Running Bear in the Subway!

Bear Learns Fast Food is Deadly

I didn't want to get too humorous in my titles here because the reason I am writing it was that it made me very sad.

(image to left from Kitimat Sentinel)²

A "Subway®" restaurant -- sandwich shop-deli -- worker, Rebecca Branton¹, was surprised last Monday morning, Sept 15,2008, at 6:15 am² by a black bear in the restaurant. There is a video of the whole incident hosted by CBC which took place in Kitimat, BC.

The CBC News report of the incident is on YouTube.

The employee was in back when the bear entered the restaurant and she spotted movement on the security camera.³

CBC News:¹

"I was just back there making soup ...but I saw the door open and it was a bear,"

(image to right from CBC News)¹

Branton had the frame of mind to hurry to the washroom with her cellphone and lock herself in and phone for help, calling her parents. She had thought the bear might have used the handicap button to enter -- she had heard the buzzer for the door go off, but saw nothing in the morning dark.

Northern Sentinel:²

“I kept watching the door and then all of a sudden a bear came in and I was like ‘oh my god’.”

She explained, “It stood up on its hind legs and pulled the door open like a person and got down on all fours and the door closed behind it as it walked in.”

(Image to left from CBC news)¹

Branton called her mom first not being sure what to do, but called the police afterwards.² The police arrived quickly and her parents also came down. The 10 minutes or so were terrifying and she felt isolated in the washroom as she heard the bear moving about in the shop. The bear sniffed around and at one point hopped on the counter.

It didn't apparently eat anything before jumping back down and eventually made its way out of the Subway® restaurant. Conservation Officers also arrived and set up a watch at the Dairy Queen® lot -- where the bear had come through to get to the Subway®.²

(image to right from The Guardian)⁴

Sadly this curious young bear -- approximately two-years-old -- was later put down by Conservation officers in the downtown area of Kitmat. They felt there was a danger that this bear would continue to return to the area and coming back being a danger to the public. Some might wonder why they didn't tranquilize the bear. I wondered it, but then considered... in the area around Kitimat, with all the wilderness, black bears might not be considered that special -- sadly.

(image on left from Subway® Restaurants International)

I feel sad for this intelligent creature who was so curious and intelligent. In the video he reminds me somewhat of a curious house cat or dog looking around where he might be caught doing something naughty. There was something to the curiosity and intelligence which struck a chord with me when I heard the handsome creature was destroyed. It often ends poorly for the animal when wildlife and humans interact.

Later!
~ Darrell

143

¹ "B.C. black bear pops in for fast food" CBC News, Oct 1, 2008; CBC.ca.

² "Hairy start to Subway worker's day" Kitimat Sentinel, Published Sept 24, 2008 (Web Page dated: Oct 1, 2008); NorthernSentinel.com.

³ CBC News reports the incident happening last Thursday (Sept 25) while the video shows "2008 09 15". The Northern Sentinel article reports it being "Monday" and considering the article was published September 24 puts credence to the Monday September 15 date for the incident.

⁴ "Black bear checks out sandwich shop" Oct 1, 2008 Charolottetown, The Guardian

Going the Extra Mile - Accessible Often Means Roundabout

The Long Way Around

While sometimes a person might complain when there are no accessible facilities available, it can seem like you are looking a gift horse in the mouth with you complain about the facilities that exist. It can be rough to miss a connection on a bus because you were taking the extra fifty or even hundred metres required to reach an elevator or ramp.

True, a person might say "you should have started out earlier" which might have some truth to it --  but when connecting from one service to the next, you only have a certain amount of time to travel from one mode to another whether it be from bus to train or train to bus or even bus to bus or train to train. When service is every 3-5 minutes it is not so bad, but when service is less frequent than every 15 minutes it can make a large difference.

When you can't run for a bus it can be very frustrating for one to leave when you are so very close at hand -- travelling from one place to another within the station or terminal.

