Questions and Answers about ATC's Name Change

Why are we making this change?

“Conference” does not describe our primary work today, and it confuses people who might otherwise want to support us. (Not to mention those who call seeking to rent a meeting room at our “conference center.”) While the Appalachian Trail welcomes three to four million visitors a year, only a tiny fraction—less than one percent—are members of the ATC, supporting the uncommon care behind the uncommon place they have just enjoyed. Our research showed that Trail users did not see a reason to join an organization that, if they knew about it at all, exists only to coordinate “the real work” done by others.

If the A.T. is going to survive well into the twenty-second century, we must lay the groundwork now for raising our profile and growing our membership base. Without a higher public profile and broader public support, we will be unable to fend off the impact of threats, such as communications towers and road construction and tree-killing pollution, or provide the Trail-maintaining clubs with the financial and other support that they have identified as a critical need.

When was the decision made?

On Saturday, November 20, 2004, the Board of Managers of the Appalachian Trail Conference overwhelmingly voted to change the organization's name. Of the 28 Board members present, 23 voted in favor of the change. There was one abstention, one vote against, and two votes not cast. The chair does not vote. Nineteen votes were required for a bylaws amendment.

When does it take effect?

On July 4, 2005, during a celebration of the organization's 80th anniversary at the biennial meeting. Learn more about the biennial meeting at www.southernhighlands2005.org.

What was the decision-making process?

The recommendation to change the organization's name was the result of a years-long planning process and months of thoughtful market research and analysis. In accordance with the specific direction of its strategic plan adopted in November 2003, the ATC leadership selected a marketing firm oriented to nonprofits (Bemporad Baranowski Marketing Group) to examine the issue of a name change, among other marketing initiatives. In addition to auditing ATC materials and existing relevant research, the firm conducted a survey, a series of in-depth interviews, and two focus groups with a cross-section of ATC members and nonmembers. The ATC leadership first notified members of a possible name change in the March-April issue of Appalachian Trailway News, in reporting the adoption of the plan, and raised it again in the “Overlook” editorial in the July-August issue. The latter piece resulted in a number of letters from ATC members, which Board members factored into their understanding of what “conference” means to people and into their decision. ATC staff members and volunteers presented preliminary research findings at Regional Partnership Committee meetings throughout October and early November.

What did the research show?

Despite its familiarity within the ATC community, the word “conference” confuses more than it clarifies when it comes to describing ATC's primary mission to many different audiences, including the members. It universally suggested “coordination of others,” the oldest element of the ATC mission but no longer its preeminent one. “Conservancy,” the Board believes, connotes a host of positive, sense-of-place associations that will make it easier to garner support from many spheres to protect and promote the A.T. experience for generations to come. The confusion generated by “Conference” tends to keep doors closed rather than to open them.

Does the Board of Managers have the authority to make this change?

Yes. The Board of Managers has the authority to amend the bylaws of the organization, which include its name.

Was a vote to the members ever considered?

A vote of the ATC's 33,000 members was carefully considered but ultimately viewed as impractical. ATC's bylaws have no provision for a vote of the entire membership, so any action would have to wait until the biennial meeting, which history indicates less than 4 percent will attend. Given the careful planning and analysis that went into considering the name change, combined with the strategic imperative to begin raising the organization's profile with the 80th anniversary in a matter of weeks, the Board was confident the name change had to be approved now.