PDA

View Full Version : Death at Chimney Rock



Ramble~On
05-29-2008, 06:46
http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200880524027

A 2 year old boy escaped his mothers grasp on Saturday while hiking at Chimney Rock State Park in North Carolina and fell to his death.
My heart goes out to the family...I can't imagine.
He fell from the Upper Skyline Trail down to the Cliff Trail.
If you saw the movie "The Last of the Mohicans" you may remember the cliff scenes towards the end of the movie..those scenes were filmed here.

It's not really for me to say but....I'll share that there is no way I would have taken my daughter on that trail when she was two..
To Chimney Rock itself yes...but not on the Skyline Trail or Cliff Trail.
But that's me.

The park has decided to continue allowing children on these trails.

Photo-cliff (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/vbg/showimage.php?i=25120&original=1&c=member&imageuser=2785)

Frolicking Dinosaurs
05-29-2008, 08:12
My deepest sympathy to the family. The mother will have a difficult time getting over this as she ask herself over and over why she took the child on this trail and could she have done anything to stop his fall.

I agree with SpiritWind - this is not a trail for toddlers. I took my son there first when he was about 8 yo because that was the first year he was mature enough to understand the danger involved in getting too close to and being careless around cliff faces. To avoid future tragedy, I wish the Park Service would set a minimum age of at least 5 years for those trails. Both have sheer, unguarded drop-offs that require the sort of careful attention to safety that small children just cannot handle and I can sympathize with anyone trying to hang on to a willful 2 yo and trying to keep their own footing under such conditions.

4eyedbuzzard
05-29-2008, 08:41
Very sad. Lots of places on the AT and elsewhere where there is potentially deadly terrain. There's quite a few here in NH. It would be very hard to pass or enforce any kind of prohibition though saying you can't bring children of a certain age as age alone doesn't relate arbitrarily to comprehension of the risk, behavior, obedience, etc.

Again very sad.

See Bee
05-29-2008, 10:14
This is sad. Will NC change how and who it lets hike at Chimney Rock?

dmax
05-29-2008, 10:21
This is very sad, and my deepest regrets go out to the family.
I always took my son out hiking from as early as I can remember. You have to keep your guard up at all times. I don't feel children should be banned from the wilderness. Accidents happen all the time. It can happen on your sidewalk in front of the house, or in a grocery store parking lot. Adults have fallen to their deaths too, but I wouldn't ban adults from the back country either. Everybody needs to pay close attention to all that is going on around them, and be safe.

envirodiver
05-29-2008, 10:35
So very sad. The Mom will probably never get over this.

Probably a good place to use one of those child harnesses and leash like I see some people use at the mall, etc. If you take them at all on this type of trail, which I agree you should not.

sherrill
05-29-2008, 10:45
This is sad. Will NC change how and who it lets hike at Chimney Rock?


Chimney Rock is privately owned, like Grandfather Mountain.

peanuts
05-29-2008, 11:14
my deepest and heartfelt sympathies to the family... very sad indeed.

Pete Moss
05-29-2008, 11:57
Arent they getting ready to build a big housing development out there?

MOWGLI
05-29-2008, 12:01
Chimney Rock is privately owned, like Grandfather Mountain.

It was purchased by the State of NC - and is now a State Park.

http://www.ncparks.gov/Visit/parks/chro/main.php

BlackCloud
05-29-2008, 12:02
It is sad, but so is life. I also fear the attorneys who might want to take advantage of this...

RITBlake
05-29-2008, 12:15
heart breaking...

SweetAss03
05-29-2008, 12:17
Sad, sad. However, I'm not voting for any more restictions on how to raise my child. Our nations jails are full of "State raised" Children... I think I can do a better job.

Juw5

SweetAss03
05-29-2008, 12:17
Sad, sad. However, I'm not voting for any more restictions on how to raise my child. Our nations jails are full of "State raised" Children... I think I can do a better job.

Just my two cents.

SweetAss

Frolicking Dinosaurs
05-29-2008, 12:25
While I feel the state should leave child rearing to parents in most cases, when it comes to genuine safety issues I'm supportive of such legislation (child restraint seats in cars, restricting children from dangerous hiking trails, setting a minimum age at which a child can be left without supervision, etc.)

I suspect the mother who lost her 2 yo son in this tragedy was not aware of the conditions on the Upper Skyline trail and would have opted not to take him had she known. The warning signs at the trailhead are similar to those I've seen at the trailheads of far less dangerous trails. A sign saying children under 5 are not allowed on the trail would be more effective IMO.