Some places just aren't designed well for people who aren't travelling well on foot. It is like the designers don't actually have a clue what it is to use these facilities if you need the accessible facilities. Perhaps this is just the case. Perhaps they really do need people who use the facilities to be a part of the design and not just part of town hall meetings and open houses on getting building permits approved.

(image to right from Wikipedia)

I know that there is the issue of keeping wheelchair friendly ramps at a slope that is safe and without too long straight lengths and such forth. But sometimes thing should be planned out better. I hope that things are getting better. I also hope that there is planning included for (in no particular order and not inclusive) people with babies in strollers and carriages; people with other impairments such as visual; people with luggage; people with small children; and so many other situations other than a business person on the way to work with a brief case and maybe an umbrella... for that matter... rainy days can sure be a problem with people not having a thing they can do with a wet umbrella.

An example of bad design is a "Skytrain" station built in the late 80's or early 90's which straddles a major highway interchange and bridge entrance ramp system. The station does have escalators and an elevator to take people up to the elevated track level -- but -- the elevator is on the side of the highway interchange the "Park & Ride" is on while the Transit Loop for catching buses is on the far side. The work-around is to call for a "Handi-dart" bus to come and transfer you from one side of the interchange to the other. Handi-dart is the part of the local transit system that picks up disabled people who are typically unable to ride normal public transit.

The station should have had an elevator designed into both sides. It is not a matter of there not being room. It might have meant a couple fewer parking stalls in the design of the "Park & Ride". I guess nobody on the design team considered that a person who would require the elevator might be taking the bus to continue their journey? It is good that the stations can be built elevated so that they can be above roads and thus make a smaller footprint on the urban groundspace -- But the disabled are often the folk on the low incomes that use the transit system most... perhaps not in a wheelchair, but sometimes a person who gets around with a cane or walking stick has problems with stairs and escalators?

We need more than work-arounds!

Later!
~ Darrell

142.

Jailing Ourselves

Do Bars a Prison Feel - Should We Allow Public Safety to Make Us Feel Like We Are in Prison?

I recently took a survey for our public transit system that had its theme security on the system. They asked questions on what people thought might make patrons feel safer on the ALRT - Automated Light Rail Transit* - System. They also asked about issues of fare evasion. Currently when you get to our ALRT stations on the SkyTrain system (image on left - image from Wikipedia) there are no ticket takers, gates, or turnstiles to pass through on the way into the stations and up to the trains.

Many people get very grumbly about it thinking that there are too many people taking advantage of this and getting a free ride. In the survey results it seems that people think that out of every 100 people on the train at least 20 of them are fare evaders. Even when given the information that 80% of the people getting onto the train to ride are using some form of prepaid fare - either prepaid monthly passes, university passes (paid for by students through their fees), company passes paid through their employer or an employee payment plan, or by simple bus transfers from the buses of the transit system when the passengers switch over from bus to train - people still think that 20% or more are fare evaders. Go figure...

So one priority on many people's minds is some sort of gate or turnstile system to rebuff the freeloaders. Some reasons given are to save the lost revenue from so many fare evaders and others point out that criminal elements are simply walking onto the train to travel from point to point in the city and that putting up the gates and turnstiles will decrease this problem - after all no self respecting hoodlum or vandal will pay a transit fare to ride the train will they. (He writes sarcastically parroting what he has heard many times)

For me one of the great things about the SkyTrain was being able to embark from a bus walk without much in the way of obstruction into the station and up - or down - onto the platform to catch a train. To me it felt like being a part of the future. There were terminals to purchase your transit fare and there was a requirement to keep your fare receipt in case you would have to prove payment, but since most already had either payed on the bus they were transferring in from or were being dropped off by a spouse or coming in from the commuter parking with their passes, most did not require to pay at the machines.

They were starting on one very heavily travelled route in Vancouver that ran the articulated buses to allow entry and exit from all three sets of doors on the long bus coaches. It made for much quicker loading and unloading and shorter times at the busy stops on that route rather than restricing entry to the front door only.

