                       Report to Congress 
                               on 
                        Section 507 (a) 
                               of 
                       the Americans With 
                    Disabilities Act of 1990
                                
                                
                          June 1, 1992
                                


                                
                 National Council on Disability
            800 Independence Avenue, S.W., Suite 814
                     Washington, D.C.  20591
                     (202) 267-3846 (Voice)
                      (202) 267-3232 (TDD)








   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.

















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

National Council on Disability
800 Independence Avenue, S.W., Suite 814
Washington, DC 20591
(202) 267-3846 Voice
(202) 267-3232 TDD
(202) 453-4240 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.
            National Council on Disability

Members                       Staff

Sandra Swift Parrino          Ethel D. Briggs
Chairperson                   Executive Director
New York                      
                              Harold W. Snider, PhD
Kent Waldrep, Jr.             Deputy Director
Vice Chairperson              
Texas                         Billie Jean Hill
                              Program Specialist
Linda W. Allison
Texas                         Mark S. Quigley
                              Public Affairs Specialist
Ellis B. Bodron
Mississippi                   Katherine D. Seelman, PhD
                              Research Specialist
Larry Brown, Jr.
Maryland                      Brenda Bratton
                              Staff Assistant
Mary Ann Mobley Collins
California                    Stacey S. Brown
                              Staff Assistant
Anthony H. Flack
Connecticut                   Janice Mack
                              Administrative Officer
John A. Gannon
Ohio and Washington, D.C.     Consultant
                              Gregory J. Lais
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






                 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.............................................. 1

Introduction................................................... 5

Background..................................................... 6

Assumptions and Definitions.................................... 7

Scope of Study................................................. 8

Limitations of Study........................................... 9

Methodology....................................................11

Findings.......................................................15

   1. Current policies of NWPS managing agencies...............15
 
     National Park Service.................................... 15
     U.S. Forest Service...................................... 18
     Bureau of Land Management................................ 20
     Fish and Wildlife Service................................ 21

     Survey results of field managers of NWPS units........... 23

   2. Current NWPS use levels by persons with disabilities.... 26

   3. Enjoyment of the NWPS by persons with disabilities...... 28

     How do persons with disabilities visit the NWPS?......... 32

     Effect of restrictions on mechanized use................. 33

   4. Suggestions for increasing enjoyment of the NWPS........ 35

Conclusions................................................... 44

Recommendations............................................... 46

Acknowledgments................................................47

References.................................................... 48

Appendices.................................................... 49

Appendix 1.Surveys, Cover Letters, and Attachments Distributed to

          A) Outfitters and Organizations..................... 50
          B) Persons with Disabilities........................ 56
          C) NWPS Managers.................................... 63

Appendix 2.Tabulations of the Responses from Surveys Distributed 
to

          A) Outfitters and Organizations..................... 68
          B) Persons with Disabilities........................ 76
          C) NWPS Managers.................................... 91

Appendix 3.Outfitters, Organizations, and Wildnerness Advocates 
Contacted
          for Participation in the Study.......................98

Appendix 4.National Council Member and Staff Biographies......101
 
                        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:

     a.   That the person have a disability as recognized by 
          theADA.  We further qualified this criterion to 
          selectpeople 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.

     b.   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.

     c.   That the persons were as representative of anational 
          sample as possible.  We made a significanteffort to 
          survey individuals who live throughout theUnited 
          States.

     d.   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:

     a.   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.

     b.   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 
          differentagencies.  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 user31
Mobility impairment, wheelchair user50


State of Residence

Alaska         6
California2
Colorado       5
Florida        4
Georgia        1
Idaho     5
Illinois       4
Indiana        7
Maine     1
Michigan       2
Minnesota      22
Montana        1
New Jersey2
New Mexico1
New York       2
North Dakota1
Ohio           2
Rhode Island1
Tennessee      1
Texas     2
Vermont        1
Washington1
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
FWS            55        42             76
BLM            17        13             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 knowNo 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 knowNo 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 information14/3045%


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 knowNo 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 knowNo response

USFS      1%             96%            0%             3%
NPS       10%            90%            0%             0%
FWS       0%             100%           0%             0%
BLM       0%             100%           0%             0%

TOTALS    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           2,500National Park Service
Boundary Waters     2,000Forest Service
Glacier Bay         1,000National Park Service
Cabinet Mountains   1,000Forest Service
Sycamore Canyon,
     Munds Mountain,
     Red Rock-Secret 
     Mountain              850Forest Service
St. Marks                  500Fish and Wildlife Service
Great Swamp           500Fish and Wildlife Service
Olympic                    500National Park Service
Joshua Tree           500National Park Service
Carson-Iceberg,
     Emigrant,
     Mokelumne             500Forest Service
Black Elk                  460Forest Service
Ellicott Rock         300Forest Service
Shining Rock,
     Middle Prong          300Forest 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 littlesomewhat  very muchtremendous          
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 little3        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
                         respondentsrating
                         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 Return6             4.66           5/4  
Kenai               5              4.4            5/4  
Lake Chelan-Sawtooth5              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 Refuge2            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-Slickrock2            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/Gunnison1             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 Mountains1            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 River1              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 accomplishment83
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 campsites13
Uncooperative group members        13
Poor access at entry point 
  (parking,etc)                    13
Lack of information about area5