Johnny Swank
05-29-2008, 12:38
Oh God, that's horrible. I can't imagine losing a child like that.

Yeah, that trail's not a place for a toddler, but I'm not one for more rules. There's enough of those as it is.

4eyedbuzzard
05-29-2008, 13:07
It is sad, but so is life. I also fear the attorneys who might want to take advantage of this...

It think it would be very difficult to prevail in a suit based upon an accident like this. There's the assumption of risk that goes along with parent's choice to take a child into an area with cliffs and waterfalls, and likely the hazards are reasonably apparent, and not just implied but expessed as well. I don't know the area personally, but I'm betting that the hazards are both plainly visible and posted at the park itself or on an entrance ticket, information flyer, etc. BTW, my understanding is that the parents spoke/understood very little English. Even so, the readily apparent danger of hiking in areas with cliffs isn't a language issue, and ultimately, the parent has control and is responsible for choosing to take the child into the area and the child's actions, not the state or its contractor operating the park. It's unlikely that a court would rule that a reasonable person wouldn't be knowledgable of the hazards and therefore would be responsible for assuming that risk. There would also be the issue of sovereign immunity to be overcome in suing the state government or its employees. The contractor might be more vulnerable here, but I doubt there's an actionable case.

RITBlake
05-29-2008, 13:09
the fall :(

http://maine2georgia.com/fall.jpg

emerald
05-29-2008, 13:23
The warning signs at the trailhead are similar to those I've seen at the trailheads of far less dangerous trails. A sign saying children under 5 are not allowed on the trail would be more effective IMO.

Sad indeed. I understand where you are coming from in suggesting a new sign, but I wonder whether legislation or a rule which may be required beforehand would be legal or could be enforced.

While it seems something more might have been done to prevent this loss of this life at such a young age, it would also require people respecting whatever is posted whether it has the force of law or not. Laws frequently aren't enough, funding for enforcement isn't limitless and enforcement personnel can't be everywhere.

Bulldawg
05-29-2008, 13:26
What a horrible tragedy. I wouldn't dare take my 6 and 7 year old up to the cliff on that picture. I often get skiddish when we are some of the possibly not as scary summits we are on. Skids took us to the "opera box" on Standing Indian" Saturday and I was a little nervous with my kids out there one at a time.

I can't imagine losing a child like this. This family certainly needs our prayers.

StarLyte
05-29-2008, 13:37
I can't even picture this.

I also can't picture what was the mother/parents thinking? They need their damn heads examined.

I feel sorry for the child who suffered before his death. I hope he is in a beautiful place. :sun

I'm so sad. How awful. I'm terribly bothered by this, yet very mad.

God bless all little innocent children and animals.

4eyedbuzzard
05-29-2008, 13:37
While I feel the state should leave child rearing to parents in most cases, when it comes to genuine safety issues I'm supportive of such legislation (child restraint seats in cars, restricting children from dangerous hiking trails, setting a minimum age at which a child can be left without supervision, etc.)

I suspect the mother who lost her 2 yo son in this tragedy was not aware of the conditions on the Upper Skyline trail and would have opted not to take him had she known. The warning signs at the trailhead are similar to those I've seen at the trailheads of far less dangerous trails. A sign saying children under 5 are not allowed on the trail would be more effective IMO.

The problem with a sign saying "children under 5 are not allowed" is that you then imply it's safe for 6 year olds, with all the resultant implications. You have kids and grandkids, Dino. Some 5 year olds would be fine around dangerous cliffs. Some 10 year olds wouldn't be - heck, some 18 year olds wouldn't...

Cliffs aren't "safe" for anybody, including adults.

EDIT: The mother according to what's being reported spoke/understood very limited English. Wouldn't effect the visible hazard factor - see cliff, be cautious - but certainly may have effected any written warnings not being followed.

envirodiver
05-29-2008, 13:47
It would seem to me that the best you could do with signage would be to declare the danger associated with the trail and maybe even a photo like the one posted earlier to illustrate the danger. I've seen signs that say something like "falls could result in severe injury including death". But, many people ignore signs and refuse to accept that their child is not capable of having a problem with it.

Don't know what else could be done unless there is one of those you must be this tall to hike this trail signs like at the amusment park.

I've not hiked this trail, but it looks very dangerous and is it as treacherous when wet as it appears that it would be?

twosticks
05-29-2008, 14:19
I can't even picture this.

