[pct-l] Government trail maintenance expensive?

WT Reynolds wrote:
>And, in case you haven't heard, I do donate money to the trail
because I don't have the time to donate. Unfortunately the government
management of the trail is very expensive, precisely because it is the
government.<

Mr. Reynolds and I have been flaming eachother off the list, but I can't resist bringing this statement into the open.  Just what is meant by expensive, and what are you comparing this to?  To take the PCT as an example, it's over 2600 miles long, subject to erosion, floods, fire, equestrian abuse, landslides, etc.   It traverses numerous climatic zones.  It can also be abuses by illegal uses such as bikes, ORV, etc.   Why would it NOT be expensive to keep the trail open and maintained?  Do you think there is a less expensive alternative?  Please tell all of us what you mean.  In my opinion you simply hate government and are willing to say so without supporting this with facts or anything beyond simplistic ideology.  

Many land management agencies along the PCT already do what the private sector would do if they were responsible:  outsourcing (much trail work is contracted out), volunteerism (a big conservative idea, and many of us contribute) and effective delegation (the PCTA performs some of the tasks for stewardship of the trail in place of government).  

Please WT, enlighten us with your wisdom!

Roger 

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---
* From the PCT-L |  Need help? http://www.backcountry.net/faq.html  *

==============================================================================
To:            "'Roger Carpenter'" <rogercar@pacifier.com>, PCT-L <pct-l-digest@backcountry.net>