[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [at-l] handicapped access
Sharon Sharpe wrote:
> There have been many people who would "qualify" as handicapped ... The trail
> stands as it is (maybe
> only for now) and I feel if you have the determination to challenge it, it
> would be up to you to conform yourself to its customs, laws (written and
> otherwise) etc and give it your best shot. No one would argue that ANYONE
> can do a through hike in the same way that anyone can walk into a federal
> building, or anyone can pull their camper up to the hook-ups at the KOA.
> Nature decides how accessible the wilderness is, for all of us.
Very well stated. I agree with you.
Physical ability is not rigidly defined in practice, maybe in theory. We are all
of differing physical abilities relative to each other and even relative to
ourselves in different stages of our lives. Who are we to say that others of
differing physical abilities can't enjoy the wilderness.
I don't think the ADA was intended to require full access to the AT. Under current
ADA legislation, separate but equal is still the law for handicapped Americans.
That does not mean full access. I think that pack animals would be acceptable on
the trail. Maybe since I grew up in the West around farm animals, I am not
intimidated by large animals such as horse or mules.
Maybe the trail should be allowed to degenerate and those who want to use it must
bushwhack the entire 2200 miles. Then only the super fit would be able to use the
trail.
Sorry for the rambling on but I feel that the ADA and pack animals on the AT are
small consequence for improving the lives of some of our fellow Americans.
-John
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List | For info http://www.hack.net/lists *
==============================================================================