Wilderness Accessibility for People
with Disabilities A Report to the
President and the Congress of the United States on Section 507(a)
of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, December 1, 1992
National Council on Disability
1331 F Street NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004-1107
(202) 272-2004 Voice
(202) 272-2074 TT
(202) 272-2022 Fax
The views contained in this report do not necessarily
represent those of the Administration as this document has not been
subjected to the A-19 Executive Branch review process.
DESCRIPTION OF THE
NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY
The National Council on Disability is an independent
federal agency composed of 15 members appointed by the President
of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. The National
Council initially was established in 1978 as an advisory board within
the Department of Education (Public Law 95-602). The Rehabilitation
Act Amendments of 1984 (Public Law 98-221) transformed the National
Council into an independent agency. The current statutory mandate
of the National Council assigns it the following duties:
- Establishing general policies for reviewing the
operation of the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research (NIDRR);
- Providing advice to the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation
Services Administration (RSA) on policies and conduct;
- Providing ongoing advice to the President, the
Congress, the RSA Commissioner, the Assistant Secretary of the
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS),
and the Director of NIDRR on programs authorized in the Rehabilitation
Act;
- Reviewing and evaluating on a continuous basis
the effectiveness of all policies, programs, and activities concerning
individuals with disabilities conducted or assisted by federal
departments or agencies, and all statutes pertaining to federal
programs, and assessing the extent to which they provide incentives
to community-based services, promote full integration, and contribute
to the independence and dignity of individuals with disabilities;
- Making recommendations of ways to improve research,
service, administration, and the collection, dissemination, and
implementation of research findings affecting persons with disabilities;
- Reviewing and approving standards for Independent
Living programs;
- Submitting an annual report with appropriate recommendations
to the Congress and the President regarding the status of research
affecting persons with disabilities and the activities of RSA
and NIDRR;
- Reviewing and approving standards for Projects
with Industry programs;
- Providing to the Congress, on a continuous basis,
advice, recommendations and any additional information that the
Council or the Congress considers appropriate;
- Providing guidance for the President's Committee
on the Employment of People with Disabilities; and
- Issuing an annual report to the President and
the Congress on the progress that has been made in implementing
the recommendations contained in the National Council's January
30, 1986, report, Toward Independence.
While many government agencies deal with issues and
programs affecting people with disabilities, the National Council
is the only federal agency charged with addressing, analyzing, and
making recommendations on issues of public policy that affect people
with disabilities regardless of age, disability type, perceived
employment potential, economic need, specific functional ability,
status as a veteran, or other individual circumstance. The National
Council recognizes its unique opportunity to facilitate independent
living, community integration, and employment opportunities for
people with disabilities by assuring an informed and coordinated
approach to addressing the concerns of persons with disabilities
and eliminating barriers to their active participation in community
and family life.
NATIONAL COUNCIL
ON DISABILITY
Members
Sandra Swift Parrino, Chairperson, New York
Kent Waldrep, Jr., Vice Chairperson, Texas
Linda W. Allison, Texas
Ellis B. Bodron, Mississippi
Larry Brown, Jr., Maryland
Mary Ann Mobley Collins, California
Anthony H. Flack, Connecticut
John A. Gannon, Ohio and Washington, D.C.
John Leopold, Maryland
Robert S. Muller, Michigan
George H. Oberle, PED, Oklahoma
Mary Matthews Raether, Virginia
Anne Crellin Seggerman, Connecticut
Michael B. Unhjem, North Dakota
Helen Wilshire Walsh, Connecticut
Staff
Ethel D. Briggs, Executive Director
Harold W. Snider, PhD, Deputy Director
Billie Jean Hill, Program Specialist
Mark S. Quigley, Public Affairs Specialist
Katherine D. Seelman, PhD, Research Specialist
Brenda Bratton, Staff Assistant
Stacey S. Brown, Staff Assistant Janice Mack, Administrative Officer
Consultant
Gregory J. Lais (www.wildernessinquiry.org)
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
December 1, 1992
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
On behalf of the members and staff of the National
Council on Disability, I am pleased to provide you with a copy of
Wilderness Accessibility for People with Disabilities, prepared
in accordance with Section 507 (a) of the Americans With Disabilities
Act (P.L. 101-336).
Although no monies were appropriated to conduct this
study, the National Council was able to produce this preliminary
report on the subject. This report is intended to summarize existing
federal policies and regulations and identify important issues relevant
to wilderness accessibility for people with disabilities.
The National Council will continue to address public
policy issues and to ensure that discrimination in all aspects of
American society that inhibit the attainment of independence and
dignity for people with disabilities is eliminated.
Sincerely,
Sandra Swift Parrino
Chairperson
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The National Council expresses its gratitude to Gregory
J. Lais, executive director of Wilderness Inquiry, Inc., Minneapolis,
Minnesota, for conducting this study, Wilderness Accessibility
for People with Disabilities: A Report to the President and the
Congress of the United States on Section 507 (a) of the Americans
With Disabilities Act. In addition, we wish to recognize Leo
McAvoy, PhD, and Laura Fredrickson of Wilderness Inquiry for their
assistance.
Section 507 of the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990:
FEDERAL WILDERNESS AREAS
(a) Study.--The National Council on Disability shall
conduct a study and report on the effect that wilderness designations
and wilderness land management practices have on the ability of
individuals with disabilities to use and enjoy the National Wilderness
Reservation System as established under the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C.
1131 et seq.).
(b) Submission of Report.--Not later than 1 year after
the enactment of this Act, the National Council on Disability shall
submit the report required under subsection (a) to Congress.
(c) Specific Wilderness Access--
(1) In General--Congress reaffirms that nothing
in the Wilderness Act is to be construed as prohibiting the use
of a wheelchair in a wilderness area by an individual whose disability
requires use of a wheelchair, and consistent with the Wilderness
Act no agency is required to provide any form of special treatment
or accommodation, or to construct any facilities or modify any
conditions of lands within a wilderness area to facilitate such
use.
(2) Definition--For the purposes of paragraph (1),
the term wheelchair means a device designed solely for use by
a mobility-impaired person for locomotion, that is suitable for
use in an indoor pedestrian area.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction
Background
Assumptions and Definitions
Scope of Study
Limitations of Study
Methodology
Findings
1. Current policies of NWPS managing
agencies
National Park Service
U.S. Forest Service
Bureau of Land Management
Fish and Wildlife Service
Survey results of field managers of NWPS units
2. Current NWPS use levels by
persons with disabilities
3. Enjoyment of the NWPS by
persons with disabilities
How do persons with disabilities
visit the NWPS?
Effect of restrictions on mechanized use
4. Suggestions for increasing
enjoyment of the NWPS
Conclusions
Recommendations
Acknowledgments
References
Appendices
Appendix 1. Surveys, Cover Letters, and Attachments
Distributed to
A) Outfitters and Organizations
B) Persons with Disabilities
C) NWPS Managers
Appendix 2. Tabulations of the Responses from Surveys
Distributed to
A) Outfitters and Organizations
B) Persons with Disabilities
C) NWPS Managers
Appendix 3. Outfitters, Organizations,
and Wildnerness Advocates Contacted for Participation in the Study
Appendix 4. National Council Member
and Staff Biographies
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
On the surface, the concurrent goals of equal
accessibility and preservation of wilderness areas seem to be
antithetical. However, at a closer look, we do not believe that
is actually the case. It is not, in our estimation, a question
of one goal or legal mandate taking precedence over another or
superseding another. It is a question of finding effective ways
to balance the intent of both and finding ways to provide the
highest level access with the lowest level impact on the environment.
Statement of Mr. David C. Park, Chief, Special Programs
and Populations Branch, National Park Service, to the National
Council on Disability on August 7, 1991.
Introduction
The primary goal of this document is to satisfy the
requirement of Section 507(a) of the Americans With Disabilities
Act (ADA) of 1990.
The National Council on Disability shall conduct
a study and report on the effect that wilderness designations
and wilderness land management practices have on the ability of
individuals with disabilities to use and enjoy the National Wilderness
Preservation System (NWPS) as established under the Wilderness
Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.)
The National Council on Disability (NCD) contracted
with Wilderness Inquiry, Inc., of Minneapolis, Minnesota, to help
conduct this study.
