SOURCES
ABOUT THE AUTHOR

This report was funded by a grant from the American Land Alliance, a non-profit foundation located in Mountain View, California. All opinions expressed herein are solely the responsibility of the author. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the many people who permitted me to interview them, including officials of the Appalachian Trail Conference, the Dartmouth Outing Club, and the Hanover (New Hampshire) Conservation Commission. In particular, the author would like to thank the members of the Appalachian Trail Landowners Association for their time and patience.

For slightly more than 2000 miles a hiking trail runs from Maine to Georgia through 14 states. It is called the Appalachian Trail (AT) and proceeds primarily along the ridge line of the Appalachian Mountains, although many other mountain ranges also figure prominently in the pathway such as the Great Smokies in the South and the White Mountains in the North. For the most part, the Trail is governed by the National Park Service within the U.S., Department of Interior. The AT is strictly a narrow footpath for hikers. No motorcycles nor other vehicles are allowed. Although much of the Trail passes through public land, much of it also crosses private land and it is the latter state of affairs which is the concern of this report.

This study is a micro-study, focusing on the small part of the Appalachian Trail (photo 1) which passes through the area around the town of Hanover, New Hampshire (Photo 2), the home of Dartmouth College (Photos 3 and 4). Part Two offers the reader a brief history of the Appalachian Trail, particularly as it relates to the state of New Hampshire.

A comment here about sources is appropriate for the reader. References are given at the end of each Part.  After an initial full citation, later referrals to the same source may be in a shortened format. With the exception of newspapers and interviews, which are cited fully at first reference in the endnotes, all references in the Bibliography are cited in full.

Part Three in this report presents the stories of people who are primarily inholders, landowners whose property has been touched by the Appalachian Trail. Each person is featured in a vignette or case study and the focus for the reader is on the land acquisition policies of the National Park Service which have impacted upon these people; in other words, how the Appalachian Trail has affected the economic, social, and cultural life of those citizens who live with the Trail upon their land. 1

There are two Appalachian Trails, the historical and the modern. Probably most Americans associate the Appalachian Trail with the name of Daniel Boone and that pioneer's efforts to lead early American settlers westward through the Cumberland Gap to the trans-Appalachian frontier of late 18th century America. This Trail, the historical one, has virtually no relevance to this report, The modern Appalachian Trail does not run through the Appalachian Mountains, but rather along their ridge north to south. As one of the nation's most distinguished frontier historians, Professor Mal Rohrbough of the University of Iowa, said, "There are no historical antecedents to the modern Appalachian Trail," The historical Trail ran east to west and intersects the modern Trail which extends from Maine to Georgia. 1

As a professional historian the author felt it important that the reader, at the outset, should not be confused on this point. The distinction is especially worthwhile to remember whenever a hiker, an official, or anyone else might invoke the mantle of history when discussing the modern Appalachian Trail. Such a use of the past would be totally erroneous.

The modern Appalachian Trail owes its existence primarily to the vision of one man, Benton MacKaye. MacKaye was a forester and naturalist from Massachusetts who, near the turn of the century, developed the idea of a long hiking trail which would run from one of New England's highest mountains to one of the highest in the south. He first articulated this notion to friends in 1921. Shortly thereafter, MacKaye published his Appalachian Trail concept in the Journal of the American Institute of Architects and the idea took hold.

By 1923 the first part of the new Appalachian Trail had been cleared and marked in the Bear Mountain region of Palisades Interstate Park of New York and New Jersey. In 1925 a landmark organization was formed, the Appalachian Trail Conference (ATC). It was established as an umbrella group which would supervise future Trail planning and coordinate all the various private hiking clubs which would maintain the Trail. Such clubs included the Appalachian Mountain Club, one of the oldest hiking clubs in the nation, founded in Boston in 1876, the Green Mountain Club in Vermont, and the Dartmouth Outing Club in Hanover, New Hampshire, an organization which figures prominently in this report.2

By 1928, at the time of the second meeting of the Appalachian Trail Conference, 500 miles of trail had been designated. By 1937, the entire Trail was marked from Mount Oglethorpe in Georgia to Mount Katahdin in Maine. In 1958 the southern terminus of the AT was shifted slightly north to Springer Mountain, Georgia.

As the 1950's and 1960's wore an the hiking population of the Trail increased and so did the demands for greater protection of the AT. Inevitably those concerns made their way to the federal government and, in October of 1968, President Lyndon Johnson signed into law the National Trails System Act. This Act established both the Appalachian Trail and the Pacific Crest Trail on the other side of the continent. It also provided a basis for future National Scenic and Recreational Trails. The 2000 mile-long footpath which had been the dream of Benton MacKaye was now a federally-protected reality. 3

The National Trails System Act put the bulk of governing authority for the Appalachian Trail upon the Department of Interior, through the National Park Service, except in those sections where the Trail went through National Forest land such as the White Mountains in New Hampshire. National Forest areas fall under the domain of the Department of Agriculture.

With regard to land acquisition along the AT, the Act stated:

. . . consideration shall be given to minimizing the adverse effects upon the adjacent landowner or user and his operation. Development and management of each segment of the National Trails System shall be designed to harmonize with and complement established multiple-use plans for that specific area . . .

Something should be said for the reader's edification about the modern Appalachian Trail as it existed in the earlier decades prior to the federal takeover. It was a narrow footpath which wound through both public and private land. The Appalachian Trail Conference and its subsidiary clubs formed many agreements with private landowners so that the Trail could proceed through their land. Normally the AT was blazed along property borders so as to cause the least disruption. Often older trails were simply used by the ATC. For instance, in the state of New Hampshire the Dartmouth Outing Club (housed on the campus of Dartmouth College--Photo 5) had originally been formed in 1909 as a winter club for cross-country skiing, By 1918, the DOC had blazed several trails. Several years later the Appalachian Trail Conference simply adopted the older Dartmouth Outing Club trails as part of the new AT.

By the 1950's and 1960's as some hikers increasingly littered and vandalized private property, many landowners who had previously agreed to easements and use arrangements with the ATC, began to break their agreements and close off parts of the Trail. Since these agreements had been private, or non-governmental, such doings were part of the reason environmentalists clamored for federal protection, as well as emerging development along parts of the Trail.

After passage of the National Trails System Act in 1968 many landowners assumed that the Appalachian Trail would continue essentially as it had before, only with the added imprimatur of the federal government. In too many cases, though, such assumptions proved to be wrong. Within a decade or so the federal takeover meant an extreme widening of the Trail corridor bordering the footpath, often to the point of more than quadrupling the width of the AT as it had been known previously under the aegis of the Appalachian Trail Conference. What had functioned well, for the most part, for decades as a delightful hiking experience and reasonably unobtrusive neighbor to most landowners soon evolved into a greatly swollen Appalachian Trail with the power to condemn people's land through what has seemed to be an often needless use of eminent domain and its threat. 5

The 1968 Trails System Act specifically encouraged the affected states to get involved and participate in the design and management of the Appalachian Trail. This was exactly what the state of New Hampshire did, beginning in the early 1970's. The state directed the Trail proposal with the help of the Dartmouth Outing Club. Through careful planning New Hampshire officials eventually devised an Appalachian Trail with a 200-foot wide corridor through their state. The state planners thought that this width, common with much of the AT as it had existed previously, would provide an adequate buffer for the hiking path. As the Trail passed through wooded areas, obviously, the 200-foot width would be more than enough space to prevent obtrusive development from intruding upon the hiker's outdoor experience. In more open areas, it was thought the corridor would be reasonably wide enough to offer a pastoral bordering strip on both sides of the footpath to diminish the effect of viewing structures by the hiker.

Perhaps more important than the corridor width, the state of New Hampshire had planned to acquire the land for the Appalachian Trail through less-than-fee methods such as permanent easement purchases. The state trail planners saw no necessity to buy the land outright. They were confident that the Trail could be adequately protected and maintained through cooperative arrangements with its neighbors, without the large cost and social disruption caused by the title transfer of private land to the state.

