Re: [at-l] AT may be too tough says oldtimer ;o)

[Owen <jrowen@ibm.net>]

Tim Hewitt wrote:
> 
> Thomas McGinnis wrote:
> >
> >  OUCH! "Unsafe" might be a bit off there, too, isn't it? The
> >  "average hiker" (outside of ATMLness, obviously) might consider
> >  the whole of the AT as "unsafe." Should we rope off Charlie's
> >  Bunion?
> >
> [clip]
> 
> This is the real issue, isn't it. If I say a trail is fine, and you say a trail
> is unsafe, who is right?  If you have a bigger lobby in Congress, you are right.
>  If you say that anyone should be able to hike the AT and not just the
> "physically elite," and you have a bigger voice in Washington, you will win.
> 
> Ah, but your counter argument is that the ATC controls trail issues, not the
> Federal government. Today that is mostly correct. Will it be in 10 years? With
> the Feds buying up more and more of the trail corridor, will the ATC, a
> non-government, independant organization be able to maintain control over this,
> the "people's land."
> 
> I see the future downfall of the AT in it's Federal control, and the eventual
> loss of guidance by the ATC as a result of this.  Can we deny the physically
> handicapped access to the AT today?  If under Federal control, and all Federal
> projects must satisfy the ADA, we cannot.  What does this mean?  How about a
> wheelchair accessible bridge over Mahoosuc Notch?  Far fetched? Perhaps. Perhaps not.
> 
> I know that Earl is well meaning in his statements that the trail now is much
> harder than it "needs to be" to be a footpath in the wilderness from Georgia to
> Maine. I have also read those notes that well meaning visitors write in trail
> registers like "This trail is too bumpy, can't you take out some of the rocks?"
> or "A squirrel stole my peanuts and I expect a refund." Remember those messages
> that were posted here a few months back?  We all laugh, but the ADA has a strong
> lobby and the ACLU has lots of money and attorneys with which to put pressure on
> Congress to "open up" the AT to all Americans, regardless of physical ability.
> 
> I fear this day will come in my lifetime.  I will not support making the trail
> any easier for political reasons - only if by relocating a trail to avoid a
> serious trail problem like erosion and we happen to make the trail easier at the
> same time will I support the activity.
> 
> I'm for taking out shelters, not adding more. I'm for making areas less
> accessable, not more accessable. I'd almost prefer to have to carry 10-14 days
> of food at all times in order to hike the trail. Someone is suggesting putting a
> hostel in the middle of the Hundred Mile Wilderness. I guess if that happens
> we'll have to change the name to The Two Fifty Mile Wildernesses...
> 
> -Paddler


I hear an echo -- we started singing this song in 92.  And others have
probably sung it before us.  Keep on singing.  

Walk softly,
Jim

* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

==============================================================================