Background
In 1964 Congress passed the Wilderness Act and established
the National Wilderness Preservation System. The NWPS is made up
of lands managed by federal agencies, including the U.S. Forest
Service, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and, more recently, the Bureau of Land Management. The NWPS is not
an independent lands system.
Over the years since its passage, some people have
claimed that the Wilderness Act discriminates against the rights
of persons with disabilities because it prohibits the use of motorized
vehicles, mechanized transport, and other activities within federally
designated wilderness areas--the NWPS.
In 1990 Congress passed the Americans With Disabilities
Act (ADA). The ADA specifically addresses the issue of wilderness
access in Section 507(c):
(1) In General--Congress reaffirms that nothing
in the Wilderness Act is to be construed as prohibiting the use
of a wheelchair in a wilderness area by an individual whose disability
requires use of a wheelchair, and consistent with the Wilderness
Act no agency is required to provide any form of special treatment
or accommodation, or to construct any facilities or modify any
conditions of lands within a wilderness area to facilitate such
use.
(2) Definition--For the purposes of paragraph (1),
the term wheelchair means a device designed solely for use by
a mobility-impaired person for locomotion, that is suitable for
use in an indoor pedestrian area.
Scope of study
This study is intended to accomplish the following
objectives:
1. Review and summarize existing federal policies
and regulations relevant to the issue of wilderness access by persons
with disabilities.
2. Survey federal unit managers of the NWPS to determine
current levels of use by persons with disabilities, identify important
issues, and solicit suggestions for ways that persons with disabilities
can better utilize the NWPS.
3. Survey programs and outfitters that have provided
services to persons with disabilities in units of the NWPS to obtain
recommendations and suggestions for improved access.
4. Identify and survey users of the NWPS who have
disabilities to document use, obtain measures of the enjoyment of
the NWPS by persons with disabilities, and solicit suggestions on
ways to improve the level of enjoyment of the NWPS by persons with
disabilities.
Limitations and methodology
This study should be considered exploratory in nature.
We believe that it fairly and factually represents the issues considered;
however, as with any study, it is important to note its limitations
in order to establish its validity. Readers are urged to review
the sections on limitations and methodology before drawing conclusions
on the contents of this report.
Federal management policies and practices
The four federal agencies responsible for wilderness
management have different policies and management practices regarding
persons with disabilities.
Three of these agencies--the National Park Service,
the Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management allow the
use of wheelchairs within the NWPS. The Fish and Wildlife Service
currently does not have any policies regarding this issue; however,
the agency has stated its intention to adopt policies similar to
those of the other land managing agencies within Department of Interior.
Forest Service policy does not allow the use of electric
(motorized) wheelchairs in the NWPS. This policy appears to be in
conflict with the definition of a wheelchair in Section 507 (c)(2)
of the ADA, which states:
...the term wheelchair means a device designed
solely for use by a mobility-impaired person for locomotion, that
is suitable for use in an indoor pedestrian area.
This definition is assumed to include all wheelchairs,
whether motorized or not, provided that they are suitable for use
in an indoor pedestrian area.
Most NWPS managers (74 percent) do not make special
provisions for wilderness area use by persons with disabilities.
This appears to be consistent with Section 507(c)(1) of the Americans
With Disabilities Act, which reads:
...consistent with the Wilderness Act no agency
is required to provide any form of special treatment or accommodation,
or to construct any facilities or modify any conditions of lands
within a wilderness area to facilitate such use.
However, beyond the question of wheelchair use, there
is a lack of specific guidelines on use of the NWPS by persons with
disabilities, including issues such as trail width and toilets at
established sites.
Finally, there appears to be some confusion among
NWPS field managers about policies regarding use by persons with
disabilities and considerable differences in opinion about how best
to serve persons with disabilities in the NWPS.
Use levels of the NWPS by persons with disabilities
In response to the NCD survey, managers of NWPS units
estimated that a total of 16,767 people with disabilities use the
NWPS each year. Unfortunately, it is impossible to verify the accuracy
of these estimates or to extrapolate from the data collected to
other NWPS units that did not respond to the survey or to the question.
Therefore, no meaningful estimates about use of the NWPS by persons
with disabilities can be given. A number of NWPS units that are
used relatively frequently by persons with disabilities have been
identified by wilderness managers, outfitters, and users with disabilities.
Ability of persons with disabilities to enjoy the NWPS
A significant majority of persons with disabilities
surveyed very much enjoy the NWPS and 76 percent do not believe
that the restrictions on mechanized use stated by the Wilderness
Act diminish their ability to enjoy the wilderness. People with
disabilities appear to visit the NWPS in the same ways and for the
same reasons that people without disabilities do.
Recommendations
1. All federal agencies that manage the NWPS should
adopt policies consistent with those stated in Section 507(c) of
the Americans With Disabilities Act as soon as possible.
2. Federal agencies should bring existing facilities
outside of the NWPS up to code for use by persons with disabilities
as soon as possible. This upgrade includes trailheads, parking facilities,
restrooms, and telecommunications devices for the deaf (TDDs) in
ranger stations.
3. NWPS managing agencies should develop guidelines
for special permits and modifications regarding use by persons with
disabilities that are consistent with the Wilderness Act. Agencies
should be encouraged to facilitate NWPS use by persons with disabilities
when such use is consistent with the Wilderness Act. Agencies are
encouraged to work with persons with disabilities, outfitters, and
other programs that use the NWPS to develop these guidelines.
4. NWPS unit managers should receive training to increase
general awareness of disability issues and specific awareness of
the policies and practices regarding use of the NWPS by persons
with disabilities.
5. Each agency should develop better information about
what is available to persons with disabilities who want to use the
NWPS. This information should be made readily available to the public.
INTRODUCTION
The primary goal of this document is to satisfy
the following requirement of Section 507(a) of the Americans With
Disabilities Act of 1990:
The National Council on Disability shall conduct
a study and report on the effect that wilderness designations
and wilderness land management practices have on the ability of
individuals with disabilities to use and enjoy the NWPS as established
under the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.).
The National Council on Disability (NCD) contracted
with Wilderness Inquiry, Inc., of Minneapolis, Minnesota, to help
conduct the study requested. A 501(c)(3) organization, Wilderness
Inquiry provides activities that integrate people with and without
disabilities into outdoor experiences, including many that take
place within the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS).
Founded in 1978, part of Wilderness Inquiry's mission
is to "advance the study of the recreational and educational needs
of people with disabilities, with particular emphasis on accessibility
to wilderness areas."
BACKGROUND
In 1964 Congress passed the Wilderness Act
and established the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS).
The NWPS is not an independent lands system; rather, it is made
up of lands managed by four federal agencies: the U.S. Forest Service,
the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
the Bureau of Land Management.
Congress has sole authority to designate wilderness
areas, but the four federal agencies must manage these lands within
the parameters specified by the Wilderness Act. As stated in Section
2(a), the purpose of the Wilderness Act is
...to assure that an increasing population, accompanied
by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy
and modify all areas within the United States and its possessions,
leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in
their natural condition, it is hereby declared to ...secure for
the American people of present and future generations the benefits
of an enduring resource of wilderness....
Over the years since its passage, some people have
claimed that the Wilderness Act discriminates against the rights
of persons with disabilities because it prohibits the use of motorized
vehicles, mechanized transport, and other activities within federally
designated wilderness areas. Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act
states
Except as specifically provided for in this Act...there
shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized
equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form
of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within
any such area.
The Wilderness Act was written before the rights of
people with disabilities were part of the national debate. Not surprisingly,
there is no mention of people with disabilities in the Act. Over
time, as people with disabilities began to use the wilderness, the
question was raised whether a wheelchair is a mechanical device
and therefore prohibited from the NWPS. The four federal agencies
responsible for managing the NWPS have responded differently to
this question.
In 1990 Congress passed the Americans With Disabilities
Act (ADA). The ADA gives civil rights protection to individuals
with disabilities similar to those provided to individuals on the
basis of race, sex, national origin, and religion. Among other issues,
the ADA addresses specific wilderness access in Section 507(c):
(1) In General--Congress reaffirms that nothing
in the Wilderness Act is to be construed as prohibiting the use
of a wheelchair in a wilderness area by an individual whose disability
requires use of a wheelchair, and consistent with the Wilderness
Act no agency is required to provide any form of special treatment
or accommodation, or to construct any facilities or modify any
conditions of lands within a wilderness area to facilitate such
use.
