Enough of this B... S...!  Nothing confuses the public,government agencys and any other concerned
organization than the constant bickering among the blind and visually impaired population about audible
signals, tactle marking and any other device that may help us remain independant and safely moble.  Before
the" White Cane:., What?  Before "Braille".  What?  etc.  Of course anyone can be confused, even the
sighted.  More blind and visually impaired persons are confident and actually moving about in our urban
society far more than they ever did before.  There are doomsayers and negatibe thinking who would oppose
any form of progress out of hand.  Cooperation and teamwork by the blind community for the benefit of the
majority is essential to attract support by the very sighted individuals who really understand little of
what it is like to be blind or visually impaired.  Think long, hard and deep before you decry benefits to a
majority.  Gordon

Steve Zielinski wrote:

> I also find this article to be rather balanced.  Worth sharing along the
> line.  I have posted it to the vicug-l list.
>
> Steve
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 07:52:03 -0600
> From: David Andrews <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: Multiple recipients of NFBnet NFB-Talk Mailing List
>     <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Fwd: Audible Crosswalk Signals Divide Blind Community ---  Devices
>     Are Common in Europe, But Opponents Say They Can Stigmatize  and Distract
>
> >I originally read the following on NewsLine, and found the article to be pretty balanced and complete.
>
> Dave
>
> >Subject:      Audible Crosswalk Signals Divide Blind Community --- Devices Are
> >               Common in Europe,
> >               But Opponents Say They Can Stigmatize and Distract
> >Audible Crosswalk Signals Divide Blind Community --- Devices Are Common
> >in Europe, But Opponents Say They Can Stigmatize and Distract
> >By Jeffrey A. Tannenbaum
> >Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
> >
> >03/13/2001
> >The Wall Street Journal
> >
> >(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
> >
> >To public-works officials in Baltimore, it seemed like a good idea:
> >Install the city's first audible traffic signals, to both aid blind
> >pedestrians and help the U.S. play catch-up on a promising technology.
> >But last October, when officials laid plans to outfit four intersections
> >with beeping devices, they ran into unexpected flak -- from some blind
> >residents themselves. The nonprofit National Federation of the Blind,
> >which maintains that audible signals are usually unnecessary, objected to
> >the proposed locations. The group says the spread of needless audible
> >signals would reinforce stereotypes of the blind as people who need huge
> >amounts of help.
> >
> >So Baltimore tabled the plan -- only to trigger a protest by members of
> >the nonprofit American Council of the Blind, which had sought the signals
> >in the first place. Now Baltimore is going ahead with a slightly altered
> >plan, months behind the original timetable. "It doesn't make it easy,
> >from a public-policy perspective, when two groups of the blind differ
> >drastically on these signals," says Sheila Dixon, president of the city
> >council.
> >Division within the blind community has slowed adoption of the
> >audible-signal technology in much of the country, says Lois Thibault,
> >research coordinator for the U.S. Architectural and Barriers Compliance
> >Board, which makes rules under federal disabilities law. The so-called
> >accessible signals beep, chirp or give voice messages to alert the blind
> >when a "Walk/Don't Walk" signal changes. Some devices emit noises
> >automatically, while others require activation by a button.
> >By some estimates, there are roughly 5,000 communities in the U.S. that
> >have some audible signals. Many are on the West Coast, such as San
> >Francisco and Seattle. Ms. Thibault and others say many blind individuals
> >have requested audible signals near their homes, but the requests often
> >meet opposition from other blind people. Clashes over proposed signals
> >have arisen in recent years not only in Baltimore, but also in
> >Minneapolis, Vancouver, Wash., Portland, Ore., and Hot Springs, Ark,
> >according to advocates for the blind.
> >Though declaring itself "flexible" since 1992 on the issue of audible
> >signals, the National Federation of the Blind confirms that its chapters
> >-- and sometimes just individual members -- occasionally oppose requests
> >for signals. "If there is a plain four-way stop and no good reason for an
> >audible traffic signal, the mere request of a single individual would not
> >justify it," says James Gashel, director of governmental affairs.
> >Indeed, the wrangling in Baltimore led the city to change one of the four
> >locations slated to get the signals to a more complicated intersection.
> >The federation believes the signals, if used in intersections that aren't
> >especially complex, can stigmatize the blind. The group also believes
> >that money used for signals could be better applied to programs such as
> >job training for the blind. Some members think the devices can even be
> >harmful at times.
> >Scott Labarre, a 32-year-old Colorado lawyer, says he was once distracted
> >by a beeping signal and thus nearly stepped in front of a moving car. "I
> >was afraid my cane was going to get crunched, if not myself," he says. In
> >Salt Lake City, 52-year-old Ray Martin says audible signals "are useless
> >to me. . . . I've been taught the proper skills of cane travel."
