Re[2]: [at-l] Handicapp Access

[tmcginnis@ucclan.state.in.us (Thomas McGinnis)]

     WARNING: POSSIBLE INFLAMMATORY POST. READ AT YOUR OWN RISK.
     
     I have to disagree with OrangeBug. I have seen "trail maintenance" go 
     from a private, amateur, volunteer-driven activity to a realm of 
     bureaucracy-driven projects designed by "certified experts" whose 
     whole purpose is to keep the work going. In Public Administration 
     terms, "Spend up to your budget" -- in money OR it time -- to ensure 
     that everyone sees how "necessary" all of the efforts (and tax 
     dollars) are. I don't think you can use a chainsaw on an AT project 
     any longer without being "certified." Now, GATC gets informed that 
     their VOLUNTEERS are not "needed" to work on the Blood Mountain fire 
     BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT "CERTIFIED." Blah blah blah.
     
     What this translates to for trail maintenance OR TRAIL DESIGN 
     decisions is that there is a large machine, at the federal, state, and 
     yes, even the club level, which is oriented at nothing more than 
     finding the next project, and fitting that project to the available 
     time. Yes, this goes for the ATC, too. These decisions are not driven 
     by trail need, but by the need to justify the existence of "A Solution 
     Looking for a Problem." The "decision" to provide "Handicapp Access" 
     was the output of a machine; it was not "customer driven."
     
     I don't mean to denigrate anyone's efforts; we need to proceed with 
     MUCH more caution, though, in how we "maintain" our trails. I don't 
     know if the AT has become "harder" (as Earl Shaffer et.al. have spoken 
     to) or "easier" (as implied in this thread), but I have heard plenty 
     about projects for "the bridge *needed* at the X_____ Stream 
     crossing." My own (very small) organization has a very cute T-shirt, a 
     logo of a crossed ax and Pulaski, and written around it is the saying 
     "There's no such thing as a trail that couldn't stand a little 
     improvement." We're young, we're small, we get more done than clubs 
     many times our size, but we too are absolutely guilty of "make work" 
     projects. What ever happened to a trip to the woods with a litter bag 
     and clippers/scythe? No,....most wait till the (certified) 
     chainsawyers, treated lumber/rebar, and surveyors come out.
     
     Trail imperfections are part of the trail experience. Differences in 
     trail design and maintenance, signage and lean-tos, reflect the 
     differences of the *volunteer* clubs *and*individuals* who devote 
     their time, money, gasoline, sweat and brawn; these are also part of 
     the trail experience. And, to be clear, to "standardize" is to dilute 
     that trail experience.
     
     The Long Trail *may*be* our longest wilderness path.
     
     
     Don't have a bureaucratic day,
     Sloetoe.
     


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: [at-l] Handicapp Access
Author:  "W F Thorneloe; MD (Domain will change soon to attglobal.net)" 
<thornel@ibm.net> at ima
Date:    11/19/99 9:27 AM


You are forgiven, apology accepted. Consider joining the ATC and get the 
answers to those questions, and maybe volunteer with your local trail club 
and see how much planning goes into the plot to pave over the Trail. You 
will feel much better after you are assimilated into the OrangeBorg.
     
OrangeBug
Atlanta, GA
     
At 06:42 AM 11/19/1999 -0500, PaddyBeer@aol.com wrote:
>Sorry folks, this is not a troll but an honest plea to look at
>something from a different perspective and maybe stop the over softization of 
>the AT.
     
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

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