(2) Definition--For the purposes of paragraph (1),
the term wheelchair means a device designed solely for use by
a mobility-impaired person for locomotion, that is suitable for
use in an indoor pedestrian area.
The primary purpose of this study is to review the
management practices of the four federal agencies that manage the
NWPS and to determine whether people with disabilities are able
to use and enjoy the NWPS.
ASSUMPTIONS
AND DEFINITIONS The following key concepts
must be considered and defined:
Wilderness designations. This term refers to
the 546 units (94,972,412 federal acres as of June 5, 1991) that
have been included by Congress as part of the National Wilderness
Preservation System. This term does not include many wild lands
commonly thought of as "wilderness," such as Yellowstone National
Park. Yellowstone, although it has many natural characteristics
similar to units of the NWPS, is not part of the NWPS. This term
also does not include state-designated wilderness areas, such as
Maine's Allagash Wilderness Waterway. The Allagash Wilderness Waterway
is managed by Maine's Department of Conservation.
Wilderness land management practices. This
term refers to the management practices and policies of the four
federal agencies that manage the units of the NWPS: the United States
Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM), and the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS). Each of these agencies is responsible for managing
the NWPS units under its jurisdiction according to the practices
set forth in the Wilderness Act of 1964.
Individuals with disabilities. The ADA defines
individuals with disabilities as those who
(a) have a physical or mental impairment that substantially
limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual;
(b) have a record of such impairment; or
(c) can be regarded as having such an impairment.
For the purpose of this study, this definition has
been qualified to focus on individuals whose disability is likely
to have a more significant impact on their ability to use and enjoy
the NWPS. Wilderness designations are generally considered to have
a greater effect on persons with mobility and sensory impairments
than on persons with cognitive disabilities. Although 10 percent
of study respondents do have cognitive disabilities, persons with
mobility and sensory impairments received priority in participant
selection for this study (see methodology section on sampling methods).
Use and enjoyment. This term is interpreted
to refer to the physical ability of persons with disabilities to
visit units of the NWPS and their ability to get pleasure from these
visits as persons without disabilities do.
SCOPE
OF STUDY The study is intended to accomplish
the following objectives:
1. Review and summarize existing federal policies
and regulations relevant to the issue of wilderness access by persons
with disabilities.
2. Survey the federal unit managers of the NWPS to
determine current levels of use by persons with disabilities, identify
important issues, and solicit suggestions for ways that persons
with disabilities can better utilize the NWPS.
3. Survey programs and outfitters that have provided
services to persons with disabilities in units of the NWPS to obtain
recommendations and suggestions for improved access.
4. Identify and survey a minimum of 75 users of the
NWPS who have disabilities to obtain measures of their enjoyment
of the NWPS and solicit suggestions on ways to improve the level
of enjoyment of the NWPS by persons with disabilities.
LIMITATIONS
OF STUDY We believe that this report fairly
and factually represents the issues considered. However, as with
any study, it is important to note its limitations in order to establish
its validity. Several limitations must be considered when interpreting
this report.
1. The study is exploratory in nature. Many of the
questions were designed to obtain qualitative information so that
important issues could be identified.
2. People with disabilities surveyed represent a nonprobability
judgment sample. Persons with disabilities who have visited the
NWPS are considered the most appropriate individuals to evaluate
their ability to use and enjoy the NWPS. Finding people who fit
this criterion was a challenge and required the use of a nonprobability
sampling method (see section on methodology). The limited scope
and resources dedicated to this study precluded using a large, random
sampling method. While we believe that the persons with disabilities
surveyed are the most appropriate for the purposes of this study,
no claim can be made that they are a representative sample of all
persons with disabilities in this country. Our priorities in selecting
the sample included the following criteria:
- That the person have a disability as recognized
by the ADA. We further qualified this criterion to select people
who have disabilities that are most likely to affect their ability
to use and enjoy the NWPS. In this context we gave priority to
people who use wheelchairs, those who have other significant mobility
impairments, and those with significant sensory impairments.
- That the person had visited a unit of the NWPS.
People who are active in the outdoors but who had not visited
an actual unit of the NWPS were not included.
- That the persons were as representative of a national
sample as possible. We made a significant effort to survey individuals
who live throughout the United States.
- That the persons were referred by a variety of
sources. Most of those who participated in the survey were referred
by outfitters and programs that serve people with disabilities
on outdoor adventures.
In interpreting study findings it is important to
remember that the persons with disabilities surveyed had already
visited the NWPS. Although this may suggest that these people are
more likely to take risks and accept physical challenges, we cannot
make a precise determination about how these people may differ from
the general public or, more specifically, from persons with disabilities
who have not visited the NWPS.
3. Some respondents in all categories misunderstood
some of the questions, including the following:
- Several people with disabilities and some of the
outfitters misunderstood what the NWPS is. The most frequent misunderstanding
was to consider other wild lands as part of the NWPS when they
are not. Defacto wilderness outside the NWPS was not included
in any of the tabulations; however, it is possible that comments
from some study subjects may refer to areas outside of the NWPS.
We consider this possible influence small and of minimal importance.
- Some of the wilderness unit managers in the study
did not distinguish between questions about agency policies and
what they personally thought was physically possible. For example,
when asked whether their NWPS unit permitted the use of wheelchairs,
some responded no, but went on to comment that while wheelchairs
are legally allowed, the terrain does not accommodate them. The
intent of this question was to determine agency policy, not a
manager's perception of what is physically possible. Therefore,
this question is not a precise indicator of how well the managers
understand agency policy and should not be interpreted as such.
However, in comparing the comments with responses, it is clear
that some confusion about agency policy does exist among wilderness
managers.
4. Another limitation concerns the experience of the
NWPS unit managers who responded. The titles of the 304 respondents
ranged from recreation planner to wildlife biologist, and their
experience on the job ranged from more than 20 years to only 1 month.
Although we may assume that a recreation planner with more than
20 years' experience is more knowledgeable about agency policies
and practices than one with 1 month, we have no way to verify this.
Consequently, we have ignored the question of credentials and experience
in reviewing the data.
5. Finally, as with any human endeavor, there is the
possibility of entry errors. Some editing was done by the researchers
while they recorded and summarized qualitative comments. In every
case an effort was made to portray accurately the true meaning of
the statement. In some instances words have been added for clarification.
In such cases, brackets [] have been placed around the added words.
After extensive checking we believe any other entry errors do not
materially affect the results of this study.
METHODOLOGY
Information for this survey was gathered through
two primary means. First, personnel from the four federal agencies
responsible for managing the NWPS were asked to send pertinent information
regarding their wilderness management practices and policies toward
people with disabilities. Second, surveys were developed and distributed
to
- Outfitters and programs serving people with disabilities
in the NWPS.
- Field managers from the four federal agencies
that manage NWPS units.
- Persons with disabilities who have used the NWPS.
Copies of the surveys and cover letters used are found
in Appendix 1. Tabulations of the responses from each survey are
found in Appendix 2. Each of the information gathering methods is
described in more detail below.
Review of existing policies and regulations
The national wilderness managers of the four federal
agencies were asked to provide the policies and procedures in place
regarding use of the NWPS by persons with disabilities. The managers
included Wesley Henry from the National Park Service, Ann Fege from
the U.S. Forest Service, Keith Corrigall from the Bureau of Land
Management, and David Heffernan from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
In addition to these wilderness managers, we contacted
David C. Park, Chief of the Special Programs and Populations Branch
of the National Park Service, and Joe Meade, National Access Program
Manager for Recreation, Cultural Resources, and Wilderness Management
for the U.S. Forest Service. All of these people were very helpful
in promptly providing the information we needed to summarize and
review the policies, regulations, and management practices regarding
use of the NWPS by persons with disabilities.
Survey of unit managers of the NWPS
The managers mentioned above all helped to develop
a survey to distribute to NWPS unit managers. Significant assistance
was also provided by Alan Watson and Liz Close of the U.S. Forest
Service, and by Kay Ellis of the National Park Service. The sample
included the managers of all 546 units of the NWPS; however, the
total number of possible responses is different than 546 for the
following reasons:
1. Some units of the NWPS are managed jointly by
different agencies. For example, the Frank Church/River of No Return
Wilderness in Idaho is managed jointly by the USFS and the BLM.