But, given that people want to have some sort of gate, and all...

On the survey they showed 4 choices. (4 images below are from the survey for Translink done by Vision Critical)

Regular waist-high turnstile
This is what I am used to seeing at fairgrounds and that sort of thing. I have always found them a bit awkward to get through. I thought they would be a choice that disabled people wouldn't like, but according to the survey they have little problem with them. I am not sure though, perhaps it is because there is always a section with a chain across and an attendant to let them through? I don't know. I wouldn't want to pass through these with crutches or a wheel chair or while maneuvering a stroller, two wheeled grocery cart, or even suitcases or backpack through... or a fussing 2-year-old.

Paddle style gate
I am used to seeing this sort of thing, at least a one sided one at libraries, though this is more modern and I take it bidirectional and of course controlled by the ticket reading machine. I think it easier to get through with strollers, 2-year-olds, and so forth, but of course they would create bottlenecks like any of the options would during rush hour.

Bi-parting leaf gate/turnstile
This is a new take on that regular turnstile - I think - and perhaps easier to go through. Still I wonder how easy it would be for people who are not just travelling empty handed through the gate.

Floor-to-ceiling
I have seen these at some fairs and zoos. They are a bit like the revolving doors in large buildings and I know the benefit in the large buildings is that they let people go in and out quickly without allowing either the warm air out in winter or the cool air out in summer. They always make me think they are dangerous... sort of like people-strainers. I think I watched too many violent cartoons in my childhood.

Of course these gates would be in place with the ticket readers just for people coming in, though there would also have to be one-way gates on the exits to keep folks from sneaking in the back way.

I can see negatives to these gates. One of them is that with transportation - aren't we trying to reduce bottlenecks? It is the places like bridges and tunnels where traffic backs up as well of course as accidents. Isn't creating additional bottlenecks for the people using "rapid"transit a bit counterproductive? Especially when trying to lure drivers out of their cars.

But that aside, and aside the discussion on whether it is necessary to catch the actual less than 7% who are fare evaders. There are the issues about whether the actual evaders will not simply jump the waist high gates or duck under them. That leaves the more intrusive floor to ceiling ones that should be a lot more restrictive.

I look at the floor-to-ceiling option and wonder if it just wouldn't give a cold "you are entering prison" feeling - and not the softer newer prison either. A lot of how people feel in the city has to do with impressions like this which lead to issues of pride and that leads to things like levels of graffiti and littering and indeed to that of increasing or decreasing crime. Some people think that such security gates will increase safety, but I have read that the career pickpockets who work in groups all have paid fare receipts in places such as Paris and London where they have such gates in place. That lineups created by bottlenecks are places which are just great for criminals for doing things like picking pockets. I imagine that someone who intends something serious like terrorism would surely be willing to spring for a one way bus ticket.

I think there probably better ways to cope with fare evaders than the gates - though they also are speaking about smart cards which I am not so sure on either. With the smart cards you would scan your card both entering and exiting both train and bus which seems a bit counter-productive to me.

Later!
~ Darrell

__________
* No, our SkyTrain ALRT system isn't pulled by steam engines like the Hudson Class 4-6-4 CPR Empress, I just like to somehow tie my portrait for the articles with the theme of the article somehow. Our SkyTrain uses linear induction motors where the stator is built into the track and for the most part is elevated substantially above the ground. There are some stretches at grade and a tunnel and one underground section downtown. The newest line built in time for the 2010 Winter Olympics uses more conventional electric motors, but the next will be going for the linear induction motors. It also will have another long stretch underground.

77.

Space the Travelling Frontier

Who Should Foot the Bill?

When we travel around this world, we expect to pay our way, or if we are lucky have someone else pay it for us, but it does get paid for us one way or another. What about situations when a person needs special provisions for travel? Who should pay for those special provisions? Should those special provisions be accounted for in modes of transportation and at whose cost?