> >The National Federation viewpoint tends to reflect the opinions of the
> >most mobile and cane-savvy of the blind, sometimes known among themselves
> >as "super blinks." The American Council, which advocates changing
> >facilities to help blind people, tends to speak for the less mobile --
> >and more numerous -- members of the community. Both groups say they
> >represent all blind people.
> >Marlaina Lieberg, a 51-year-old Seattle resident and member of the
> >American Council, says she was once hit by a car in Boston when a "Walk"
> >light changed sooner than she expected. An audible signal would have
> >helped, she says, calling the issue a "no-brainer." She adds: "Why
> >wouldn't you want any cue you could possibly use to enhance your safety?"
> >
> >Accessible signals are already widely used in Europe, Japan and
> >Australia. Bob Panich, owner of a company that installs such signals in
> >Australia, says: "We're most surprised at the U.S. being so far behind in
> >this regard, knowing that the U.S. also has antidiscrimination laws and a
> >powerful deaf/blind lobby."
> >The U.S. is moving to catch up. Following intense lobbying by disability
> >coalitions, Congress in 1999 made federal funds available for accessible
> >signals in the same way it was already available for such things as
> >sidewalk wheelchair ramps. Only traffic signals that are along public bus
> >or rail lines are eligible. The devices typically cost $400 to $500 per
> >box, with eight needed for a four-corner intersection.
> >In addition, a key federal manual for highway engineers late last year
> >included standards for accessible signals for the first time. The action
> >removed a huge stumbling block: communities' fear of liability suits if
> >they installed signals without uniform standards.
> >"A lot of communities didn't know what to put in. Now a standard is
> >available," says Julia Wilkie, a project engineer at MDU Resources Inc.'s
> >Wagner Smith unit, which installs and maintains traffic signals for 140
> >Ohio communities.
> >Another boost for accessible signals came in January, when a federal
> >advisory panel endorsed the devices, making a federally mandated phase-in
> >likely within a few years. Such a mandate could require that new
> >intersections or ones being rebuilt include accommodations for the blind.
> >
> >The signals promise to take some hazardous guesswork out of the way the
> >blind cross streets: They listen carefully for traffic sounds, then take
> >their chances. When Mr. Labarre, the Colorado lawyer, needs to cross
> >Denver's Colorado Boulevard where it intersects Mexico Avenue, there is
> >often heavy traffic moving along Colorado. So he listens for that traffic
> >to stop for a red light. When he thinks he hears that, he enters the
> >crosswalk, sweeping a white cane back and forth in sequence with his
> >steps. Crossing "is not terribly complicated," he maintains.
> >But the procedure seems terribly intimidating and risky to many other
> >blind people, who are happy when they encounter audible signals. "You
> >know precisely when the walk signal is on," says Christopher Gray, a
> >46-year-old San Francisco technical writer. When standing at Shattuck
> >Avenue and Center Street in Berkeley, Calif., Mr. Gray says he hears a
> >chirping sound if pedestrians crossing Shattuck have a "Walk" signal;
> >otherwise he hears a cuckoo sound.
> >Several trends in traffic control have been making it harder for the
> >blind to predict when lights will change. Computerized traffic flow, for
> >example, sets traffic lights depending on such things as traffic density
> >instead of at regular timed intervals. Advocates of audible signals say
> >that at least a dozen blind pedestrians have died while crossing streets
> >during the last three years, though whether an audible signal would have
> >changed the outcome isn't always clear.
> >Berl Colley, a 58-year-old computer programmer in Lacey, Wash., says he
> >was once struck by a car and badly bruised. "Now, every time I cross the
> >street, I wish I had some audible indication that I should go," he says.
> >While the disagreements among the blind have slowed the advance of
> >audible signals, marketers think the industry is poised for a leap
> >forward. "It's going to be another two years before it really takes off,
> >but it is building momentum now," says John McGaffey, president of Polara
> >Engineering Inc. The Fullerton, Calif., firm, has sold audible signals
> >for several hundred intersections, including many in Las Vegas.
> >Meanwhile, Novax Industries Corp., Vancouver, has outfitted about 1,000
> >intersections in the U.S. and Canada during the last six years.
> >Most accessible signals are heard by all within earshot, but there is
> >another promising technology to help blind pedestrians. In San Francisco,
> >about 100 blind people carry special receivers marketed by Talking Signs
> >Inc., a small company in Baton Rouge, La. The receivers pick up
> >infrared-light signals from transmitters installed inside buildings and,
> >in a few cases, at intersections. Users can hear a computer-generated
> >human voice describe the surroundings and the status of any traffic
> >lights.
>
> VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
> To join or leave the list, send a message to
> [log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
> "subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
>  VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
> http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html


VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
 VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html