2. Some units are managed by multiple managers within
the same agency. For example, the Frank Church/River of No Return
Wilderness spans six different national forests managed by the USFS,
each of which has a person who is responsible for managing its portion
of the Frank Church Wilderness. Consequently, up to seven responses
from two different agencies are possible for that wilderness.
3. Some managers are responsible for more than one
unit. For example, Prescott National Forest (USFS) in Arizona is
responsible for seven different units of the NWPS-- Apache Creek,
Castle Creek, Cedar Bench, Granite Mountain, Juniper Mesa, Pine
Mountain, and Woodchute. Consequently, one response may encompass
seven or more units of the NWPS.
We originally intended to isolate responses by individual
units of the NWPS. This was possible for some units, but in many
cases was not possible because it could not be determined whether
a respondent was answering in the context of one segment, or in
the name of the entire NWPS unit. Also, if a manager was responsible
for more than one unit, it usually could not be determined whether
he or she was answering in response to all of the units or only
part of them.
This section of the report is a compilation of the
views and opinions of the people who manage units of the NWPS.
Surveys were distributed to NWPS unit managers in
several ways. Wilderness Inquiry sent surveys directly to BLM and
FWS unit managers. The NPS and the USFS distributed their surveys
internally. NPS managers responded directly to Wilderness Inquiry.
USFS responses were collected by Liz Close, USFS, and forwarded
to Wilderness Inquiry. Response rates for the surveys are indicated
below.
Federal Agency Responses to Surveys
Number Number Percent of
Agency sent returned response
USFS 365 210 58
NPS 42 39 93
BLM 17 13 76
FWS 55 42 76
TOTAL 479 304 63
Survey of programs
and outfitters serving persons with disabilities
Programs and outfitters that provide services to persons
with disabilities in units of the NWPS also were contacted. Although
our list of service providers is not exhaustive, we are confident
that it represents an appropriate level of the programs and outfitters
that provide these services. A total of 22 outfitters, organizations,
and wilderness advocates were contacted, and 15 responded to the
survey. Of the 15 that responded, 11 conduct activities in the NWPS
involving persons with disabilities. The names and addresses of
the organizations contacted are included in Appendix 3.
In addition to answering survey questions, outfitters
and organizations were asked to provide the names and addresses
of persons with disabilities who have used the NWPS. A total of
208 people were identified through this effort.
Survey of users of the NWPS who have disabilities
Surveys, including a cover letter from the National
Council on Disability and a map showing most of the units of the
NWPS, were sent to the 208 persons identified by the outfitters
and organizations. A total of 89 people responded--a 43 percent
response rate. Of these responses, 3 were not included because the
respondent did not have a disability, 5 because the respondent had
not used or attempted to use the NWPS, and 1 because the response
did not contain enough information to make it meaningful. A total
of 80 completed surveys from persons with disabilities who have
visited the NWPS remained.
The following demographic characteristics of these
80 respondents:
Type of disability Percent of respondents
Cognitive impairment 10
Sensory impairment 9
Mobility impairment, non-wheelchair user 31
Mobility impairment, wheelchair user 50
State of Residence
Alaska 6
California 2
Colorado 5
Florida 4
Georgia 1
Idaho 5
Illinois 4
Indiana 7
Maine 1
Michigan 2
Minnesota 22
Montana 1
New Jersey 2
New Mexico 1
New York 2
North Dakota 1
Ohio 2
Rhode Island 1
Tennessee 1
Texas 2
Vermont 1
Washington 1
Wisconsin 5
Unknown 1
Gender Percent of respondents
Male 55
Female 43
Not indicated 2
Age Percent of respondents
18-29 24
30-39 35
40-49 28
50-59 6
60-69 3
70-79 3
Not Indicated 1
Analysis
methods
The study used both quantitative and qualitative methods
of analysis. Quantitative analysis is limited to tabulation of categorical
responses and is presented as frequencies of response. A significant
amount of qualitative data was collected. When appropriate, these
data have been grouped and categorized according to the type of
response.
FINDINGS
1. Current policies of NWPS managing agencies
The following is an agency-by-agency summary of policies
and management practices regarding wilderness access by disabled
persons. Three of the agencies responsible for NWPS management are
part of the U.S. Department of Interior; one agency, the Forest
Service, is part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
National Park Service (USDI)
Total NWPS units: 42
Total NWPS acres: 39,075,415 The National
Park Service (NPS) established a Special Programs and Populations
Branch on January 2, 1980, to oversee use of NPS lands and facilities
by persons with disabilities. Although the primary emphasis of this
branch has been to ensure accessibility compliance in historic structures,
battlefields, and so on, it is also charged with overseeing accessibility
compliance within the NPS units of the NWPS.
NPS policies on use of wheelchairs in the NWPS.
In Management Policies Regarding Accessibility for Disabled Persons
(January 1990), under the section on Wilderness Preservation and
Management (chapter 6, page 8), the NPS states,
As a general rule, public use of motorized equipment
or any form of mechanical transport will be prohibited in wilderness....
Mobility impaired persons may use wheelchairs (as defined in 36
CFR 1.4) in wilderness.
The NPS goes on to define a manual wheelchair as "a
device that is propelled by human power, designed for and used by
a mobility impaired person." A motorized wheelchair is defined as
"a self-propelled wheelchair device, designed solely for and used
by a mobility impaired person for locomotion that is capable of
and suitable for use in indoor pedestrian areas." [emphasis
added]
The NPS does allow the use of manual and motorized
wheelchairs in the NWPS. An important criterion in determining whether
a manual or motorized wheelchair is allowed in the NWPS is that
it must be suitable for indoor use. If a device is not suitable
for indoor use it is considered a motor vehicle and excluded from
use in the NWPS.
A key concept here is that the NPS treats people who
use wheelchairs as pedestrians, not as operators of motor vehicles.
As stated in 36 CFR 1.2 (3)(e), "The regulations in this chapter
are intended to treat a mobility-impaired person using a manual
or motorized wheelchair as a pedestrian, and are not intended to
restrict the activities of such a person beyond the degree that
the activities of a pedestrian are restricted by the same regulations."
All-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and other devices that would not be
allowed in elevators, public buildings, and private homes are not
allowed in the NWPS. Various entities have recognized that persons
using motorized wheelchairs should be afforded the same rights and
duties as pedestrians in general, including the right to use a sidewalk,
elevator, and indoor facilities.
This concept of indoor pedestrian use is used in Section
507 (c)(2) of the ADA in reference to the use of wheelchairs in
the NWPS:
For the purposes of paragraph (1), the term "wheelchair"
means a device designed solely for use by a mobility impaired
persons for locomotion, that is suitable for use in an indoor
pedestrian area.
NPS policies on alteration of terrain and facilities.
In Policies on Accessibility to Specific National Park Functions,
the NPS comments on accessibility for disabled persons in park facilities:
In accordance with the mandates of the Architectural
Barriers Acts of 1968 and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 as amended in 1978, it is the policy of the National Park
Service to provide the highest level of accessibility in all visitor
and management buildings and facilities as is possible and feasible,
consistent with the nature of the area and facility. The degree
of accessibility provided will be proportionately related to the
degree of man-made modifications made to the area or facility
and to the significance of the facility.
This policy divides park areas into three types: developed
areas, undeveloped areas, and threshold areas. The comments relevant
to the NWPS pertain to the section on undeveloped areas:
The undeveloped areas,
such as the part of the park that is outside the immediate influence
of buildings, roads, and cars, will not normally
be modified nor will special facilities be provided for the sole
purpose of providing access to disabled people.
Although this statement does not specifically address
the NWPS, it is interpreted to mean that the NPS does not seek to
make alterations in trails, footbridges, established campsites,
and other accommodations within the wilderness units it manages.
In a statement to the National Council on Disability on August 7,
1991, David C. Park, chief of the Special Programs and Populations
Branch of the NPS, said,
We believe this policy is consistent with the effective
management of the resources we control and is consistent with
our attempt to balance access with conservation. We also believe
it is consistent with the intent of, and regulations for, Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act. One major section of all Federal
regulations for Section 504 states that agencies are not required
to take any actions that would result in a "fundamental alteration
in the nature of a program or activity." It is our belief that
altering wilderness areas for the sake of providing access would
definitely change the fundamental nature of that activity. In
our discussions with people who are disabled and the agencies
and organizations that represent them, we have found overwhelming
agreement with this position.