I also can't picture what was the mother/parents thinking? They need their damn heads examined.



Heads examined for starting off their children on the right foot? This is a tragedy yes, but if the child wouldn't have fallen she would have had one hell of a trip to talk about. I've taken my young ones on some "dangerous" trails at that age and now they've got a deep rooted love for the outdoors. I guess that's what the parents were thinking.

emerald
05-29-2008, 14:25
With the addition of the last post added to the broth, it won't require much stirring or heat under it to be another WhiteBlaze thread in need of a lock.:rolleyes:

RITBlake
05-29-2008, 14:27
I also can't picture what was the mother/parents thinking? They need their damn heads examined.


Must be nice to be perfect and never make mistakes, even grave ones such as this.

Mrs Baggins
05-29-2008, 14:39
Friends of ours took their son, maybe 4 at the time, up that trail and almost lost him to big wind gust up there. He actually slipped to the edge before they caught him. They blamed the trail conditions when it was clear that they should never have taken him up there.

I remember back in the late 60's a young mom took her in-arms infant to an area somewhere above Niagara Falls. She had the baby resting on the railing as she looked down, grew faint from seeing the height and the power of the water, and as she started to pass out her arms opened and she dropped her infant over the rail. I've never forgotten that news story.

4eyedbuzzard
05-29-2008, 15:13
With the addition of the last post added to the broth, it won't require much stirring or heat under it to be another WhiteBlaze thread in need of a lock.:rolleyes:

Threads don't ever really need to be locked down, just certain people do.

I don't think the discussion has to go beyond civility. Neither the parent nor the state was mailiciously reckless. Some might judge the parent's decision a poor or even uninformed choice, but there was no malice involved. It was an accident. That's why we call them that. Otherwise we'd call them on-puposes.

There are definitely a few issues raised. My thought are:

1) Unfortunately, accidents do happen. Life is simply not without risk. As Ben said, death and taxes are the only certainties. A child ran off, fell and died. Isn't the first time and won't be the last. He could just as easily have run out into traffic on a highway.

2) Within legal bounds, it is the parent's responsibility to assess and determine the level of risk their children are exposed to. Do I think hiking this trail increases the level of risk? Yes. But so would going out on a friends boat, going to an amusement park, the beach, and countless other activities.

3) The state should not be a nanny striving to insulate people from every risk out there. Nor should it be liable when people choose to subject themselves(or their children) to higher levels of risk that some might find too high. Assessing the risk involved in hiking, swimming, or whatever activity we freely choose to participate in is not the duty of the government, but of the person or their parent.

A few weeks ago a woman hiker was killed by a falling rock in Franconia State Park here in NH http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Newsroom/News_2008/News_2008_Q2/Search_Hiker_Death_050908.html
It was a freak accident. But, given enough time, someone else will likely be killed by another falling rock here in NH. Should we prohibit hiking in these areas as a result?

A 19 year old hiker was killed in a fall in CO yesterday http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/16422899/detail.html?rss=den&psp=news
He was sliding on the snow and went off a cliff. Should the state mandate ice axes and certification of self-arrest techniques before allowing people to hike near snowfields?

emerald
05-29-2008, 15:20
There's no need for a lock with an occasional post like someone just took the time to write. Avoiding a lock does require someone to write such a post, however.

twosticks
05-29-2008, 16:02
There's no need for a lock with an occasional post like someone just took the time to write. Avoiding a lock does require someone to write such a post, however.

And what exactly did your two posts add to the discussion?

Frolicking Dinosaurs
05-29-2008, 18:29
The problem with a sign saying "children under 5 are not allowed" is that you then imply it's safe for 6 year olds, with all the resultant implications. You have kids and grandkids, Dino. Some 5 year olds would be fine around dangerous cliffs. Some 10 year olds wouldn't be - heck, some 18 year olds wouldn't...Good point. Most 5 yo will listen to their parents warnings and are under voice control. 4 yo's tend to get distracted easily and forget the rules in strange environments. Children under age 4 often require physical restraint to avoid being injured.

SweetAss03
05-29-2008, 18:37
I must have missed what was wrong with those two post Shades of Gray. Is it because they have a different point of view then what you have? Well then we can't have that. Ever read Fahrenheit 451?

SweetAss

Skidsteer
05-29-2008, 18:41
Children under age 4 often require physical restraint to avoid being injured.

As do some boys in the 14-29 year old range.

