Re: [at-l] ADA concerns (was An into)

["W F Thorneloe, MD" <thornel@ibm.net>]

Let's calm down please. The ADA requires attention to accessibility for 
public facilities through reasonable accommodations. The Devil is in the 
details regarding what reasonable means, and to what degree retrofitting of 
public facilities may be required. Decisions by the NPS to standardize 
construction of public facilities may result in oddly located construction, 
but that is not necessarily an ADA issue.

This thread was started by a person with disabilities who has interests and 
apprehensions about enjoying the back country. We have all been there. 80% 
or more of us find that we are still unable to find reasonable 
accommodations, even without the challenge of wheelchair, crutches, seeing 
eye dogs, or other assistance. This interest is a means of determining _if_ 
there are reasonable means of accommodation, and the opportunity to share 
our sport with others. Those of us who grouse about the short legged slow 
hikers, old folks and their knees, and tutu wearers would do well to shut 
up and grow up. At least he didn't want to rename the trail or buy cheese 
fries!

IMHO

OrangeBug
Atlanta, GA

At 09:13 AM 5/8/1999 -0400, Nadine9799@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 99-05-07 20:41:33 EDT, Cosmo.A.Catalano@williams.edu
>writes:
>
><< I hope that the Access Group will
>  specifically recommend changing this rule to allow devices that assist the
>  disabled (but still continue to ban other things like bikes and ORV's)
>   >>
>Cosmo,
>I must ask why you state this in this manner?
>As I see it, to make  the AT or any backcountry trail travelable by
>wheelchair is just plain stupid for so many reasons

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

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