New Hampshire's plans for the AT, however, ran into two roadblocks. The first occurred in the mid and late 1970's when the state's arch-conservative Governor, Meldrim Thompson, consistently vetoed funds which had been approved by the state legislature for the expanded planning and implementation of the Appalachian Trail in the state. The second barrier to the state planners was even more formidable, the National Park Service.

The Park Service had much bigger plans for land acquisition for the AT in the state. The agency wanted an approximate 1000-foot wide corridor to buffer the hiking path. Worse yet, for the people of New Hampshire, the NPS wanted to control much of the land along the Trail by buying it outright and condemning that which would not be willingly sold. The 1000-foot swath was necessary, according to the Park Service, to insure "protection" of the Appalachian Trail. (To give the reader an idea of how wide 1000 feet is, it is more than the width of the standard four or eight land divided interstate highway). Also, to acquire most acreage by fee simple purchase was not a new policy for the agency despite the unusual angular nature of the AT. The Park Service had a long aversion to easements. It preferred total control for bureaucratic ease and it had the seemingly unlimited wherewithal to buy as much land as it wanted. 6

The New Hampshire forest planners were confounded by such a policy and the intransigence of the Park Service produced a stalemate by 1978. This state-federal dispute, coupled with an uncooperative Governor, forced the New Hampshire officials, who had worked for years on the Trail, to reluctantly give up their primacy in planning the shape of the AT through their state to the federal government. In 1978, in fact, the Park Service received a $90 million boost from Congress to hasten their land acquisition along the Trail.

With the state of New Hampshire now pushed aside, the Park Service proceeded rapidly in 1978. The Dartmouth Outing Club willingly adapted to the newly expanded federal AT. In fact, many DOC members preferred a wider corridor. Being a private club hiking and skiing club, supported by Dartmouth College, the DOC understandably had no reason for fiscal responsibility and community caution in land acquisition for the Trail. 7

What occurred in 1978-1979 along the Appalachian Trail in New Hampshire remains a subject of great controversy. Many landowners were not informed of the NPS takeover of the project and its resultant changes. Many of those affected continued to assume that a 200-foot corridor would border their land on a permanent easement basis, as the state had wished. Particularly controversial were the methods by which the Park Service tried to implement its policies. The agency worked indirectly. In other words, landowners were notified of an expanded AT by members of the Dartmouth Outing Club and the Appalachian Trail Conference, groups which seemed to be implicitly speaking on behalf of the Park Service and which were legally empowered to do nothing other than to advise the Park Service and maintain the Trail as devised by the federal government. Offers of land use options and purchase, negotiation tactics, and permission to survey and appraise were strictly the responsibility of the NPS. It was as if the National Park Service was invisible during these crucial years of the late 1970's.

This state of affairs will be discussed much more in Park Three, but what happened to inholder Stuart J. Stebbins might serve as an example. In the early summer of 1978, he received a letter from a Neil Van Dyke who identified himself as a member of the Dartmouth Outing Club. Also, the letter was on DOC stationary. The letter announced that the National Park Service was in the process of "finalizing" the Trail route, unbeknownst to most affected property owners, and, not only that, but the Trail was now going to run along Stebbins land. This was the first the Stebbins' heard about the relocation of the AT onto their land! What Van Dyke did not disclose in the letter was the fact that he was also an employee of the National Park Service!

Another example of this confusion for the landowners occurred when Eleanor Blanchard received a letter from the Executive Director of the DOC, not a Park Service employee, which included an official NPS Right-of-Entry for Survey form. Blanchard was then requested to sign the form and mail it to the Park Service.

These are only two examples of the extraordinarily odd circumstances which faced the people scheduled to have the Trail on their land. Confusion, anger, and resentment were all too often the result as the Park Service moved into their lives. What follows in the next Part are the experiences of same of the neighbors of the Appalachian Trail and their encounters with the land acquisition procedures of the National Park Service. 8

Helen Lacoss is a widow, now in her 60's, who owns two pieces of non-contiguous land in the village of Etna, New Hampshire (located within the town of Hanover). Her daughter and son-in-law currently farm one part of the property. For most of her life the Appalachian Trail has been on her land and she considers herself a friend of the Trail, but her recent experiences with Trail officialdom have been what might best be-described as an administrative roller coaster rode.

Since the 1920's the AT, then usually called the "Dartmouth Outing Club trail," has been on Lacoss land near their wood-lot near Moose Mountain, one of the highest points in Hanover. After passage of the Trails System Act in 1968, and into the early 1970's, New Hampshire officials kept assuring the Lacoss' that the AT was going to be moved off their land onto the crest of Moose Mountain, an obviously more attractive route.

In June of 1978, as happened with Stuart Stebbins, Helen Lacoss heard from the ubiquitous Neil Van Dyke (representing himself as a member of the Dartmouth Outing Club) who informed her that the Trail was now back on her land. Not only that, Van Dyke said the AT would cross the land in such a way as to segment the property and take a seven acre chunk of corner land (Area north of Area 1 on map). The reader should note at this point that the Appalachian Trail should logically follow along property borders whenever possible. Two parties would then share the corridor surrounding the footpath. Some of the bitterest controversies have resulted when the AT strays from this logic and segments a single landowner with the Trail route.

In her communication with Van Dyke, unlike that which occurred with Stuart Stebbins, not the slightest mention was made of the National Park Service, nor was Helen aware that Van Dyke was a Park Service employee. Van Dyke kept speaking in terms of "we" when talking about the AT proposals on Lacoss land and Helen Lacoss assumed incorrectly that the Dartmouth Outing Club was fully authorized to "negotiate" land sales for the Appalachian Trail.

She later agreed to a survey and, in early 1979, asked the head of the DOC when it would take place. The Executive Director, at that time, told Helen Lacoss that the Trail was no longer on her property. Then, in the spring of 1980, an official from the Appalachian Trail Conference told her that the Trail was going to be back on her land, but at the point of her shared border with her neighbor, "Pete" Cavaney (near Area 2 on Map). Also, the ATC person said that a 1000-foot corridor was necessary for that part of the Trail, a 500-foot wide loss of land for Lacoss and Cavaney.

Since this up and down treatment has struck Helen Lacoss, she has managed to convince later Park Service officials that only a 250-foot corridor is needed for each side of the AT, and that protection can be done all by easement rather than fee simple purchase. Recent talks with the NPS, however, grow progressively "more complicated." Last year, in negotiating the easement, the Park Service said that all it needed in the easement land were building and mining rights. This year, though, the NPS altered this to include all rights not specifically reserved by the landowners. This new twist forced Lacoss to seek greater legal counsel as well as to think of the potential land use and her heirs scores of years hence. As far as she knows the Park Service has never even surveyed her land. The permission granted back in 1978 had a one-year expiration date, as is typical of most Right-of-Entry forms. Although she felt that recent years have been filled with less bitterness than the years 1978-1981, Helen Lacoss said her future "is filled with doubt." 1

"Pete" Cavaney, a successful insurance executive, is the aforementioned neighbor of Helen Lacoss and he confirmed much of what she had said, although his memory was unclear as to whether he had ever been contacted by Neil Van Dyke or any Dartmouth Outing Club representative. In decades past, the Appalachian Trail had always been on his land with only a 20-foot corridor or so. He never had any problems with the older Trail and always maintained the Trail on his land himself by periodically clearing the brush. He counted the highest number of hikers who ever used the trail on his property in one year as 75.

After the Park Service took over the project, the agency proposed a massive 500-foot swath through his land which would have taken approximately 60 acres through the heart of his land (Area 2 on Map), nearly one-half of his total property. Most of the original desires of the Park Service were in terms of total fee simple purchase, but Cavaney has been able to reduce that to an easement as well as reducing the corridor to a 250-foot width as did his neighbor, Helen Lacoss. "Pete" still feels that the Trail corridor of the NPS is absurdly wide due to the fact that the common Caveney-Lacoss border for the AT is heavily wooded. He said, though, of the current AT, "at least we're down now where we can live with it." 2

Kevin owns several acres (Area 3 on Map) immediately north of larger acreage owned by his father, A. Wallace Cunningham (Area 4 on Map). Kevin farms on the combined and contiguous 65 acres and the elder Cunningham has indicated that he will soon deed all of his land over to his son. Technically, it is his father's current property which has been impacted by the newly proposed Trail route, but the impact extends to Kevin and his family's hopes for a future on the land which will eventually be theirs.