This position is consistent with Section 507(c)(1)
of the ADA, which reads,
Congress reaffirms that nothing in the Wilderness
Act is to be construed as prohibiting the use of a wheelchair
in a wilderness area by an individual whose disability requires
use of a wheelchair, and consistent with the Wilderness Act no
agency is required to provide any form of special treatment or
accommodation, or to construct any facilities or modify any conditions
of lands within a wilderness area in order to facilitate such
use.
Park also commented in his statement of August 7,
1991,
On the surface, the concurrent goals of equal accessibility
and preservation of wilderness areas seem to be antithetical.
However, at a closer look, we do not believe that is actually
the case. It is not, in our estimation, a question of one goal
or legal mandate taking precedence over another or superseding
another. It is a question of finding effective ways to balance
the intent of both and finding ways to provide the highest level
access with the lowest level impact on the environment.
More information about NPS policies regarding persons
with disabilities in the NWPS can be obtained by contacting
David Park
Chief, Special Programs and Populations Branch
National Park Service
P.O. Box 37127
Washington, DC 20013-7127
(202) 343-3674
(202) 343-3679 (TDD)
(202) 523-0162 (FAX)
U.S. Forest Service (USDA)
Total NWPS units: 365
Total NWPS acres: 33,609,661 Although the NPS
manages more total acreage of the NWPS (much of it in Alaska), the
U.S. Forest Service (USFS) manages the great majority of units of
the NWPS (365 out of 546 total NWPS units). As an agency, the USFS
is more decentralized than the NPS, an important point when considering
its management practices and how they are implemented.
Even before the ADA was signed, the chief of the Forest
Service had established an agency goal of "becoming the leading
provider of accessible outdoor recreation opportunities in America."
Toward that end, the Forest Service established a new program in
1990, "Access: America's Great Outdoors," to formulate and implement
agency policy and direction regarding access for all components
of outdoor recreation, including wilderness. One of the functions
of the program is to help establish clear direction for the USFS
on the issue of access.
USFS policy seeks to maximize wilderness values while
providing opportunities for persons with disabilities to enjoy wilderness
on its own terms. As stated in the "Accessibility of Wilderness
to Persons With Disabilities" draft policy statement prepared October
12, 1990, by Ann S. Fege, National Leader for Wilderness Management,
Wilderness values must dominate over all other
considerations in wilderness resource management. There are many
opportunities for persons with sight, mobility, hearing, and developmental
disabilities to obtain wilderness experiences on the same terms
as the rest of the recreating public....
...There is no correlation between the physical,
sensory, or cognitive abilities of an individual and the need
for solitude, beauty, challenge, risk, discovery or adventure.
...Our attention should be focused on providing
opportunities to enhance the understanding, enjoyment, and use
of wilderness by all the public, including persons with disabilities.
...We can enhance [use of the NWPS] for hearing,
mobility, sight, and developmentally impaired persons through
interpretive services and greater attention to providing recreation
access information in usable forms. ([] added for clarification)
...Access can frequently be expanded with very
little effort. Involving persons with disabilities and/or persons
with appropriate technical expertise to help identify opportunities
could greatly increase access to wilderness experiences to meet
varied skills and interests of persons with disabilities.
Current USFS policy regarding the use of wheelchairs
in the NWPS reads as follows:
Mechanical apparatus that is medically necessary
for the basic mobility of any individual is considered to be part
of that person and not subject to restrictions on mechanical use.
(Forest Service Manual, 2326.03 no. 4)
This policy on wheelchair use does not allow the use
of motorized wheelchairs within NWPS units managed by the USFS.
As noted in the policy statement by Ann Fege:
Some have advocated the use of electric wheelchairs
in order to allow wheelchair-mobile persons lacking upper body
strength to enter wilderness and make our policies consistent
with the National Park Service. This change is not being proposed
at this time.
Fege goes on to comment on trails management regarding
access:
Trails management handbook direction limits trail
width in wilderness areas to 24". Standard wheelchairs require
a minimum width of 32" tread width to navigate. Consequently,
although wheelchair use is allowed in Forest Service wilderness
areas, tread width restrictions prevent access except in the most
unusual of circumstances. We [the USFS] are exploring the idea
of allowing tread widths in excess of 24 inches where the impact
to the natural environment is minimal and there is an opportunity
for wheelchair users to achieve a quality wilderness experience.
According to Joe Meade, USFS National Access Program
Manager, the Forest Service wants to leave some latitude for local
managers to make decisions on a case-by-case basis, depending on
environmental conditions. The Forest Service can issue special permits
to authorize otherwise prohibited activities. A memo from Meade,
dated August 9, 1991, illustrates the point:
Our policy is not to hinder a person with a disability
from using a non-motorized mechanical device different than just
a wheelchair in order to access the wilderness. Units have the
authority and indeed are encouraged to prudently issue permits
to individuals who need such an exception. The person may need
to offer proof of the disability, such as a note from a medical
authority or some other method of verification...i.e. a person
with a chronic back disability which does not permit them to carry
weight on their back may be issued a permit to use a wheeled primitive
cart... remember, wheelchairs are not the only devices serving
the disabled. We draw the line with motorized devices....
Meade further noted:
The Forest Service recognizes its strict adherence
to the 1964 Wilderness Act prohibits use of electric wheelchairs.
However, millions of acres of near wilderness experiences are
available for this use. If Congress feels this should be evaluated
in order to comply with the ADA, the Forest Service is very willing
to do so.
The USFS and the NPS have been working cooperatively
on the issue of access for a number of years. They have produced
a publication, Universal Design Guide for Accessible Outdoor
Recreation, to be released in 1993. The guide provides comprehensive
standards and guidelines for accessible outdoor recreation facilities,
programs, and services--including those in wilderness areas--and
is intended for planners and designers. For more information about
the design guide or about Forest Service policies regarding use
of the NWPS by persons with disabilities, contact
Joe Meade
USFS-USDA Recreation Staff
14th and Independence Ave., SW
P.O. Box 96090
Washington, DC 20090-6090
(202) 205-1129
(202) 205-1739 (Text Telephone)
(202) 205-1145 (FAX)
Bureau of Land Management (USDI)
Total NWPS units: 66
Total NWPS acres: 1,610,995 In a letter to
Representative John Rhodes of the House Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs, dated October 13, 1989, BLM Director Cy Jamison
wrote,
As a policy exception, the BLM does not prohibit
the use of wheelchairs by persons with mobility impairments in
the wilderness.
The BLM is in the process of clarifying its policies
toward use of the NWPS by persons with disabilities. In an information
bulletin to all BLM state directors dated August 10, 1990, Keith
Corrigall, chief, Branch of Wilderness Resources, stated that the
BLM's clarifications regarding wheelchair use in wilderness areas
will be available in the revision of the 43 CFR 8560 regulations
and Manual 8560.
In a memo dated October 25, 1991, Michael J. Penfold,
assistant director, Land and Renewable Resources, outlined the BLM's
accessibility initiative; "Access Means Freedom." This initiative
makes a number of recommendations, such as establishing training
groups, developing a field guide, and producing an awareness video.
It also recommends establishing a fully coordinated BLM policy to
incorporate accessibility and reduce conflicts in and among resource
programs, and to define a policy similar to that of the National
Park Service, stating that the BLM will maximize the effort
to make all areas and operations accessible.
For more information about BLM policies regarding
use of the NWPS by persons with disabilities, contact
Keith Corrigall
Chief, Branch of Wilderness Resources
Bureau of Land Management
Room 3360, Main Interior Building
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20240
(202) 208-6064
(202) 208-4819 (FAX)
Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI)
Total NWPS units: 75
Total NWPS acres: 20,676,341 According to
wilderness manager Dave Heffernan, the FWS does not currently have
any policies regarding persons with disabilities in the NWPS. However,
the FWS intends to adopt policies similar to those of the other
land managing agencies within the Department of Interior.
For more information about Fish and Wildlife Service
policies regarding use of the NWPS by persons with disabilities,
contact
Dave Heffernan
Division of Refuges
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Department of the Interior
Mail Stop 670-ARLSQ
18th and C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20240
(703) 358-2043
(703) 358-2248 (FAX)
Survey results of field managers
of NWPS units. Federal managers of individual NWPS units were
surveyed to determine their familiarity with the policies of their
agencies and with the general issues involved in providing opportunities
for persons with disabilities. The table below provides a breakdown
of the response frequencies from each agency.