FlimFlam
05-29-2008, 22:35
This is a sad event, but I'm glad the park will continue without age restrictions. We already have too many restrictions. Let parents decide. Even if they had an age rule, the parents could take their kid on a hike with a fifteen foot drop, the kid falls and dies. What does the rule accomplish?

4eyedbuzzard
05-29-2008, 22:54
This is a sad event, but I'm glad the park will continue without age restrictions. We already have too many restrictions. Let parents decide. Even if they had an age rule, the parents could take their kid on a hike with a fifteen foot drop, the kid falls and dies. What does the rule accomplish? I agree

FlimFlam
05-29-2008, 23:06
I think its very appropriate. People taking enough time to participate in a thread about a sad accident, yet to bring that situation into a larger context is inappropriate? I'm not sure what you mean.

JDCool1
05-29-2008, 23:10
When a tragedy like this one occurs in our park lands we want to figure out a way to avoid repeats. A number of years ago some children were chasing each other along the wooden walkways surrounding the hot springs in Yellowstone. At the beginning of the walkway signs read "Danger, Do not Run." The parents did nothing. A child fell into one of th springs and was scalded to death. The park service was blamed and sued. I am sure the money did not ease the parents grief nor did it relieve their guilt. The government is not responsible for the lack of judgement, nor are they to hold our hands and instruct us. We could just lock up all the dangerous places, but who will judge what is dangerous and what is not. I grieve for the loss of the child and the guilt of the parent, but responsibility rests with the adult. May they find some peace. Like other have said, accidents will happen. Rules of the trail and limiting who goes where will not change the attitude some have to the obvious dangers.

Ramble~On
05-29-2008, 23:34
Here is a photo of one of the many signs at Chimney Rock.
Photo-Sign_at_Chimney_Rock (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/vbg/showimage.php?i=25175&original=1&c=553)

The park does have rules and the first rule listed on their trail map
states: "An adult must accompany children under 16 at all times."

There have been several deaths this year already at North Carolina waterfalls...one of which was in a state park. Hiking trails near these falls do not always have signs and the majority do not have fences...people should be less concerned with lawsuits and more concerned with their own safety and the safety of their children.

This recent death at Chimney Rock is tragic...however it was avoidable and no one is pointing a finger at the park...people are pointing fingers at the parents...if you are familiar with the area where this fall took place you realize that the circumstances have to at least bring up some serious questions as to how this 2 year old boy was able to get that close to the area where he fell. I don't have any facts and won't offer opinions but I have been to this spot and the incident is horrible..regardless of how it happened.

The park has reviewed this incident and made the decision to not change their current policies...that says something about this incident.

BlackCloud
05-30-2008, 09:45
It think it would be very difficult to prevail in a suit based upon an accident like this. There's the assumption of risk that goes along with parent's choice to take a child into an area with cliffs and waterfalls, and likely the hazards are reasonably apparent, and not just implied but expessed as well. I don't know the area personally, but I'm betting that the hazards are both plainly visible and posted at the park itself or on an entrance ticket, information flyer, etc. BTW, my understanding is that the parents spoke/understood very little English. Even so, the readily apparent danger of hiking in areas with cliffs isn't a language issue, and ultimately, the parent has control and is responsible for choosing to take the child into the area and the child's actions, not the state or its contractor operating the park. It's unlikely that a court would rule that a reasonable person wouldn't be knowledgable of the hazards and therefore would be responsible for assuming that risk. There would also be the issue of sovereign immunity to be overcome in suing the state government or its employees. The contractor might be more vulnerable here, but I doubt there's an actionable case.

Unless you're in Hawaii. There's a state park on Oahu that's been closed for years b/c some people were killed when rocks fell on them, well past all the big signs that say WATCH FOR FALLING ROCKS!

So yes, I agree with you, but some state laws are so extreme that they defy all sense...

Frolicking Dinosaurs
05-30-2008, 10:02
I hiked with my kids from before they could walk, but not on trails with cliffs and sheer drop-offs when they were small. My son was jumping from rock to rock on the Chimney Top trail in the GSMNP at age 9 and I wasn't worried because I knew he had the ability to make the decisions about where to jump and not to jump. My foster daughter was the timid sort and didn't want to go up there - a wish I honored. I took her on trails that were equally beautiful, but less scary. The hike you pick for your kids needs to match the child's attributes - their abilities, fears and things they enjoy. Individual children are very different - even children from the same family.

envirodiver
05-30-2008, 10:08
Here is a photo of one of the many signs at Chimney Rock.
Photo-Sign_at_Chimney_Rock (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/vbg/showimage.php?i=25175&original=1&c=553)

The park does have rules and the first rule listed on their trail map
states: "An adult must accompany children under 16 at all times."