Kevin Cunningham calls himself a "part-time farmer," a commonly heard description in New England. Most people who farm in New England do so on a part-time basis as the number of acres usually involved are so small that another job, often a "city" job of a more full-time, regular hours nature is normally required to provide an adequate income. Kevin's other job is a small computer business he runs in nearby Lebanon, New Hampshire. He is most proud, though, of the herd of 18 prize Holstein cows (Photos 7 & 8) he has raised through the relatively new process of embryonic transfer. The cows leave their barn on his land and proceed south down the pasture road (Photo 9) to graze on his father's land. The proposed Park Service Appalachian Trail would sever the pasture road from west to east and totally segment the land of his father. Kevin is very fearful of exposing his herd, the finest of which are worth in the neighborhood of $10,000 each, to the uncertain passings of unknown hikers cutting through his pasture road (Point 5 on Map).

The Appalachian Trail from the 1920's through the 1960's never went onto Cunningham land. In the early and mid-1970's, when the state of New Hampshire initiated Trail readjustments following passage of the Trails System Act, the AT was still far from the boundary of Kevin Cunningham. In the spring and summer of 1978, as occurred elsewhere, Neil Van Dyke, the Dartmouth Outing Club, and, presumably, the National Park Service relocated the AT again, off the property boundary to the currently proposed segmenting of A. W. Cunningham's land (Pink line through A. W. Cunningham land on Map).

Like so many other landowners in 1978, Kevin and Linda Cunningham were unaware of what Neil Van Dyke was really doing regarding their property. They were told .that "proposed" Trail routes were being studied with the implication that preliminary alternatives would be carefully studied before a final decision was made. In the summer of 1979 Kevin noticed a flagged route cutting across his pasture road and he began to suspect that the vague "proposal" was becoming a threatening reality. No one had informed them that the Trail would now segment their land until the fall of 1979, nearly two years after various officials and "planners" had moved the Appalachian Trail right through the middle of their land. It was not until this point that their first significant contact with the National Park Service began.

By October of 1979 Kevin Cunningham was "furious" that the National Park Service had never properly informed him of its intentions for his land and he was especially angry at the role played by the Dartmouth Outing Club. He complained to Dartmouth College about Van Dyke and DOC actions. There had been recent meetings between landowners and only members of the DOC at which AT relocation on their properties had been discussed. In November of 1979 Dartmouth College Dean Ralph Manuel ordered the Outing Club to cease such activity and to disengage itself from all Trail planning.

It was also at this point in time that Kevin Cunningham began to get organized. He and his neighbor, David Cioffi (whose experiences will be discussed in greater detail later in this Part), met with Park Service officials to air their complaints. They were angered that their input had not been sought regarding the Trail on their property earlier in the process and complained that serious alternatives were never examined. The NPS admitted as much and told the surprised pair to come up with a better route in 30 days!

Cunningham and Cioffi, despite their lack of experience. in forestry and trail planning, hurriedly assembled maps and prepared an alternative AT through Hanover within the deadline given them (Yellow line on Map). This route became known as the Cioffi-Cunningham route, or the Northern route. The Dartmouth Outing Club/Appalachian Trail Conference/National Park Service Trail proposal was the Southern route. Both were quickly submitted to an Environmental Assessment and a review process. These alternative Trails and the Assessment and review of them will be discussed in much more detail under the heading of David Cioffi's story later in this Part. Suffice it to say for now that the Cioffi-Cunningham alternative was summarily rejected by the NPS early in 1980.

The year 1980 was a particularly bitter and frustrating one for the Cunninghams. They had felt left out of a major decision affecting their lives: their future on their land. Kevin supported the Appalachian Trail and resented local allegations that he and his family were raising objections simply because they did not want the AT on their land. The Cunninghams; were perfectly willing to have the Trail on their property, even the footpath portion. Kevin wondered, though, why the Trail could not run along his property boundary as it did for the vast majority of affected inholders. His northern border, which he shared with his neighbor, Elaine Bent, (Area 6 on Map) would have been an attractive and heavily wooded route (Photo 10), except for a view of the pastoral Bent hone and farmland (Photo 11). Another objection raised by the Park Service to a route along the shared boundary was that Kevin's home and sugar house were visible through the trees. As Photo 12 indicates, the house is barely visible while the wooded sugar house is more so, but would hardly qualify as an "unsightly" development wrought by humanity. For the Appalachian Trail to dissect the middle of Cunningham land, however, and cut across Kevin's pasture road will put his herd in jeopardy and destroy his plans for livestock expansion.

Cunningham was especially galled at the actions of Dartmouth College in determining the AT route through Hanover. For the College to allow the Dartmouth Outing Club to act as it did for years, he said, was unforgivable. In effect, Dartmouth placed the management and planning of the Appalachian Trail into private hands. Equally annoying, according to Cunningham, has been the way the College has pushed the Trail away from its own land. Dartmouth is, by far, the largest landowner in Hanover and the largest employer. The university has large tracts of undeveloped land for which it may have future plans and the institution was not above using its considerable influence to direct-the route. For instance, when the Cioffi-Cunningham Northern route merely approached the vicinity of the land of Dartmouth College President, John Kemeny, the President and his wife wrote a letter complaining of this, even though the Trail proposal was over 1000 feet from Kemeny land. Kevin said that the College also steered the AT away from its skiway and recreational lands, but allowed the Trail to go through College land in the Velvet Rocks area, a steeper rocky area, unfit for future development, which has enabled the institution to claim that it has given the most acreage to the Trail, among local property owners. The proposed corridor to the Velvet Rocks area, alongside Dartmouth property known as Chase Field (Photo 13) has been earmarked for only a 20-foot corridor of land acquisition despite the highly visible development in sight for the hiker.

Kevin Cunningham was a 1970 graduate of Dartmouth College and received a M.B.A. degree from the same institution in 1973. He was elected Class Agent for his class which meant that he was the one chiefly responsible for fund-raising. Had he continued in that capacity, he personally would have contributed over $10,000 to Dartmouth over the course of his lifetime. Since his encounters with the Dartmouth Outing Club, however, he has resigned as Class Agent and severed all ties with his alma mater, not without some regret.

In the last several years the Park Service has negotiated for acquisition of AT land through Cunningham property. Kevin and his family, though, are so discouraged that they are seriously considering selling all of their land to the NPS rather than live with a divided home and grazing land. Currently he is awaiting an appraisal of his land (to be paid for by the Park Service). Kevin estimated the value at between $150,000 and $200,000 and said, "I don't think they'll bat an eyelash," at whatever price is determined. If he does decide to sell out entirely, Kevin hopes to remain in the Hanover area with his Holsteins, perhaps on land of the nearby Hewes family, and start all over again. 3

Vera Burgess has lived over 35 years on her 26 acres near Lyme, New Hampshire (Photo 15). In 1982 her husband, George, died, but this spry widow has always done a large part of the hay farming on the land and she continues to do so. Although her experiences with the Appalachian Trail may appear slightly humorous to some readers, they, nonetheless, illustrate, perhaps in the extreme, the problems landowners encounter with hikers.

The Appalachian Trail has been on Burgess' land since the beginning. Q fact, the AT runs to within 30 feet of Vera's home, one of the closest proximities in the state (Photo 16). Her house is very isolated and the only structure hikers are likely to see on that part of the Trail.

One hiker came to her house and asked her to call the Humane Society for an apparently registered dog which had followed him. Burgess described the hiker's appearance as "creepy" and said that he stayed three hours in her home, eating doughnuts and drinking coffee, while waiting for aid to arrive. During this time the young man described how his mother had given him money so that he could walk the Appalachian Trail in order "to find himself." After continual ramblings about how he "wished he could find himself," the hiker finally left. As he did so, he undid the top of his backpack and showed Vera Burgess that he had a loaded revolver.