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 wheelchair50
Crutches/cane       33
No devices used16
Electric wheelchair5
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
Outfitters15

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%
Outfitters33%

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%
Outfitters20%

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%
Outfitters13%

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%
Outfitters20%

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%
Outfitters7%

* 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 of ATVS.

     Allow individualized motorized access to certain areas.

     Disabilities or age should not stop people from going to 
     wilderness.  Managers of the units should rent motorized 
     equipment...government shouldn't limit people from using 
     motors.

     ATV is a way to see wilderness I could never reach on foot.

     How [can I] get out in case an emergency arises?  Need 
     mechanized usage.

Comments from NWPS managers:

     Develop special area within wilderness to allow motorized 
     use.  Specialized permit.

     Issue special use permits for motorized use if disabled 
     individual needs this.

     Allow use of motors on a limited basis.

Maintain existing regulations that allow for limited motorized 
use.

Comments from outfitters:

     [Provide] access with motorized vehicles.

Suggestion 6: Encourage/promote use of outfitters and guides

Users     10%
Managers       13.4%
Outfitters0

Comments from users with disabilities:

     Highly promote existing organizations that enable persons 
     with disabilities to go to wilderness areas.

     Implement trail partners, which advocates people power for 
     access.

Comments from NWPS managers:

     Develop partnerships with area guides and specialty 
     outfitters.

     Commercial use operators could be encouraged to specifically 
     tailor trips for persons with disabilities.

     Increase usage and dependence on groups that deal with 
     specialized population and the creative solutions they use.

     Market the various outfitters who service persons with 
     disabilities.

     Cosponsored disability awareness training for commercial 
     guides.

Comments from outfitters:

     None
Suggestion 7:  Increase funding for better access, including
     facilities, promotion, and scholarships.

Users     6.25%
Managers       2.63%
Outfitters0

Comments from users with disabilities:

     Continue to fund organizations that bring persons with 
     disabilities to wilderness.

     Develop more organized programs that take persons with 
     disabilities [that are] federally funded.

Comments from NWPS managers:

     We need an increase in funding and staffing to approach this 
     issue in a positive manner.

     The use of this area by persons with disabilities will 
     require an imaginative approach that will require copious 
     funding.

     Specific funding aimed at developing accessible trails.

     Lobby to provide funding for retrofit of existing 
     facilities.

Comments from outfitters:

     None
Suggestion 8:  Rely on people power/human companions to gain 
     access to wilderness.

Users     6.25%
Managers        .33%
Outfitters0

Comments from users with disabilities:

     Rely more on people power...reciprocate.

     Go with someone who completely understands your disability.

     Rely on friends who are willing to assist your needs while 
     in the wilderness.

Comments from NWPS managers:

     A chair-bound person willing to travel with an able bodied 
     friend will probably have an extraordinary experience.

Comments from outfitters:

     None
                            Conclusions


Federal management policies and practices

The four federal agencies responsible for wilderness management 
have different policies and management practices regarding use of 
the NWPS in general and regarding persons with disabilities in 
particular.  These differences are partly attributable to the 
fact that the NWPS is not an independent federal lands system.  
Each agency has a different mission and these missions are 
reflected in their overall policies toward the NWPS.

Three of the 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 a policy on this issue; however, it is 
their intention to adopt policies similar to those of the other 
land managing agencies in the Department of Interior.  The BLM is 
in the process of further defining its policies; however, as a 
Department of Interior land management agency it, too, is likely 
to adopt the policies developed by other USDI agencies, 
specifically those of the National Park Service.

Forest Service policy differs from National Park Service policy 
in that it 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:

     ...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 of the NWPS managers (74 percent) do not make special 
provisions for use by persons with disabilities.  This appears to 
be consistent with Section 507(c)(1) of the ADA:

     ...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, specific 
guidelines on what is consistent with the Wilderness Act 
regarding use of the NWPS by persons with disabilities appear to 
be lacking.  Guidelines are needed on issues such as trail width, 
toilets at hardened sites, and other practices currently employed 
within the NWPS to preserve the resource.  In general, it appears 
that the federal agencies do not factor in use of the NWPS by 
persons with disabilities as much as they could.