That should be sufficient warning to anyone regarding the potential danger associated with this area. IMO

MOWGLI
05-30-2008, 10:17
I remember being at the Bryce Canyon with my 2 year old. She didn't want her hand held and squirmed, whined, pulled, and did everything possible to break free of my grip. Needless to say, it was upsetting, and I ended up yelling at her loudly. The result? I literally scared the pee out of her. My wife was so mad at me, she wouldn't talk to me for almost 24 hours.

Any criticizing of the parents in this case is simply uncalled for. I suggest people back off and let them grieve. This is a terrible tragedy. Try and think about that before you type.

FlimFlam
05-30-2008, 10:43
with that logic, one should invoke politics & foreign policy into every thread, which would make this website worthless to most people & destroy its very purpose.

example:
Post= "i just got this backpack on sale for real cheap"

Post= "oh yeah, that's just a result of a global capitalist system that exploits the less fortunate from poorer societies to feed the excesses of its own".

see what i mean?:-?

Title's a joke...somewhat.

We're talking about a small tragedy that was probably easily avoidable. Either by better parenting or better/more park rules and safety restrictions. I say that we don't need more rules and restrictions in this case. I then juxtaposition/contextualize this smaller, accidental tragedy with a much larger planned and thought-out tragedy that continues to happen on a daily basis.

Now someone objects to this example's "appropriateness". For what specific reason? Did you personally know the child and his parents? Are you sitting in front of your monitor, shedding tears about the loss of your personal aquanitance. If so, okay, its an inappropriate comment.

But I doubt that you knew him/his parents. You read about it from a news article posted on a hiking forum. So me juxtapositioning this smaller event with others (political or military events) to show the absurdity of some people's position on government rules and restraints in the face of most people's deafening silence about even more important event....This is somehow inappropriate or offensive to you? Well I think that's a symptom of larger problem. People not wanting to think and reflect.

Oh well. Let's place some signs on this forum saying that people who want to discuss "inappropriate" things or "politcs" should either go to a political forum or should be enclosed by a fence made of "tsssk tssskers." We can create a taskforce to formulate a list of what is appropriate or inappropriate and to maintain this list.

/sarcasm

Good Lord...

4eyedbuzzard
05-30-2008, 13:45
Here's the latest news. A long read. The mother claims there were no Spanish signs. Seems I've seen a few pics of one here in this thread. Sorry, I ain't buying her whole story. They're already retracting statements witnessed by police after finding out the police officer was a certified Spanish interpreter. http://www.lavozindependiente.com/news.php?nid=491&pag=0

What a freakin' sideshow this is gonna be. :mad:

gghiker
08-02-2008, 23:01
I don't buy the story either, the part about the child at no time not being under control from the mother. Holding the hand of a 2 year old while walking upright on a very narrow trail...possible for a short length, but obviously not what happened.

I can't say anything bad about the mother, else I would be a hypocrite of sorts. As I am still reminded every once in a blue moon, when I was a young boy I got away from my parents on the lower falls trail at Chimney Rock. I always did like to keep my own pace, I suppose. I ended up so far ahead, when I came out onto the road, I had to wait about 10 minutes for my dad to catch up. That didn't go over too well, I don't believe. The details are spotty after 30 years (feeling old now)

My opinion on the trail from which the child fell, there should be a fence. I mean chain link, at least. No purism of nature or sanctity of the trail to be ruined at Chimney Rock Park; only busloads of kids and tourists clogging every route and attraction. I haven't been back in at least 15 years, but I doubt its changed for the better in that regard.

gghiker
08-13-2008, 21:34
Just as a final notice for this thread, The Skyline trail is closed now for modifications. So the NC Parks Service is probably putting up fencing.

Marta
08-13-2008, 22:03
Crowders Mtn. State Park has new signs, in English and Spanish, warning of the dangers of the cliffs. I assume this is fallout, as it were, from the accident.

wilconow
09-01-2008, 13:10
someone just died at looking glass falls

http://hikerhell.blogspot.com/2008/09/man-dies-from-70-foot-waterfall-jump.html

Tipi Walter
09-01-2008, 13:40
What a freakin' sideshow this is gonna be. :mad:

Another good reason to close the roads to these "tourist traps" and make people walk long miles to reach such areas. It would weed out the casual dayhikers and gawkers, and the mothers with 2 year olds. The whole Yellowstone debacle with the geysers is a good case in point. Make it a 40 mile hike in to see it and not some Dollywood sideshow with snow cones and funnel cakes. A long hump would keep out the riffraff and rolling couch potatoes. Imagine how many wheeled tourists would be dead if they could drive up to the Khombu Icefall on Mt Everest?