Federal Agency Responses to Surveys
Number Number Percent of
Agency sent returned response
USFS 365 210 58
NPS 42 39 93
BLM 17 13 76
FWS 55 42 76
TOTAL 479 304 63
In the following tables, all responses were converted
to a percentage of responses for the agency in question. For example,
a response of 62 percent for the USFS means that 62 percent of the
USFS managers responded in the manner indicated. Some columns may
not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.
Responses to question: Does your unit allow for the
use of wheelchairs by persons with disabilities?
Yes No Do not know No response
USFS 62% 30% 6% 2%
NPS 69% 26% 5% 0%
FWS 40% 55% 5% 0%
BLM 62% 38% 0% 0%
TOTALS 60% 33% 6% >1%
(n=304)
Comments: The intent of the question
was to determine the respondent's familiarity with agency policy;
however, some respondents answered "NO," then went on to comment
that, although wheelchairs were legally allowed, the terrain was
too rough for wheelchair use. Others, however, clearly indicated
they thought that wheelchairs were illegal. Despite this limitation,
the responses to this question suggest that NWPS wilderness field
managers from all managing agencies could benefit from additional
training on agency policies regarding wheelchair use by persons
with disabilities--especially in consideration of Section 507(c)
of the ADA.
Responses to question: Does your unit make special
provisions for use by persons with disabilities?
Yes No Do not know No response
USFS 16% 79% 3% 2%
NPS 49% 51% 0% 0%
FWS 12% 69% 0% 19%
BLM 15% 77% 8% 0%
TOTAL 19% 74% 3% 4%
(n=304)
If special provisions were offered, respondents
were asked to indicate the kinds of special provisions as presented
below:
Special permits 15/304 5%
Use of motors 11/304 4%
Special areas 11/304 4%
Accessibility information 14/304 5%
Only 10 out of 304 respondents provided
comments on special provisions. Examples of comments follow:
Special permits: We
allow seeing eye dogs in wilderness. --Joshua Tree National
Monument
Use of motors: We
allow the use of motors as well as accessibility information.
--Pinnacles Wilderness
Special areas: We
provide accessible facilities--restrooms, campsites, telephones--in
areas surrounding wilderness. --Lassen Volcanic Wilderness
Accessibility information:
We offer personal assistance if requested. --Katmai Wilderness
Response to question: In your opinion, do the management
policies of your agency for NWPS units inhibit the enjoyment of
persons with disabilities?
Yes No Do not know No response
USFS 25% 74% 0% 1%
NPS 10% 87% 0% 0%
FWS 12% 86% 2% 0%
BLM 38% 62% 0% 0%
TOTAL 22% 77% >1% >1%
(n=304)
Respondents were then asked to
comment on why they believe their agency policies do or do not inhibit
enjoyment by persons with disabilities. A total of 99 comments were
offered. Analysis of these comments was difficult because of the
broad range of responses. A representative sample of responses is
provided here.
Management policies do not inhibit use,
however the nature of the terrain does.
It is not the policy of my own agency,
but the wording of the Wilderness Act itself.
Policies do not prohibit; however, our
actions have not encouraged the disabled to seek out these areas.
The wilderness designation simply forces the individual, handicapped
or not, to venture into the wilderness on its own terms.
Our policies provide for the protection
of wilderness values and are enforced equally among all visitors;
the policies do not inhibit the enjoyment of any persons with
a good wilderness ethic.
Wheelchairs are prohibited.
We don't have information on other options,
the Wilderness Act prohibits the use of wheelchairs.
The people we talk to don't want special
treatment, they want the challenge wilderness has to offer. They
do however, want more accessible facilities outside of wilderness
boundaries.
Nearby wilderness-like area provides access
and assistance for persons with disabilities.
I don't think it has anything to do with
policy, but rather a lack of time and funding.
With adequate funding our agency appears
to be ready to develop opportunities for persons with disabilities.
Wilderness should be managed to the purest
level of preservation. Visitor convenience should not influence
development or increase maintenance levels.
Once a wilderness is modified for people
to use mechanical means of transport, it ceases to be a wilderness
and the recreational experience for all is diminished.
The main premise of wilderness is protection
of the resource and not recreation.
Tendency is to do highly developed projects
outside the wilderness. We need to do this within the boundaries
of wilderness.
Too strict an interpretation of not using
mechanized equipment. Permit use of pullcarts on wheels for transport
of baggage.
Perhaps the best interpretation of these comments
is that wilderness managers have varied opinions on whether their
policies inhibit enjoyment of the NWPS by persons with disabilities.
Response to question: Does your wilderness unit have
any information available that specifically addresses wilderness
use by persons with disabilities?
Yes No Do not know No response
USFS 1% 96% 0% 3%
NPS 10% 90% 0% 0%
FWS 0% 100% 0% 0%
BLM 0% 100% 0% 0%
TOTAL 2% 96% 0% 2%
(n=304)
2.
Current NWPS use levels by persons with disabilities Managers
of NWPS units were asked to estimate how many people with disabilities
used their unit of the NWPS each year. Out of 304 surveys, 262 provided
estimates ranging from 0 to 2,500 per unit. The total annual estimated
use by persons with disabilities was 16,767. Unfortunately, it is
impossible to verify the accuracy of these estimates, as managers
typically do not differentiate between persons with or without disabilities
in permit reservations or any other use-tracking measures.
It is also difficult to extrapolate from the data
collected to other NWPS units that did not respond to the survey
or to the question. Therefore, no meaningful estimates about use
of the NWPS by persons with disabilities can be made. Despite these
limitations, it is reasonable to assume that per capita use of the
NWPS by persons with disabilities is less than per capita use by
persons without disabilities.
The highest estimates of use by persons with disabilities
came from the following units:
Unit name Estimated Managing agency
annual use
Phillip Burton 2,500 National Park Service
Boundary Waters 2,000 Forest Service
Glacier Bay 1,000 National Park Service
Cabinet Mountains 1,000 Forest Service
Sycamore Canyon,
Munds Mountain,
Red Rock-Secret
Mountain 850 Forest Service
St. Marks 500 Fish and Wildlife Service
Great Swamp 500 Fish and Wildlife Service
Olympic 500 National Park Service
Joshua Tree 500 National Park Service
Carson-Iceberg,
Emigrant,
Mokelumne 500 Forest Service
Black Elk 460 Forest Service
Ellicott Rock 300 Forest Service
Shining Rock,
Middle Prong 300 Forest Service
Organizations and outfitters that provide
services for persons with disabilities were also asked to indicate
which NWPS units they use.
NWPS units used by outfitters surveyed include the
following:
Black Canyon of the Gunnison
Boundary Waters Canoe Area
Chama River Canyon
Chugach
Collegiate Peaks
Craters of the Moon
Denali
Desolation Canyon
Eagles Nest
Everglades National Park
Frank Church/River of No Return
Glacier Bay
Hells Canyon
Jedediah Smith
Kenai
Lost Creek
Mesa Verde
Mt. Rainier
Sawtooth
Teton
Three Sisters
Trinity Alps
Yosemite
No information was provided on frequency of use of
these areas.
Information about use from the 80 persons with disabilities
is included in section 3.
Use of these areas raises the question of what characteristics,
if any, these NWPS units might have in common. These units may receive
more use by persons with disabilities because of
- More accessible terrain, including more opportunities
for water-based travel (canoe, kayak, raft).
- Proximity to urban centers. Boundary Waters, for
example, is one of the most visited units of the entire NWPS,
partly because it is within a day's drive of millions of people.
- Higher level of utilization by organizations and
outfitters serving people with disabilities.
- Currently available information on access and
travel within the unit.
These and other possible characteristics are issues
for further study.
3. Enjoyment of the NWPS by persons
with disabilities Completed surveys were received
from 80 persons with disabilities who had experienced the NWPS.
Respondents were asked to name as many as five units of the NWPS
they had visited since having a disability. A total of 207 responses
were given, representing 77 units of the NWPS. Respondents were
asked to rate their enjoyment level of these areas as stated below:
Please circle the number that best rates your level
of overall enjoyment of the NWPS areas you listed in question 1.