Another elderly hiker once called Vera's dog over to his side only to strike the animal with his walking stick. Hikers have often begged for food and entered her house while she has been out in the field on the tractor. Several years back, during a very severe drought, hikers left her hose running after using it for a water supply. Hikers, both male and female, have wandered far off the Trail out onto her pastureland to defecate in her piles of hay. One hiker decided to "hole up" in her woodshed as a rainstorm approached. When Vera told him that he was on private property, the hiker responded, "Oh no. We own 500 feet of each side of the Trail." It would be interesting to know where that hiker received such misinformation.

Admittedly, such boorish and sometimes frightening behavior has been done by only a small minority of people who hike the Appalachian Trail, but it obviously shows that all hikers cannot be pictured as conscientious environmentalists. Finally, after enduring decades of abuse from hikers, to the point where she had to start locking her doors, her future on her land changed for the better. About five years ago, a representative from the office of U.S. Senator John Durkin and Earl Jette, head of the Dartmouth Outing Club, promised Vera that when the new Trail was finally in place it would be off her land and far from her home. Presumably, her long-time problems associated with hikers walking literally through her front and back yard would be over.

Vera Burgess may eventually wish to sell some of her land to the Trail as she gets older, but recent statements from the Appalachian Trail Conference regarding her "willing seller" status have her confused. She has reluctantly hired legal counsel. 4

Though technically not inholders along the Trail, Lewis Bressett and Ed Brown are caretakers for one of the largest inholdings which borders the AT. Bressett is President of the Hanover Water Works Company (HWWC) while Brawn is Executive Vice-President. Both men are seriously concerned that the present Trail proposed by the Park Service may damage the water supply for the town of Hanover.

The Hanover Water Works Company is a private utility owned by Hanover and Dartmouth College, The water for the town is collected from a small watershed and runs into earthen reservoirs on the large parcels of HWWC land. The Park Service wanted part of the Appalachian Trail in Hanover to cross onto a large corner of the watershed (Area 7 on Map and Photo 17). Brown maintained that this route would invite degradation of the watershed due to the high probability of human waste seepage into the earth which would then flaw downslope into a reservoir. Also, Brown said, the area in question is generally treeless pasture and would be a tempting picnic ground and an area for college parties if converted from HWWC and watershed acreage into public Trail land. AT hikers, then, would only be a part of the problem in despoiling the water supply.

At least as far as the Water Works was concerned, Brown and Bressett both favored that part of the Cioffi-Cunningham Northern route which would have taken the Trail off HWWC property and onto the shoulder of Trescott Road for only about one-half mile (see Yellow line on map). The NPS initially objected to having hikers near a paved road and in sight of the farmhouse of Robert Adams on Trescott Road. If people began congregating and hiking through the watershed, Brown said, and water pollution eventually resulted; the town of Hanover would be forced to construct a treatment plant for the water supply at a cost of several million dollars. With an untrampled watershed, such a facility probably would not be needed.

Ed Brown said that lately the Park Service has begun to see the wisdom of the HWWC's position and, although noncommittal, the agency seems to be moving toward a position of compromise so that the Appalachian Trail might not befoul the drinking water for Hanover. 5

This report does not want to give the impression that all affected inholders in the Hanover region were upset with Park Service land acquisition. There were same people who willingly sold their land, in both fee and easement, for the purpose of the Trail. Alan Adams was one such inholder. He is a bricklayer who currently lives across the Connecticut River in Vermont. Adams sold 73 of his 110 acres to the NPS, all of it in fee simple. The reason they took so much, he said, was because the agency wanted Adams' beaver pond as an attractive addition along the Trail footpath. Most of the land acquired, even with the bulge allowed for the pond, was border land, Adams had no objection to the AT whatsoever and never felt pressured by the government nor threatened by eminent domain.

Hank Swan is President and majority owner of Wagner Woodlands, a timbering concern which, among other lands, owns considerable property north of Vera Burgess' land near Lyme. Swan sold slightly more than 110 acres in fee simple and about 185 acres in easement to the Park Service. He called his dealings with the agency "very professional" and was able to negotiate the original NPS Trail intent nearer to the border of his land. He was also able to get crossing points along the AT for his business.

Like others, he was originally approached by the Dartmouth Outing Club in earlier years, but quickly realized that organization was speaking on behalf of the Park Service. He understood how this variety of personnel and agencies in the early period might confuse people, but he did not have too much of a problem. He did say, though, that the DOC lacked both communication ability and negotiating strength. He said the Club, "didn't understand the nuances of easements and fee purchase." In his youth, Swan worked for the U.S. Forest Service and was familiar with the appraisal and negotiating techniques of the federal bureaucracy. 6

Gerald and his brother, Howard, are in the process of dividing the various tracts of land left by their late father, Bert Hewes. One 90-acre lot has been targeted adversely by the recent Trail planners, according to Gerald (Area 8 on Map). Originally Appalachian Trail Conference and Park Service officials told Hewes that the Trail would pass through his land along the border with the Bent property (Point 9 on Map). The Trail here would have proceeded through a heavily wooded area of hardwood maples with no structures visible to divert the hiker.

This reasonable proposal was then altered for what Gerald Hewes felt were purely capricious reasons, The AT footpath and corridor were pushed further out onto Hewes land in front of all the maples to an open pasture area (Photo 18). Officials told Gerald that this was done because the view from the newer location was more "scenic.'' The newer route is attractive, but not wooded as the previous one, Additionally, homes can be seen in the distance. Also by this expansion of the Trail Gerald Hewes will lose approximately 35 of his 90 acres and all of his "sugar bush" to the NPS, the area of maples which were used for the production of maple sugar. 7

Alex Filimonov is listed as a "willing seller," but said that he felt pressured into doing so. He sold ten acres of undeveloped land to the NPS for the Trail. It did not have his home on it and had there been more at stake, Filimonov said that he would have resisted the pressure to sell more vehemently, He believed Dartmouth College steered the Trail away from undeveloped land it owned toward his property. In Hanover, he called the College, "the big decider." 8

As was the case with Kevin. Cunningham and his family, the story of David and Ann Cioffi and their family's experience with the Appalachian Trail is long and complex, but worth repeating here for a number of reasons. Among the inholders, David Cioffi was-probably the most active in calling public attention to what he felt was a poor and unfair process of Trail route selection and land acquisition by the federal government. It was Cioffi, along with Kevin Cunningham, who founded the Appalachian Trail Landowners Association (ATLA) late in 1979. This has been the growing organization of disaffected inholders in the Hanover area. Perhaps the most important reason for fully relating the experience of David Cioffi is because his land of concern was the only parcel in the region against which the Park Service instituted condemnation proceedings.

Technically, the Cioffis' inholding is only their house, barn and four acres off Partridge Road (Area 10 on Map). The nearly 70 acres immediately north and east of their land, however, belongs to Ann Cioffi's father, the aforementioned Stuart Stebbins (Area 11 on Map). Stebbins, a semi-retired attorney and in ill health, has indicated that the land will soon be his daughter and son-in-laws. It was this property which was significantly affected by the Appalachian Trail and the elder Stebbins has authorized David and Ann to speak on his behalf regarding the land.

David Cioffi is a native New Englander, born in Vermont. A little over ten years ago he and his wife moved to their present location. The Cioffis are totally committed to the New England lifestyle and its environment, Their house is heated solely by the hardwood cut by David on his land (and, of course., the Stebbins land). He said it takes about eight cords of wood per winter to provide heat. The Cioffis also raise chickens and have two ewes from which Ann has woven two fine wool sweaters. David also does extensive "sugaring" on the upper Stebbins land near the proposed Trail (Photo 20) and, in a good season, is able to sell maple sugar commercially. Despite his high activity on his land, like most other New England landowners, David Cioffi must work away from the land. His primary job is manager of the Dartmouth Bookstore in Hanover, a privately-owned store, not controlled by Dartmouth College. Ann Cioffi is descended from some of the oldest families in that part of New Hampshire. In fact, she can trace her ancestors back to some of the original people in England who incorporated the area of Hanover. The Cioffis and their children want to remain where they are and are more than willing to have the AT on their property, but not to the detriment of their future ability to manage their land in a reasonable manner.