Like the Interstate Highway System, Wilderness is a place where accidents happen. How many children have died on the highways? Is every parent at fault when they take children in cars and yet they know a deadly wreck could possibly occur?

BR360
09-01-2008, 14:10
I felt for the parents of this tragedy. A reminder that accidents can happen, and some are fatal.

Chimney Rock and Hickory Nut Gorge is an outstanding place, which is why NC bought it to preserve it.

I hiked there in May. Plenty of warning signs in English and Spanish, one of which is here.

4736

Skyline trail is awesome, and part of it is due to the extensive "boardwalks" that traverse an otherwise inaccessible area.

4737

I felt that this would be a difficult trail for toddlers and typical out-of-shape tourons, primarily from the length and elevation (1.5 miles), though much of it climbs or descends on stairs.

It occurred to me that there was a lot of fencing, more than really necessary for actual safety for people with judgment. This park was privately owned and operated until 2007, when it was purchased by the state. I'm sure the prior owners had to sweat the liability issues in our law-suit-happy society.

4738

gghiker
09-01-2008, 15:43
Another good reason to close the roads to these "tourist traps" and make people walk long miles to reach such areas. It would weed out the casual dayhikers and gawkers, and the mothers with 2 year olds. The whole Yellowstone debacle with the geysers is a good case in point. Make it a 40 mile hike in to see it and not some Dollywood sideshow with snow cones and funnel cakes. A long hump would keep out the riffraff and rolling couch potatoes. Imagine how many wheeled tourists would be dead if they could drive up to the Khombu Icefall on Mt Everest?

Like the Interstate Highway System, Wilderness is a place where accidents happen. How many children have died on the highways? Is every parent at fault when they take children in cars and yet they know a deadly wreck could possibly occur?
Look, I know the feeling. I've recently seen one of my favorite mountains in NC go from being a long, dangerous, extremely difficult hike to being clearcut and zigzagged and boardwalked and safety railed and sanitized for your protection. (Stone Mountain, NC) It made me physically ill and darn near in tears of rage over the unbelievable stupidity.

But (and this isn't a position I like myself for advocating) there are a very few (and should stay that way) places like Chimney Rock that are safe enough and easy enough for groups of little kids to visit on field trips, family trips, etc. and get the opportunity to see a world outside of their home and the city. And of course, the handicapped accessibility of such places alone is worth the intrusion. My wife is disabled and doesn't get to see the world first hand, she has to rely on my photos and stories. We spent last weekend at Chimney Rock, with my 9-year old niece. I've been trying to nurture a love of the outdoors to my niece, but without access to places like Chimney Rock, how will she ever learn? So even though I don't like compromise any more than you, it does serve an important service in moderation.

My niece on Chimney Rock. A picture worth a lot, I was thrilled to see her up there, enjoying the view.

Tipi Walter
09-01-2008, 16:27
And of course, the handicapped accessibility of such places alone is worth the intrusion.

So even though I don't like compromise any more than you, it does serve an important service in moderation.

So, leave the roads open only to the handicapped. The able-bodied should park and walk while the disabled few get wheeled access.

In moderation? I think we've gone way beyond moderation in vehicle access to wild places. Look at the Smokies. Look at Baxter State Park. One of the goals of American society is to have car access to every last acre of the country, so to fight this tendency there must be waged a near constant battle against such group think policy-makers. The head-honchos bring out the mutliuse handicapped-access argument as a not-so-suble ploy to increase road building and tourism, because they know that after they build such a road and open it to the public, only a very small percentage of users will be in the handicapped category.

Never underestimate the American's love affair with the automobile. Because of this addiction, some clear thinkers decided in 1964 to institute the Wilderness Act and devote large areas of land to foot/horse travel only with no cars or ATVs etc allowed. In the southeast where I backpack there are few wilderness areas so we're a bit more overwhelmed by the automobile than out west.

Roots
09-01-2008, 16:33
So, leave the roads open only to the handicapped. The able-bodied should park and walk while the disabled few get wheeled access.


I couldn't agree more.