The letter in front of each response corresponds to the Wilderness
you listed in question 1.
Did not Enjoyed Enjoyed Enjoyed Enjoyed a
enjoy very little somewhat very much tremendous
amount
a) 1 2 3 4 5
b) 1 2 3 4 5
c) 1 2 3 4 5
d) 1 2 3 4 5
e) 1 2 3 4 5
The range of responses was 2 to 5. The
average rating of all 207 responses was 4.42, indicating a very
high level of enjoyment.
The distribution of responses was as follows:
NWPS Enjoyment Ratings by Persons with Disabilities
Rating Number of Percent
responses response
1 Did not enjoy 0 0
2 Enjoyed very little 3 2
3 Enjoyed somewhat 19 9
4 Enjoyed very much 72 35
5 Enjoyed a tremendous
amount 113 55
Average Enjoyment Rating: 4.42
Below is a list of the NWPS units
visited by the respondents with disabilities and the enjoyment rating
these people gave to each unit.
NWPS unit name Number Average Range
of enjoyment high/low
respondents rating
with
disabilities
Boundary Waters 44 4.61 5/3
Teton 13 4.77 5/4
Denali 10 4.60 5/3
Everglades 10 4.3 5/3
Badlands 9 4 4/4
Frank Church/
River of No Return 6 4.66 5/4
Kenai 5 4.4 5/4
Lake Chelan-Sawtooth 5 4.8 5/4
Craters of the Moon 4 4 5/2
Hawaii Volcanoes 4 4.75 5/4
Hells Canyon 4 4.75 5/4
Yosemite 4 4.25 5/3
Bob Marshall 3 3.33 4/3
Isle Royale 3 4 5/3
Joshua Tree 3 4 5/3
Mt. Rainier 3 4.33 5/4
Arctic Wildlife Refuge 2 5 5/5
Bandelier 2 4.5 5/4
Cedar Keys 2 4 5/3
Crab Orchard 2 3.5 4/3
Florida Keys 2 5 5/5
Haleakala 2 4 5/3
J.N."Ding" Darling 2 4.5 5/4
Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock 2 5 5/5
Olympic 2 5 5/5
Petrified Forest 2 4 4/4
Presidential Range 2 4.5 5/4
Selway-Bitterroot 2 4.5 5/4
Twin Peaks 2 4 4/4
Wrangell-St. Elias 2 5 5/5
Alexander Springs 1 5
Alpine Lakes 1 4
Ansel Adams 1 5
Black Canyon/Gunnison 1 4
Bosque del Apache 1 3
Cache La Poudre 1 5
Castle Crag 1 3
Chama River Canyon 1 5
Charles C. Deam 1 2
Citico Creek 1 5
Columbia 1 3
Gates of the Arctic 1 5
Gates of the Mountains 1 5
Glacier Bay 1 5
Glacier Peak 1 5
Golden Trout 1 5
Great Swamp 1 3
Gros Ventre 1 4
Guadalupe Mtns. 1 2
Jarbidge 1 5
John Muir 1 5
Lacassine 1 5
Lake Clark 1 5
Lizard Head 1 4
Mesa Verde 1 4
Moosehorn 1 5
Mt. Evans 1 4
Never Summer 1 4
Noatak 1 4
Okefenokee 1 5
Pecos 1 5
Pinnacles 1 3
Rainbow Lake 1 5
Rattlesnake 1 5
Russel Fjord 1 5
San Juan Islands 1 4
San Pedro Parks 1 5
Saguaro 1 4
Seney 1 4
South San Juan 1 4
St. Marks 1 4
Theodore Roosevelt 1 4
Three Sisters 1 4
Upper Buffalo 1 4
Upper Kiamichi River 1 3
Washakie 1 5
Weminuche 1 4
To determine their motivation for visiting
wilderness, persons with disabilities were asked why they chose
to visit the NWPS. Their priorities for visiting the wilderness
include the following:
Reason for visiting Percent of responses
To experience scenery/natural beauty 93
To experience nature on its own terms 81
To experience a personal challenge 78
To share the experience with family/friends 70
To experience solitude 53
To enjoy fishing or hunting 20
Study participants were also asked about
the high points and low points of their wilderness experience(s).
High points include: Percent responses
Scenery or location 94
Personal achievement/
feelings of accomplishment 83
People or relationships 76
Personal growth 64
Solitude/peace 61
No high points 1
Other 1
Low points include: Percent responses
No low points 58
Trails/terrain too rugged 24
Physical discomfort 13
Undeveloped/primitive campsites 13
Uncooperative group members 13
Poor access at entry point
(parking, etc) 13
Lack of information about area 5
Many studies have been conducted to determine
the reasons people without disabilities visit the NWPS (Driver et
al. 1987). In comparing previous studies with the responses of the
80 persons with disabilities, it appears that the latter visit the
NWPS for the same reasons as people without disabilities (Roggenbuck
and Lucas 1987).
How do persons with disabilities
visit the NWPS? Most of the people with
disabilities surveyed have visited the NWPS multiple times. A total
of 47 percent have taken five trips or more, 39 percent have taken
between two and four trips, and 14 percent have only taken one trip.
The majority of respondents, 85 percent, have spent
four or more consecutive days on their longest wilderness experience.
Only 8 percent never experienced more than one day in the wilderness,
while another 8 percent have experienced between two and three days
as their longest wilderness experience.
The majority of respondents, 75 percent, had not visited
the NWPS prior to becoming disabled. Of these people, 35 percent
were born with their disability, and 40 percent had never visited
wilderness before becoming disabled. A total of 25 percent respondents
with disabilities had visited the NWPS prior to becoming disabled.
Respondents with disabilities used the following means
of transport within the wilderness:
Type Percent of responses
Canoe 71
Hike 39
Kayak 29
Raft 29
Horse 21
Dogsled 19
Motorized 5
Other 5
Respondents used the following assistive
devices on their wilderness trips:
Type Percent of responses
Manual wheelchair 50
Crutches/cane 33
No devices used 16
Electric wheelchair 5
Prostheses 5
White cane 4
Amigo 1
Walker 0
Guide dog 0
Finally, 73 percent of the respondents
utilized the services of a professional guide or outfitter to gain
access to the wilderness, 51 percent visited the NWPS with family
or friends, and only 9 percent visited the NWPS alone. (Readers
are reminded that the high proportion of respondents who have utilized
the services of a guide or outfitter may be due to the fact that
most of these people were identified with the assistance of outfitters
and organizations serving people with disabilities in the NWPS.)
A variety of studies has been conducted on the use
patterns of nondisabled users of the NWPS. With the exception of
assistive devices, people with disabilities appear to visit the
NWPS in the same ways that people without disabilities do (Lucas
and Krumpe, 1986).
Effect of restrictions on mechanized
use When asked whether the restrictions
on mechanized use within the NWPS diminishes their ability to enjoy
the wilderness, 76 percent of the respondents with disabilities
said no, 21 percent said yes, and 3 percent did not answer the question.
Responses indicated that many of the respondents think
wheelchairs are allowed in the NWPS; thus, we believe they considered
other mechanical devices, such as ATVs, in answering this question.
Typical comments from persons who do not believe that
restrictions on mechanized use inhibit their opportunities to enjoy
wilderness include the following:
[There are] many alternatives such as dogs,
horses and people power. The sense of personal achievement is greatly
enhanced by overcoming the emotional, physical and psychological
barriers and achieving a significant undertaking in the wilderness
without relying on mechanized use.
There are enough areas on the planet that
allow machines.... By adaptation persons with disabilities can
access the total wilderness areas.
Mechanized use would undermine the concept
of wilderness...keep them out.
Enjoy the wilderness in its natural state...it
just requires some assistance from other people to help me adapt.
Mechanized use is incompatible with the
wilderness experience....There are many places to go that are
like wilderness that allow motors.
Loopholes shouldn't be created for persons
with disabilities; other groups will seek to alter wilderness
to accommodate them also.
Individuals with disabilities should rely
on family and friends to help them out in wilderness. Do not allow
motors or mechanical devices.
Allowing mechanized use in the wilderness
would make it noisy and polluting, precisely what persons with
or without disabilities are trying to escape.
Wilderness is wilderness...it won't be
the same if mechanized use is allowed. People with disabilities
can access the wilderness if they only put their minds to it.