Like the Cunninghams and others in the village of Etna, the Appalachian Trail of decades past and even that adjusted by the state of New Hampshire in the 1970's did not come close to touching the Cioffi-Stebbins land, Thus, when Neil Van Dyke of the Dartmouth Outing Club approached them in the summer of 1978 and talked about a possible route through their land, they thought little of it. To anyone who has lived long in the Hanover region, the appearance of DOC members asking about trail routes is a common occurrence. There are numerous DOC trails in the area and private landowners have traditionally either allowed occasional DOC crossings or declined. It was not until over one later that the Cioffis realized that behind Neil Van Dyke was the full power of the National Park Service and the Appalachian Trail had been "finalized" by dissecting the Stebbins land nearly in half, far from the property boundary.

In the meantime there had been several meetings and discussions of the Trail among members of the Dartmouth Outing Club, the Appalachian Trail Conference, the Hanover Conservation Commission, and the National Park Service at which affected landholders were either excluded or never properly notified. The state of New Hampshire, in previous years, had usually notified affected inholders by letter. This did not normally occur in the crucial years of 1977-1979 when the Trail planning was taken over by the Park Service. Meetings were sometimes publicized by a notice on the community bulletin board in downtown Hanover, but there was little effort by the Park Service to contact newly affected landowners in the early stages of the agency's land acquisition plans.

The relocated AT, both the footpath and corridors, cut totally through Stebbins-Cioffi land. Originally a 1000-foot corridor was wanted which would have not only cut the family's land in half, greatly devaluing it according to a local realtor, but would have eliminated David's entire "sugar bush" (as shown in Photo 20) and his plans to clear an upper portion and plant a small orchard. What particularly bothered Cioffi was that most of the proposals and adjustments of the corridor and where it would proceed were made by officials of the Appalachian Trail Conference and the Outing Club. As late as 1981, the ATC still wanted all of the Cioffi maple trees in the corridor, What David Cioffi was encountering were private individuals, not employed by the government, telling him how much land they would like for the Trail, or, in the case of Van Dyke, an individual who identified himself as a DOC member while he was employed by the Park Service.

As mentioned earlier, when Cioffi and his friend, Kevin Cunningham, realized what was happening to them they organized other affected inholders. They drew upon the example of the many unhappy inholders along the Trail in Connecticut who had formed the Appalachian Trail Landowners Organization (ATLO), an organization numbering nearly 90 people. Cioffi and Cunningham named their local group the Appalachian Trail Landowners Association (ATLA). Shortly thereafter they presented their alternative route to the Park Service. David Cioffi admits that the proposed Northern Trail may not have been the best route. Many local people objected to that part of their trail which ran northward along the Connecticut River from Ledyard Bridge. The riverbank is loosely sloped and eroding. The primary objection of Cioffi and the other inholders is not the Trail passing along their land, but the process by which this came about.

For example, David pointed out the role of the Hanover Conservation Commission, a local public body which manages town-owned land. It was this organization which apparently urged the Appalachian Trail Conference and the Park Service to swing out from the AT footpath and gather in Alan Adams' beaver pond as part of the corridor. Although the figures seem inexact, the Commission owns and manages between 900 and 2000 acres of land in Hanover. When the northern route tried to use much of this recreational and undeveloped land as part of the alternative, land already tax-exempt and off the property tax rolls, the Hanover Conservation Commission objected. Not one square foot of Commission land, much of which already has trails, is in the current Park Service Trail. The Commission always told ATLA members that-its land was "too sensitive" or "too fragile" to be protected by the NPS and the Appalachian Trail.

Unlike the Hanover Conservation Commission, the Hanover Conservation Council is a private organization which, through the years, has purchased land it felt in need of protection or desired for other recreation, much as environmental land trusts operate, and then passed title on to local government, or its appropriate body, such as the Hanover Conservation Commission. When the Cioffi-Cunningham. northern route passed through an area known as Balch Hill, most conservationists and others felt that this was a very attractive and scenic part of the trail proposal. Unfortunately, the Hanover Conservation Council owned much of Balch Hill and objected to this AT vigorously, even though the land might be "saved" through federal protection.

To Cioffi and others, then, the history of the Appalachian Trail through Hanover appears more the result of political pressure than any actual environmental consideration. What occurred with regard to his neighbor, Richard Jones, might further illustrate this contention. In 1978 Jones was President of the State University of New York (SUNY) at Cortland and used the land immediately north of the Stebbins land as a summer home. After he learned that Neil Van Dyke and the Park Service were considering a Trail route along his border with Stuart Stebbins, Jones wrote the overall Park Service director of the Trail, David Richie, and complained how this might disrupt the peace of his eventual retirement upon the property. Within months, Van Dyke and the Park Service, unbeknownst to David Cioffi and Stebbins, moved the AT off the logically shared boundary and deep onto Stebbins land. Recently, Richard Jones has since retired and seems willing, according to Cioffi, to compromise and have part of the AT along his border.

Cioffi also agreed with Kevin Cunningham about the enormous influence of Dartmouth College and the institution's willingness to use its power to route the Trail off its land when it chose to do so, As an additional example of this, beyond what was done by the Dartmouth Outing Club, he cited a letter written by Cary Clark, attorney for the College, to U.S. Senator John Durkin which downplayed inholder opposition to the Trail in Hanover and urged rapid completion of the southern Park Service-preferred route.

Again, Cioffi maintained, it was not so much whether their alternative was superior to the Van Dyke-Park Service southern route, but rather the process of how the two were evaluated. Firstly, the inholders were given only 30 days to come up with an alternative despite the fact that apparently the NPS had not seriously looked at alternative trail paths in the two years or so prior when the agency devised its AT.

Second, the evaluation of the Environmental Assessment of the two routes deserves note, Not one single landowner affected by the Trail was selected by the Park Service to review and evaluate the Assessment. Those chosen included local environmentalists, which, oddly enough, in some cases, included their spouses and children, who had already publicly denounced the alternative proposed by David Cioffi and Kevin Cunningham, This supposedly objective group of people, devoid of any inholder input, quickly rejected the northern alternative to the route and recommended the-one laid out by the Dartmouth Outing Club and adopted by the Park Service, Kevin Cunningham angrily called the decision a "kangaroo court."

David Cioffi settled back into a process of trying, at least, to have the AX on his property in a more reasonable fashion, particularly with regard to corridor width and having it moved closer to the property boundary, away from the center of his land. Stuart Stebbins was willing to donate a 250-foot corridor of the land if it were near the boundary line. Despite discussions with ATC and NPS officials in the early 1980's, Cioffi was unwilling to give the government the satisfaction of coming onto his land to inspect and appraise it, He said later that he failed to realize the seriousness of taking a hard line in this detail.

In the summer of 1982 David Cioffi discovered that condemnation procedures had been instituted against the Stebbins land. Part of the reason the Park Service gave for condemnation was that "the failure to negotiate" by Cioffi and Stebbins was holding up the entire Trail through Hanover. In late 1982 Cioffi was able to see the documentation of the NPS case against himself and his father-in-law.

Finally, on February 1, 1983 David Cioffi, accompanied by Kevin Cunningham, was able to have his day in court, of sorts. On that day, in Washington, D.C., he met with senior officials from the Department of Interior and the National Park Service. The Park Service presented its case and Cioffi and Cunningham were able to point out several errors in fact and inconsistencies in the agency's argument, For example, the NPS said that condemnation was justified because Stebbins and Cioffi refused to allow an appraisal, even though the family had previously agreed to it. What had occurred was that in October of 1980 Stuart Stebbins denied the request for appraisal to the Park Service. In late January of 1981, his wife, Phoebe Stebbins, somewhat unknowingly signed the right-of-entry form allowing an appraisal, unbeknownst to David Cioffi. Therefore, the previous agreement to the refusal of Stuart Stebbins, the point in time used by the NPS, was not previous at all. The agreement to appraisal occurred after the denial. The Park Service had attempted to show that the parties had broken their word, when, in fact, the agency had confused its sequence of events.