Let's take a very simple example - a person in a wheelchair. Our public transit buses have provisions for wheelchairs. The newer buses have low floors and can extend a ramp to the curb with little slope at all. There are two bench seats which fold up against the interior side of the bus and the first forward facing seats fold up for the wheelchair to be strapped in and anchored facing forward. It does mean in the best case that if there is one person in a wheel chair, they take up the same seat space as 4 or 5 passengers would and these also are the courtesy seats for the elderly or disabled. They also request that if in use that the front 10 feet of the aisle not be used for standing passengers and this would be room that perhaps 5 or 6 people might stand.

Do not get me wrong. I am not an ogre who thinks this is wrong or inappropriate. I am proud that our transit system makes allowance for people who are travelling in wheelchairs and in mobility scooters or with walkers. I am proud that there are buses designed to make it easier for the disabled and elderly to get on board whether they are using mobility aids or not. It is a welcome bonus that the same features make it so that strollers and baby carriages can be taken onto the buses easily - not to mention those two wheeled grocery carts and wheeled suit cases. People who do not have cars and can't afford cabs need to carry goods as well as themselves too. The level floor must also make things easier for those with arthritis and who are visually impaired*. (We also have on nearly all our buses bike racks that can be used at least during daylight hours. They allow increased range for those who wish to cycle.)

But I have sometimes wondered, and worried, especially when I was much larger than I am today - what about when I need to take up more than one seat. Do people think I should pay for two fares? I used to be large enough that it would be uncomfortable for others to share a two person bus seat with. I always tried to travel only in off-peak hours for that reason.

That line of thought continues for me when I go to get groceries. I have this two wheeled grocery cart. It allows me to carry groceries that would be too bulky and heavy for me to carry otherwise. But I really can't take it down the aisle of the bus and would have to sit in the front seats - the very same front seats that fold up for a wheel chair. I guess I feel guilty about it. I end up taking 2-3 seats.

Anyway that is something that happens and is a need for people who rely on transit.

Getting around town is something that most people would agree is a necessity. What about getting around the country or from country to country?

Do the disabled and elderly have a right to travel? Of course in many countries nobody actually has a "right" to travel and must get the proper documents to do so, but in those forward thinking countries that allow people to travel, should the disabled and elderly have the same right and should they be held back for financial reasons?

Let's consider travelling from one part of a country or large state or province to another. It might not even be a matter of a vacation sort of trip, but perhaps something of a legal nature? Perhaps flying to the capital for some reason. I am not going to make up a reason - let's just say the person in question has to be there and it is not a matter of being invited or requested by the government or a company so it can't be argued to be on their dime. For a person who needs a cane or walker, they have transporter chairs to get you in and out of a plane with little problem. I imagine for most who even require more extensive mobility aids short of respirators it would just be the logistics of making sure their chair is shipped safely to the destination or there are aides to take care of pushing them at the destination if they can not ship their chair.

That is good for short flights at least of up to an hour or two, or even three - but there is the call of nature. Even if they have a transporter chair they can take up the aisle of the plane to the washroom, most - to my knowledge - are not disability friendly. Do they have "handicapped" toilets on planes? Would a person have to rely on adult diapers and catheter for the flight?

Now flight attendants can do a lot and I imagine they are trained to handle a lot of contingencies. I know that whole rows can be converted for people who are essentially in hospital beds. I wonder who pays the extra cost for all the seats and for the conversion if it isn't a matter of using the plane as an impromptu air ambulance?

My question is, should the disabled passenger? Should the government? Should health insurance? Should the carrier as a part of civic duty and "cost of doing business"?

I can't answer that myself really. I do know that often it is the elderly and disabled that are on the lowest incomes and that they have the higher medical bills to begin with if those bills are not being paid for by health insurance or government plans.

There are a lot of things that can get complicated if you become disabled or always have been. I just was thinking about this one.

I am proud to live somewhere where they are trying to see towards transportation needs of all of us and where there is not a huge fight when the city wants to put in curbs at corners that a wheel chair can get up or audible pedestrian signals for the visually impaired.

