Last week I went on a Carolina Mountain Club hike on the Appalachian Trail from Sams Gap to Devil’s Fork Gap, heading south.
About a half-mile from the parking area, we found this granite marker. It stands, maybe three feet or so off the trail on the left side. It’s not hidden, but proudly out here for all hikers to see.
We all wondered what a personal, family, religious marker was doing on the A.T. and on Pisgah National Forest land. I looked at the website http://www.
As many hikers may or may not know, the Appalachian Trail goes through public land, such as forest and park land. And it’s the land manager, such as the Appalachian District of Pisgah National Forest in this case, who dictates the rules and regulations of their land. So that’s why A.T. hikers can’t walk with their dogs in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, for example.
I queried the Appalachian Trail Conservancy and the Appalachian National Scenic Trail offices and got essentially the same answer.
As it turns out, its erection was a condition of the land exchange. The final location and design might be worth discussing, said Chief Ranger, Todd Remaley, of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail office in Harpers Ferry.
In other words, it’s not in violation of any rules. Pisgah National Forest must have approved this marker to buy or exchange the land from the family. Would this arrangement work in a national park? But wait, the Appalachian Trail is a national park.
It’s not only the religious nature of the marker that is in question. It’s also the personal family name, that the Moye family made sure was very obvious. I understand that Pisgah no longer names features like mountains or trails for people who’ve been an asset to the forest, but they didn’t seem to have problems with this.
In addition, when A.T. hikers from all over the world come to walk this section, they are not going to know the distinction between the A.T. and the land manager. Pisgah National Forest is not going to be on their radar; hikers will just know that they’re on the A.T.
A couple of days later, I took a Friends of the Smokies group to Elkmont in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. We found the cemetery which dates back before the Elkmont community, back when settlers lived here year round.
Of course, the cemetery had religious symbols and personal names. It was a cemetery and a historical place, after all.
The Smokies preserves the cultural aspects of the park. This particular grave is of Alice Townsend, the last wife of Colonel Townsend who logged the Elkmont area.
No one, including me, questioned why personal religious symbols were here. This is historic.
But the Moye Family marker is just personal.
I am really not sure why you are offended by this marker. I do not think it names anything other than a rest stop on previously owned land. It is like all the roads that they name after politicians. Or bridges for killed police officers. From a historical standpoint a hiker would know that this land had connections to the Moye family. Simple as that. You seem to put a time period on ‘historical’ also. That cemetery stone was in 1969 and the marker was 1998. Why is one more ‘historical’ than the other here?
Now to your religious objection, again you did not state what that is based upon. I hope not the ‘separation of church and state’ as that is not anywhere in our constitution. What I get from the marker is that Moye family were Christians. Simple as that. Just because they were Christians you are against them stating their beliefs on the marker for what reason? If the answer is that it just offends you then I only can say do not go on that section of the trail. Simple as that.
Hi Tom:
Thanks for your comments. Don’t worry, Tom. I’m not offended by the personal religious beliefs of others.
Nowhere do I say that I am offended. I question the legality and appropriateness of the marker on public US Forest land. The question has nothing to do with religion or the Moye family. It all has to do with the decision by the US Forest Service.
Danny, you said in your reply:
“The question has nothing to do with religion or the Moye family.”
But in your blog post you did make these statements that the religious nature of the marker and the Moye family are in question:
“It’s not only the religious nature of the marker that is in question. It’s also the personal family name, that the Moye family made sure was very obvious.”
“We all wondered what a personal, family, religious marker was doing on the A.T. and on Pisgah National Forest land.”
Would you question the ‘nature’ of the marker if the Moye family stated that they had personal encounters with wildlife and plants? Why is the religious aspect of the marker not appropriate? Which leads to your next concern:
“In addition, when A.T. hikers from all over the world come to walk this section, they are not going to know the distinction between the A.T. and the land manager.”
I assume you are implying that A.T. hikers will not find this marker appropriate? But if you do a Google search on “Moye Rest” you will find that people have posted positive feelings when coming upon the marker or have included a photo of the marker in their A.T. travels.
I cannot comment on the legal aspect of the marker, but is it appropriate? Yes, because you know from reading that marker that the Moye family had the same love of the land and nature as the people who are hiking it. The Moye family just felt that a ‘Christian God’ had something to do with it and this should not be a subject of removal because it is on public land or a national park.