The pair also pointed out inconsistencies in the Park Service justification for straying from property boundaries shared by two parties and dissecting single-party land plots (which will be discussed further in Part Four). Additionally, Cioffi garnered political support for his position. U.S. Senator Gordon Humphrey wrote a letter urging that condemnation not be used against the Stebbins land. The other U.S. Senator from New Hampshire, Warren Rudman, and the Cioffi's Congressman, Judd Gregg, wrote similar letters. Gregg, in particular, resented his vote on AT appropriations being used by the Park Service as justification for condemnation by the NPS. The agency also had maintained that it asked the appropriate politicians to act as "middlemen" between the federal government and Cioffi-Stebbins. Rudman and Gregg denied ever "negotiating" with-them and were angered that the Park Service attempted to use them in such a manner.

When Cioffi met with Interior Department officials in early February of 1983, the paperwork on the Stebbins condemnation was already over at the Justice Department and about to be legally carried forth. After the meeting, Interior called Justice and put the condemnation proceedings on a temporary "hold." The Interior Department gave David Cioffi till the end of the month (Approximately 30 days) to return to the Hanover area and consult with all dissatisfied inholders who had not yet sold out to the government. Interior demanded that the eight or so inholders (essentially most of the members of ATLA) agree together on an Appalachian Trail route through their properties. Cioffi and all of the other affected inholders, mostly in the village of Etna, and the Hanover Water Works, were able to do this within the deadline. In David's case he was willing to have the Trail footpath totally on his land for a Trail nearer the border and with a thinner 250-300-foot corridor, based mostly on easements. After this agreement, the Department of Interior instructed the National Park Service to accept it as a serious basis for negotiation. Interior also put the Stebbins condemnation on permanent "hold". The Cioffi and Stebbins families have since cooperated with the Park Service-regarding surveys and appraisals and the Appalachian Trail appears to be heading through Hanover on a basis of more reconcilable differences among landholders and government. After years of struggle, though, David Cioffi's problems with the Trail are not over. The Park Service still wants a wider corridor on his land than David feels is necessary to protect the Trail.

In one sense, though, the result of Cioffi's meeting with the Interior Department was a victory. Condemnation proceedings were removed from his future land and he was able to convince the federal bureaucracy that he had been misled and, to a large extent, left out of the process of Trail negotiation. The Interior Department implicitly chastised the Park Service and one of the main reasons it did so and ordered the agency to re-negotiate was the obvious confusion faced by landholders in the earlier years. As one senior Interior official said of the inholders initial meetings with the Dartmouth Outing Club and the Appalachian Trail Conference, "They didn't know who they were dealing with." 9

Virtually no one in the Hanover, New Hampshire area questioned the validity of the Appalachian Trail. With the possible exception of only one person, every inholder interviewed by this researcher viewed it as a good thing for America's recreational needs. Additionally, the vast majority of inholders affected were willing to have part of the Trail on their land. They bitterly resented some allegations that they are simply "soreheads" trying to get the AT totally off their land. A major complaint voiced by the members of the Appalachian Trail Landowners Association and others was over the width of the corridor, in effect; haw much land was enough to buffer the footpath. Perhaps, though, the main objection heard by these people concerned the overall process of selecting the Trail: not so much the specifics of route, acreage, and width. They felt unconsulted, unnotified, and misled to the point of confusion as to whom they were confronting regarding their land and the Trail.

On this point of confusion over with whom the inholders discussed the Trail, there appears little doubt that their complaints were justified, For same reason, Neil Van Dyke hid from most of the public the fact that he was working for the National Park Service. He always identified himself as a member of the Dartmouth Outing Club and continually wrote to the affected inholders in Hanover on DOC stationary. Beyond that, many landowners complained of private citizens from the DOC and the Appalachian Trail Conference coming to them personally or writing letters which discussed such highly sensitive and crucial issues as Trail, acreage options in terms of corridor width and land-use options in terms of fee simple purchase, easement, and eminent domain. By law, the ATC, under which there are over 60 private clubs such as the DOC, was empowered to act as a consultant to the Park Service regarding the maintenance and management of the Trail, once selected by the federal government, In other words, the NPS would appropriately ask the DOC whether a particular route could be easily maintained by the private club since the government was committed to a heavy reliance on private volunteerism for AT care and upkeep.

It appears that the Park Service went far beyond this and allowed DOC, ATC members and other private citizens to conceive routes, map the Trail, discuss the quantity of acreage needed, and, most importantly, the terms of land acquisition: all powers reserved solely bar the National Park Service, At the meeting between Interior Department officials and David Cioffi and Kevin Cunningham earlier this year, David Richie, overall Park Service head of the Trail, reiterated that only the Park Service was responsible for land acquisition and the negotiations on that subject with landholders.

There is significant evidence that this policy was violated. One inholder, Helen Lacoss, received a letter from the ATC which disputed her proposal for a 50-foot Trail corridor on her land by saying that it ''would not be good enough protection." As mentioned in Part One, Eleanor Blanchard received a Park Service Right-of-Entry form from the Dartmouth Outing Club, a private club. Eventually Dartmouth College forced the DOC to disengage itself from such active negotiations in land acquisition and Trail policy, One question, then, which has never been adequately answered in the Hanover region is where does the consulting role of the Dartmouth Outing Club and the Appalachian Trail Conference end and where does the administrative responsibility of the National Park Service begin? It would appear that the statement made at the end of Part Three by the Interior Department official, "They didn't know who they were dealing with," is indeed, apt.

This apparent misrepresentation was explained to this researcher by officials of the DOC and the ATC by the following rationale. Because Hanover was considered a highly vocal college town, it was thought that the uniformed presence of Park Service personnel, wearing badges, would be inappropriate for negotiations with local people about the Trail. Therefore, the Park Service deliberately "soft-pedaled" its presence, and, perhaps, its authority by allowing and encouraging that its work be done by others, local people, "less visible," and without uniforms. As one who has lived frequently in a variety of college towns and communities, there is a certain odd logic to this reasoning, but, by the very nature of such a policy, deception and behavior which some citizens could logically call surreptitious would be an obvious by-product. The good intentions toward the community of such a cautious "low profile" policy eventually gave way to a damaging sense of anger and frustration on the part of too many people and a lessening of respect for the federal government. Carried to its logical extreme in a college town, such a policy would result in not calling the police for a civil disturbance, but rather members of the local sheet shooting club since their non-uniformed presence would presumably be more ameliorative.

The purpose of this report is not to debate the Trail alternatives. It may very well be that the Northern route proposed by David Cioffi, Kevin Cunningham, and the others of ATLA was highly flawed. The Hanover Planning Board certainly thought so. Focusing again on the process of AT selection, however, their experiences with the route are instructive. They were given only 30 days to come up with an alternative to a route which others had developed for nearly two years, Nor is there considerable evidence that the Park Service considered a variety of alternative routes, other than rejecting parts of the older trail and the work done by the state of New Hampshire. Additionally, the formal citizen review of the alternatives included not one landowner along the Trail.

A couple of specific items relating to the Northern alternative reveal notable inconsistencies in the justifications used by the Park Service in determining the Trail. For example, one part of the Northern alternative went near a pond on the property of Elaine Bent (Photo 21) near the convergence of the Stebbins-Bent-Hewes boundaries. This pond could only be seen by hikers by going off the proposed route onto a less visible path (Photo 22). Part of the reason the Park Service gave in rejecting the Cioffi-Cunningham route was that the agency called the Bent pond a "diversion" which would lead hikers to stray off the AT. Yet, at the same time, the Park Service was persuaded to stray well off the path as the Trail went through the land of Alan Adams to acquire his beaver pond, What was this pond if not an attractive "diversion?'' The Park Service said a primary consideration in determining where the AT goes should be the absence of manmade structures visible to the hikers. Yet the Trail was brought out of a nicely wooded area along Gerald Hewes' boundary to an open pasture with houses visible in the distance and with no control over future development in the distance (Photo 18). The Trail also winds its way through downtown Hanover across busy intersections. This was done, according to the Park Service, so that hikers could more easily resupply and so that those few hikers who walk the entire length of the AT could register at the Dartmouth Outing Club, near Main Street (Photo 5). The number of hikers who walked the whole Trail last year was less than 200. It would seem quite possible that registration points for their purposes could be established in less urbanized areas.