Just food for thought.

Later!
~ Darrell

45

__________
*Apologies if I am not using the correct terminology.

Life On a Fragile Planet

Life - Elsewhere?

From time to time I hear fairly educated people talking about the importance of space travel and one part of there argument goes that right now we have all of our eggs in one basket - the Earth - and if there were to be a global catastrophe human life would disappear from the universe. They go on to say that with global warming that catastrophe may be coming and that we could be looking at "terraforming" Mars or Venus for mankind to call homes and thus avert this possible catastrophe.

Maybe I have just read too much, but I see some flaws in this. The first and biggest one is that the "terraforming" of Mars or Venus is a project many orders of magnitude greater than actually controlling any problems of global warming that we might have created unintentionally or that might be happening naturally and that with the Earth we are starting with something a lot closer to what we want to end up with than where we would be starting with Mars or Venus. That being said, it only speaks to the issue of space exploration in order to escape from the damages caused by global warming. Meaning that if we can terraform Mars or Venus - then surely we can cure the problems of global warming on the Earth.

Granted at some time in the future, we might want to spread our wings and spread humankind into space in the Earth-Moon system and beyond. Mars is a obvious candidate for we could with our current technology probably figure out ways to survive there. Venus might take a bit more for it would be like trying to set up camp in hell. I think the atmospheric pressures on Venus are like that of being deep undersea and the temperatures enough to melt lead in an atmosphere with enough of a sulphuric acid content to etch any metal you might have in your kitchen.

It would be simpler to create some sort of space colony than to live on Venus probably. Of course that is compared with converting the whole planet into another Earth. There is also a concept where you start by covering an area with a kilometre high dome and creating your biosphere under it and then gradually in a modular fashion expanding the area covered until potentially the whole planet is covered. That is called Paraterraforming or the "worldhouse" concept. Perhaps not with Venus, but perhaps Mars or even the Moon.

It does lead to questions like do we want to do something like convert Luna into another Earth? No longer would we have that creamy white or silvery white orb shining down on us, but would have a much brighter white and blue one potentially. We lose something to gain something. We do that every time a city expands.

Cities - which are most often built in a location where the farming was best - expand and most often cover up the adjacet farmland. You lose farmland when you gain residential and commercial land.

That is a lot like that expansion of mankind to a "New Earth" on the Moon. We lose the Moon and gain a New Earth.

The near future Moon missions planned by a number of countries of the world might lead to permanent colonies on the Moon which might in turn lead to thoughts on Paraterraforming the Moon. How much change to the appearance of the Moon are we going to be expected to accept? Should the general "man on the street"* have any say in it?

What of other places? How about "Earth Orbit"? The International Space Station is very visible from the surface of the Earth and in fact you can find charts and tables telling you when and where you might spot it flying overhead. I'm not sure but an observant person with a good set of eyes or binoculars might be able to even spot it during the daytime?

Will there be a time when the sky might be visually "crowded" where there will always be a number of objects flinging across the night sky - not unlike being near a major international airport at night? I rather enjoy watching planes go by, but there might be a time when there will be no place on Earth that one might escape that aspect of civilization without benefit of a cave or very steep mountain valley.

I don't know if we'll ever build cities in space - large rotating colonies where people can live in a shirt-sleeve environment essentially as if they were on the Earth. If they are in Earth-orbit they will be very visible. I wonder how safe we would ever be able to make them?

I wonder if we will have colonies on the Moon, Mars, and other Terrestrial and Ice Bodies of the Solar System? Will we have interstellar space colonies - which are travelling off to other stars where it will only be the decedents of the people who start off who reach them, and who essentially in the meantime are dwellers of the space between the stars?

I think that before we have the technology to terraform other planets, that same technology would allow us to save the Earth from any sort of runaway ecological disaster. But in the meantime I know we have to take care of our fragile planet. It is the only one we have.

Later!
~ Darrell

44.

__________
* Yes I mean the gender neutral "man" and in "humans" or "mankind".