Typical comments from persons who do believe that
restrictions on mechanized use inhibit their opportunities to
enjoy wilderness include the following:
Disability or age should not stop people
from going to wilderness. Managers of the units should rent motorized
equipment...government should not limit people from using motors.
[I] can't use an ATV in all areas. I need
to use this due to paralysis.
How do I get out in case an emergency
arises? [I] need mechanized usage.
Trails [in wilderness] are difficult for
manual chairs. It could be helpful to use an ATV.
Would like to be able to use a three-wheeler--it
would allow me to get into areas I wouldn't otherwise be able
to.
I would like to be able to use an ATV
for increased access.
If I were allowed to ride an off-road
vehicle it would allow me to see a lot of areas I otherwise wouldn't
be able to.
I want to be able to travel by boat and
have a close toilet facility.
It limits my independence in the wilderness
but I don't want them to change the restrictions.
ATV is a way to see wilderness I could
never reach on foot.
Persons with disabilities were also asked whether
their disability itself enhanced or inhibited their enjoyment of
the NWPS. A total of 64 percent responded that their disability
either enhanced or had no effect on their ability to enjoy wilderness,
while 36 percent responded that their disability did inhibit the
opportunity for them to enjoy the wilderness.
4. Suggestions for increasing enjoyment
of the NWPS All three surveys asked respondents
to make additional comments and recommendations regarding access
and wilderness. A number of recurrent issues emerged from NWPS users
who have disabilities, NWPS unit managers, and outfitters that serve
persons with disabilities in the NWPS.
The purpose of this section is to identify issues
for further discussion--it is not meant to imply a recommendation.
Recurrent issues are categorized below. In every case,
the percentage of responses from each of the three groups surveyed
(users, managers, outfitters) is provided with the statement. In
considering these percentages the reader is reminded that the total
number of respondents for each category was
Managers 304
Users 80
Outfitters 15
Therefore, one user equals 1.25 percent
of all users (1/80), one manager equals .32 percent of all NWPS
managers (1/304), and one outfitter equals 6.6 percent of all outfitters
(1/15). In considering these issues it is also important to remember
the following:
1. Data for these suggestions are qualitative, derived
in response to open-ended questions asking for suggestions and comments.
In some cases, the decision to categorize a response in a certain
manner was obvious; in other cases, categorization required more
judgment and interpretation. Every effort was made to categorize
the responses consistently and fairly; however, by its very nature
this process is likely to have more errors than a simple yes or
no response.
2. It is important to consider the source of each
suggestion. For example, the suggestion to increase access inside
the wilderness is the response of 3 outfitters, 8 users, and 30
NWPS managers. In interpreting these suggestions, we advise the
reader to note the number of responses from each category.
3. Typical comments representing each suggestion
category have been included for each of the three types of respondents.
Suggestion 1: Develop materials that provide information
on access; provide a clearinghouse for information.
Users 15%
Managers 15.5%
Outfitters 33%
Comments from users with disabilities:
What is needed is a central clearinghouse
for information on what areas in the U.S. have to offer a person
with a disability.
Lack of information is the biggest obstacle.
Write a guidebook of all the programs available and the levels
of accessibility to certain units of the NWPS so people can choose
where to go according to their comfort level.
More publicity letting people know what
areas are available and what programs can take them there.
Comments from NWPS managers:
Publicize what is currently available
to persons with disabilities via publications and literature.
Create a brochure listing trails easily
accessed; rate trails.
Inventory and classify trails according
to accessibility levels.
In [our] wilderness education package
we need to include special populations.
Concerted effort is needed by the four
federal agencies to convey that the wilderness is not just for
young supermen.
Comments from outfitters:
Provide the information, let participants
make the call.
Develop a board made up of individuals
with disabilities to rate the levels of ease according to each
unit.
Make information readily available to
sites and locations already fully accessible. Create an advisory
board made up of nondisabled and disabled to rate areas according
to their level of accessibility. Consult this board to make minimal,
but distinct, improvements.
Mass publication about programs or organizations
who offer trips into wilderness [for persons with disabilities].
Suggestion 2: Maintain existing regulations--seek access
without compromising the Wilderness Act.
Users 18.75%
Managers 3.6%
Outfitters 20%
Comments from users with disabilities:
My disability does not prevent me from enjoying
wilderness areas, it just adds a logistical element as to how
to get into these areas. Accessibility up to areas must be made
standard, but in the [wilderness] areas they should be left in
their natural state.
People with disabilities need to adapt to the
conditions they are in. [They] can't expect all areas to be accessible.
How far can access be taken without hurting the
concept of wilderness and the environment? I don't want to lose
the wilderness; rather than having the wilderness adapt, I'd rather
see the persons with disabilities adapt.
Areas would lose some of their attractiveness
if we were to make them completely accessible. Just good to know
there are still wild areas--keep them as undeveloped as possible.
Corporate America, in its quest for lucrative
markets, continues to use disability as a political football.
In their headlong drive for money they would gladly sacrifice
the few remaining enclaves of national heritage. Don't use disability
as a means to open wilderness.
Comments from NWPS managers:
Do not compromise Wilderness Act by allowing
ATVs, etc. ...we need to come up with policy for use of wilderness
by people with disabilities.
To provide handicapped access would involve constructing
roads or paved trails, which are contrary to wilderness values.
If made accessible, it doesn't remain wilderness.
Do not attempt to alter trails or allow mechanized
use. Do not lose sight of wilderness preservation.
Comments from outfitters:
Don't create accessibility; it goes against
the concept of wilderness.
If wilderness is made totally accessible,
will it remain wilderness? People with disabilities must accept
their circumstance and some areas may not be accessible.
Suggestion 3: Increase accessibility to areas outside
wilderness (trailheads, parking, restrooms, TDDs in ranger stations)
Users 20%
Managers 11.2%
Outfitters 13%
Comments from users with disabilities:
Entry points need to be made accessible...ramps
to existing buildings, widened restrooms.
Accessible toilet facilities at entry
points.
TDD phone at ranger stations.
Ranger stations need to have truly accessible
toileting facilities and ramping.
Braille or raised line maps would help
the blind.
Comments from NWPS managers:
Complete totally accessible trails just
outside wilderness designations.
Don't feel improvements in travel routes
are appropriate. Need to provide ramps and other structures at
trail heads for accessibility.
Handicapped accessible toilets at the
trailheads need to be implemented.
Develop the surrounding areas to be totally
accessible.
Comments from outfitters:
Have accessible entrance and specific
information on levels of accessibility [and] for visually and
hearing impaired.
Construct some mounting ramps for horse
mounting. Construct some special ramping at put-in points at river's
edge.
Suggestion 4: Increase access inside wilderness (boardwalks,
widen trails, special permits)
Users 10%
Managers 9.9%
Outfitters 20%
Comments from users with disabilities:
Improve campsites and portage trails.
Signage should be in braille and placed
at lowered heights.
Make campsite areas more accessible, ramping
from river, provide riverside bathrooms totally accessible.
Widen paths.
Comments from NWPS managers:
Construct a trail suitable for wheelchair
access.
Managers need to be provided with uniform,
regionwide policies for granting valid exemptions to the guidelines
of the Wilderness Act
Create specific trails with easy grade
and hardened surface, close to trailhead.
Widen and reroute the grade of trails.
People with disabilities have a right to visit their forests.
Redesign trails for persons with disabilities.
Special rafting permits for commercial
outfitters. Lower fee to offset cost.
Reconsider strict stance of non-use of
mechanical equipment. Special permits should be considered.
Comments from outfitters:
Specialized permits for nonprofit groups--they
can't afford fees.
Special permitting process done on a local
level--unit specific. Improve all existing camping facilities,
improve toileting facilities, widen trails.
Suggestion 5: Issue special permits allowing motors
and mechanized use for access (ATVs, motorboats, etc.)
Users 10%*
Managers 1.3%
Outfitters 7%
* Only two users specifically recommended
the use of motors; however several commented on their desire to
use motors in response to the question on whether the restrictions
on mechanized use diminishes their ability to enjoy wilderness.
If these are factored in as recommendations, the total number of
persons with disabilities who recommend the use of motorized vehicles
is eight, or 10 percent.
Comments from users with disabilities:
Allow restricted use | 