When proceeding through private land, there is an obvious logic in running the Trail along shared property boundaries, much as an alleyway for the visualization of the reader, When the NPS strays from this policy and cuts right through the land of a single party the reason must be extraordinary and readily apparent to the landholder, The reason given for dissecting the pasture road of Kevin Cunningham and putting his herd in jeopardy was to avoid having the Trail go along a public road for a short distance in order to re-join at a shared boundary. Public roads are inevitable in such a project as the Appalachian Trail as the route through Hanover would indicate. Yet one reason the Park Service may give for rejecting a certain route is used as a justification for supporting a route only a few miles away along the Trail.

When the NPS cannot convince a rational landowner, such as Kevin Cunningham, that having the Trail cut his farm in half is better than running along a shared boundary, then, possibly, the agency has made a mistake in its selection. What is worse, such a route may so discourage Cunningham that he may sell out entirely and relocate his farm and family. The Park Service, then, would have far more land than it needed for a Trail corridor at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars. This occurred with Stanley Olsen who sold the enormous amount of over 740 acres to the NIPS rather than have the Trail cut his land in two, Apparently there is little compunction against buying out smaller problems with huge monetary resources resulting in large quantities of unneeded acreage taken from local property tax rolls.

Perceptions about the role of Dartmouth College were discussed adequately in Part Three and will not be rehashed here, One comment, though, made to this researcher by an official of the Appalachian Trail Conference was that "Dartmouth acted like any other landowner." If this is true, then the awesome clout of the College in local employment and resources made it the most powerful single landowner, able to overwhelm all others in the tug and pull of Trail location.

This is the fifth report done by this author which discusses the problems encountered by inholders faced with land acquisition from the federal bureaucracy, Although the amount of acres involved, the number of inholders, and the use of condemnation here was not as great as in other locations, particularly out West, the feelings of the people are just as intense, In no location yet studied was the role of the federal government more hidden and diffuse. In no other location were the lines of authority more blurred. Responsibility was scattered and, often difficult to locate, The ultimate responsibility, though, must rest with the National Park Service. The Trail is the product of many forces, such as health and environmental, conservationist, and fiscal, By far, however, the greatest force in determining the route of the Appalachian Trail through the Hanover region seems to be the familiar power politics and institutional influence. The hiker's path has been primarily the result of political considerations, not environmental. 1

1 Ronald M. Fisher, The Appalachian Trail (Wash., D.C.: National Geographic Society, 1973), pp. 10-12.

1 Interview with Prof. Mal Rohrbough, Chairman, Department of History, University of Iowa, May 6, 1983.

2 Robert A. Browne, The Appalachian Trail: History, Humanity, and Ecology (Stafford, Va.: Northwoods Press, Inc., 1980), p. i; Fisher, pp. 135 & 156; Forward by Benton MacKaye in the Fisher book, p. 5; Ann and Myron Sutton, The Appalachian Trail (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., pp. 112-113; U. S., Dept. of Interior, National Park Service, "The Appalachian Trail Questions and Answers," (Pamphlet), Revised Jan., 1981.

3 Fisher, p. 11.

4 National Trails System Act, Statutes at Large, LXXXII, 919-926 (1968).

5 Interview with Vera Burgess, May 21 & 23, 1983; Fisher, p. 11; Interview with Earl Jette, Executive Director, Dartmouth Outing Club, May 23, 1983.

6 Interview with Clayton Heath, Department of Forest Land, State of New Hampshire, May 17, 1983; State of New Hampshire, Public Notice regarding RSA 216-D: 1-4, summer 1975, signed by George Gilman, Commissioner, Department of Resources and Economic Development.

7 Heath interview; National Trails System Act Amendment, Statues at Large, XCII, 159-161 (1978): U.S., Dept. of Interior, National Park Service, "Protecting the Appalachian Trail," (Pamphlet), Sept., 1978.

8 Interview with David and Ann Cioffi, May 20 and 22, 1983; Letter, with enclosure, from Earl Jette, Executive Director, Dartmouth Outing Club, to Eleanor Blanchard, Oct. 31, 1978; Letter from Neil Van Dyke, Dartmouth Outing Club, to Stuart J. Stebbins, June 30, 1978; U.S., Dept. of Interior National Park Service, Letter from Clarence Novinger, Land Acquisition Officer, to A. Wallace Cunningham, Aug. 29, 1979.

1 Daily Dartmouth (Hanover, NH), Feb. 1 & 4, 1983; Interview with Helen Lacoss, May 30, 1983; Log of Helen Lacoss relating all contact with her regarding Appalachian Trail; Letter from Roger Sternberg, New England Field Representative, Appalachian Trail Conference, to Helen Lacoss, May 6, 1980; Letter from Sternberg to Lacoss, June 16, 1980; Letter from Neil Van Dyke, Dartmouth Outing Club, to Helen Lacoss, June 30, 1978.

2 Interview with E. M. "Pete" Cavaney, May 23, 1983.

3 Taped recording of radio program Breakfast at the Hanover Inn , April 1, 1980, WNHV; Interview with Kevin and Linda Cunningham, May 21, 1983; Letter from Kevin Cunningham to Clarence Novinger; Land Acquisition Officer, National Park Service, Sept. 11, 1979; Letter from Kevin Cunningham. to David Richie, Project Manager, Appalachian Trail, National Park Service, Feb. 22, 1980; Daily Dartmouth, Feb. 9, 1983; Letter from President John and Jean Kemeny, Dartmouth College, to Prof. Roger Masters, Dartmouth College, Dec. 14, 1979.

4 Interview with Vera Burgess, May 21 & 23, 1983.

5 Interview with Lewis Bressett, President, Hanover Water Works Co., and Ed Brown, Executive Vice-President, Hanover Water Works Co., May 20, 1983; Letter from Ed Brown to Ric Davidge, Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, U.S., Department of Interior, Feb. 22, 1983.

6 Interview with Alan Adams, May 26, 1983; Interview with Hank Swan, President, Wagner Woodlands, June 13, 1983.

7 Interview with Gerald Hewes, May 21, 1983.

8 Interview with Alex Filimonov, June 12, 1983.

9 Taped recording of radio program Breakfast at the Hanover Inn, April 1, 1980, WNHV; Christian Science Monitor, Feb, 27,1981; Interview with David and Ann Cioffi, May 20 & 22, 1983; Cunningham interview; Cunningham letter to David Richie, Feb, 22, 1980; Letter from Cary Clark, attorney, Dartmouth College, to U.S. Senator John Durkin, April 3, 1980; Letter from Evan Douple, President, Hanover Conservation Council, to Roger Sternberg, New England Field Representative, Appalachian Trail Conference, Aug. 1, 1979; Town of Hanover, Hanover Conservation Commission Review and Evaluation of the Appalachian Trail Environmental Assessment for Hanover, New Hampshire, Jan. 31, 1980;______________, Letter from Allen L. King, Chairman, Hanover Conservation Commission, to Hanover Board of Selectmen, Oct. 21, 1979; Letter from Richard Jones, President, SUNY-Cortland, to David Richie, Project Manager, Appalachian Trail, National Park Service, Mar. 30, 1978; Interview with Prof. Emeritus Allen L. King, Chairman, Hanover Conservation Commission, May 21, 1983; Letter from Robert B. MacDonnell, realtor, to Ric Davidge, Special Assistant to the Asst. Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, U.S.Dept, of Interior, Nov. 17, 1982; Interview with Roger Sternberg, New England Field Representative, Appalachian Trail Conference, May 23, 1983; U.S. Dept, of Interior, National Park Service, Appalachian Trail Environmental Assessment for Hanover, New Hampshire, 1980;__________, ____________, Letter from Steve Golden, Regional Coordinator, Appalachian Trail, to David Richie, Project Manager, AT, Jan. 25, 1983; Taped recording of meeting between Dept. of Interior and National Park Service officials and David Cioffi and Kevin Cunningham, Wash, D.C., Feb. 1, 1983; U.S. House of Representatives, Letter from Cong. Judd Gregg to David Cioffi, Jan. 17, 1983;___________, Senate, Letter from Sen. Gordon Humphrey to James Watt, Secretary of Interior, Feb, 24, 1983; A Letter from Sen. Warren Rudman to David Cioffi, Jan, 24, 1983; __________, __________, Letter from Rudman to James Watt, Feb, 7,1983.

