Re: [at-l] A.D.A. & A.T.

[bullard@northnet.org]

At 09:23 PM 11/21/99 EST, PaddyBeer@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 11/19/1999 11:07:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
>bullard@northnet.org writes:
>
><< the idea of a parallel trail >>
>
>
>Does the phrase "separate but equal is inherently unequal" sound familiar to 
>anyone?  A second trail will be nice, but there are still going to be those 
>who want to go on the other one and that will result in efforts to make sure 
>that all can walk, crawl, hobble, roll, whatever along it.  Realistically, 
>without sounding snobbish, and getting oneself into political backwash, how 
>can and who would argue that efforts should not be made to enable the 
>handicapped person as much access as the non handicapped?  I fear that the 
>breach has been made and, while it may sound found fetched now, we will 
>indeed wind up with a paved over trail before our days are through.  I do
not 
>believe that any politico would have the incentive to stop it because to try 
>would risk political suicide.

The ADA is not the steamroller you seem to think it is. Even if it were,
Congress does not adiquately fund the maintenance that our National Parks
and Trail systems require now. The amount necessary to make the entire AT
accessible end-to-end regardless of handicap will cetainly never get
through Congress. I suspect that there will be sections which will be made
accessible. It will be those sections that are amenable to such
modification. The trail up Katadhin won't be one of them nor will most
other sections.

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

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