1 Cioffi interview; Cunningham interview; Town of Hanover, Hanover Planning Board, Letter from Walter Eaton, Chairman, to David Richie, Project Manager, Appalachian Trail, National Park Service, Mar. 28 1980; Hewes interview; Jette interview; Letter with enclosure, from Earl Jette to Eleanor Blanchard, Oct. 31, 1978; Lacoss interview; National Trails System Act; Sternberg interview; Letter from Roger Sternberg to Helen Lacoss, May 6, 1980; Taped recording of Interior Dept. meeting with David Cioffi and Kevin Cunningham, Feb. 1, 1983; Transcript of meeting between Dept. of Interior and National Park Service officials and David Cioffi and Kevin Cunningham Wash., D.C., Feb. 1, 1983.

Photograph Number	Subject
1	Appalachian Trail in the township of Hanover, New Hampshire, off Trescott Rd.
2	Main St. Hanover, New Hampshire; photo taken from Dartmouth College campus
3	Dartmouth College (Wentworth Hall, Dartmouth Hall, and Thornton Hall)
4	Dartmouth College (Baker Library)
5	Robinson Hall, home of the Dartmouth Outing Club (Dartmouth College)
6	Kevin and Linda Cunningham and family
7	The Cunningham herd of Holstein cows
8	Kevin Cunningham and Gigi
9	Pasture road of Kevin Cunningham
10	Kevin Cunningham standing near the wall dividing his property and that of Elaine Bent (part of the Northern Appalachian Trail alternative)
11	Home and farmland of Elaine Bent
12	Home, farm building and sugar house of Kevin Cunningham; photo taken near Bent-Cunningham property boundary
13	Appalachian Trail route toward Velvet Rocks area alongside Chase Field (Dartmouth College property)
14	Vera Burgess
15	Farmland of Vera Burgess
16	Home of Vera Burgess with the Appalachian Trail at right
17	Hanover Water Works Company property near Trescott Mad desired by Park Service for Appalachian Trail
18	Area in front of the "sugar bush" of Gerald Howes
19	David and Ann Cioffi and family
20	David Cioffi near his maple trees
21	Pond on property of Elaine Bent; supposed "diversion" according to the National Park Service
22	Pathway to Bent pond

Brown, Ed, Executive Vice-President, Hanover Water Works Company, Letter to Ric Davidge, Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, U.S. Department of Interior, February 22, 1983.

Clark, Cary, Attorney, Dartmouth College, Letter to U.S., Senator John Durkin, April 3, 1980.

Cunningham, Kevin, Letter to Clarence Novinger, Land Acquisition Officer, National Park Service, U.S., Department of Interior, September 11, 1979.

_____________. Letter to David Richie, Project Manager, Appalachian Trail, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior, February 22, 1980.

Douple, Evan, President, Hanover Conservation Council. Letter to Roger Sternberg, New England Field Representative, Appalachian Trail Conference, August 1, 1979.

Jette, Earl, Executive Director, Dartmouth Outing Club, Letter, with enclosure to Eleanor Blanchard, October 31, 1978.

Kemeny, John and Jean, President, Dartmouth College. Letter to Professor Roger Masters, Dartmouth College, December 14, 1979.

Lacoss, Helen, Log of all contacts regarding her land and the Appalachian Trail.

MacDonnell, Robert B, Realtor, Letter to Ric Davidge, Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, U.S. Department of Interior, November 17, 1982.

Sternberg, Roger, New England Field Representative, Appalachian Trail Conference, Letter to Helen Lacoss, May 6, 1980.

_____________. Letter to Helen Lacoss, June 16, 1980.

Van Dyke, Neil. Dartmouth Outing Club. Letter to Helen Lacoss, June 30, 1978.

_____________. Letter to Stuart J. Stebbins, June 30, 1978.

Town of Hanover (New Hampshire). Conservation Commission. Review and Evaluation of the Appalachian Trail Environmental Assessment for Hanover, New Hampshire, January 31, 1980.

____________. _____________. Letter from Allen L. King, Chair man, to Hanover Board of Selectmen, October 21, 1979.

____________. Planning Board. Letter from Walter Eaton, Chairman, to David Richie, Project Manager, Appalachian Trail, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior, March 28, 1980.

National Trails System Act. Statutes at Large, Vol. LXXXII (1968).

National Trails System Act Amendment. Statutes at Large, Vol. XCII (1978).

State of New Hampshire. Department of Resources and Economic Development. Public Notice regarding RSA 216-D: 1-4, signed by George Gilman, Commissioner, summer, 1975.

State of New York. State University of New York--Cortland. Office of the President. Letter from Richard Jones, President, to David Richie, Project Manager, Appalachian Trail, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior, March 30, 1978.

U.S. Congress. House. Letter from Congressman Judd Gregg to David Cioffi, January 17, 1983.

Senate. Letter from Senator Gordon Humphrey to James Watt, Secretary, U.S. Department of Interior, February 24, 1983.

Letter from Senator Warren Rudman to David CAM, January 24, 1983.

Letter from Senator Warren Rudman to James Watt, Secretary, U.S..Department of Interior, February 7, 1983.

Department of Interior. National Park Service. Appalachian Trail. "The Appalachian Trail . . . Questions and Answers," January, 1981.

Transcript of Meeting between officials and David Cioffi and Kevin Cunningham. Washington, D.C., February 1, 1983,

Environmental Assessment for Hanover, New Hampshire, 1980.

Letter from Steve Golden, Regional Coordinator, to David Richie, Project Manager, January 25" 1983.

Letter from Clarence Novinger, Land Acquisition Officer, to A. Wallace Cunningham, August 29, 1979.

"Protecting the Appalachian Trail," September, 1978.

Breakfast at the Hanover Inn. Radio program on station WNHV. Hanover, New Hampshire, April 1, 1980.

Meeting between officials from the U.S. Department of Interior and the National Park Service and David Cioffi and Kevin Cunningham Washington, D.C., February 1, 1983.

Adams, Alan, May 26, 1983.

Bressett, Lewis, May 20, 1983.

Brown, Ed. May 20, 1983.

Burgess, Vera, May 21 and 23, 1983.

Cavaney, E. M. "Pete." May 23, 1983.

Cioffi, David and Ann, May 20 and 22, 1983.

Cunningham, Kevin and Linda. May 21, 1983.

Filimonov, Alex, June 12, 1983.

Heath, Clayton, May 17, 1983.

Hewes, Gerald, May 21, 1983.

Jette, Earl, May 23, 1983.

King, Allen. May 21, 1983.

Lacoss, Helen May 20, 1983.

Rohrbough, Malcolm, May 6, 1983.

Sternberg, Roger, May 23, 1983.

Swan, Hank. June 13, 1983,

Christian Science Monitor. 1981.

Daily Dartmouth. 1983.

Browne, Robert A. The Appalachian Trail; History, Humanity and Ecology. Stafford, Virginia: Northwoods Press, Inc., 1980.

Fisher, Ronald M. The Appalachian Trail. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Society, 1973.

Sutton, Ann and Myron. The Appalachian Trail. Philadelphia: J, B. Lippincott Company, 1967.

Kent Anderson has taught U.S. history at the University of Arizona. He received his Ph.D., in 1975 from the University of Washington, In addition to writing many unpublished reports on land policy, he has written an article on the Federal Communications Commission and his book, Television Fraud: The History and Implications of the Quiz Show Scandals, was published in 1978 by Greenwood Press. Other research of Anderson has been cited in Public Administration Review. He is also a member of the American Civil Liberties Union.