Finally, there is some confusion among NWPS field managers about 
what the actual policies are regarding use by persons with 
disabilities.  There are also considerable differences in opinion 
about how best to serve persons with disabilities in the NWPS.
It appears that the field managers of the NWPS need better 
training and direction when it comes to use of these areas by 
persons with disabilities.


Use levels of the NWPS by persons with disabilities

People with disabilities do use the NWPS.  Unfortunately 
realistic estimates of this use cannot be made based on the data 
collected for this study.  Unit managers who responded estimated 
that 16,767 persons with disabilities visit the NWPS annually; 
however, these estimates cannot be verified, nor can accurate 
estimates be made for NWPS units that did not respond to the 
survey.  For NWPS areas with the highest estimated use, see page 
28.


Ability of persons with disabilities to enjoy the NWPS

A significant majority of persons with disabilities surveyed 
enjoy using the NWPS.  People with disabilities appear to visit 
the NWPS in the same ways and for the same reasons as people 
without disabilities (Roggenbuck and Lucas, 1987).

The majority (76 percent) of the respondents with disabilities do 
not believe that the restrictions on mechanized use stated by the 
Wilderness Act diminish their ability to enjoy the wilderness.



                          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 TDDs in ranger stations.

3.  NWPS managing agencies should develop guidelines regarding 
accommodations, special permits, and modifications for use by 
persons with disabilities that are consistent with the Wilderness 
Act.  Agencies should be encouraged to facilitate NWPS use, 
consistent with the Wilderness Act, by persons with disabilities.  
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 
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.

6.  Data collected for this study could be used in other studies; 
this information should be made available to any agency or person 
who requests it.
                          Acknowledgments

Sandy Parrino, Margaret Hager, Ethel Briggs, and Mark 
Quigley--the National Council on Disability

David Park, Kay Ellis, Wes Henry--National Park Service

Joe Meade, Liz Close, Chuck Frayer, Ann Fege, and Alan Watson-- 
U.S. Forest Service

Keith Corrigall--Bureau of Land Management

Dave Heffernan--U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Margo Imdieke, Minnesota State Council on Disability

John Nousaine, Northeast Minnesota Center for Independent Living

Jay Rochlin, Tigurd, OR 

Darrell Knuffke and the Wilderness Society, for free materials 
and information, including more than 300 maps of the National 
Wilderness Preservation System

Whole Access Tours of Redwood City, CA, for enlarged print copies 
of the Wilderness Society report on access

John Galland, Minneapolis, MN

Deb Jo Sathrum and Molly Schlaefer, Minneapolis, MN

John Kopchik, Disabled Outdoors, Chicago, IL

Mark Havens, Accessible Adventures, Portland, OR

Nancy Ertter, Alternate Mobility Adventure Seekers, Boise, ID

Tom McPike, Bay Area Outreach/Rec, Berkeley, CA  

Gary Robb, Bradford Woods, Martinsville, IN

Scott Engram, Breckenridge Outdoor Educational Center,
Breckenridge, CO

Patrick Reinhart, Challenge Alaska, Anchorage, AK

Jim Wise, Cooperative Wilderness Handicapped Outdoor Group (CW 
Hog), Pocatello, ID  

Bill Dvorak, Dvorak's Kayak Expeditions, Nathrop, CO

Diane Poslosky, Environmental Traveling Companions,
San Francisco, CA

David Cappetta, Voyageur Outward Bound, Minnetonka, MN

Tom Smith, Racoon Institute, Cazenovia, WI

Claire Coonan, Special Populations Learning Outdoor Recreation 
and Education (S'plore), Salt Lake City, UT

David Espeseth, SOAR, Portland, OR

Charlie Ross, Sobek Expeditions, Angels Camp, CA

Dale Abell, The Ability Center, Sylvania, OH



                            References

Driver, B.L.; Nash, R.; and Haas, G. "Wilderness Benefits:  A 
State of Knowledge Review." In Lucas, R.C., Proceedings, National 
Wilderness Research Conference:  Issues, State of Knowledge, 
Future Directions.  Ogden, UT:  Intermountain Research Station,   
1987, pp. 294-319.

Lucas, R.C., and Krumpe, E.E. "Wilderness Management: A 
Literature Review." In The President's Commission on Americans 
Outdoors.  Washington, DC:  U.S. Government Printing Office, 
1986.

Merigliano, L.  "Indicators to Monitor the Wilderness Recreation 
Experience."  In Lime, D.W., Managing America's Enduring 
Wilderness Resource. St. Paul, MN:  Minnesota Extension Service,  
University of Minnesota, 1990, pp. 156-162.

Roggenbuck, J.W., and Lucas, R.C. "Wilderness Use and User 
Characteristics: A State-of-Knowledge Review."  In Lucas, R.C., 
Proceedings, National Wilderness Research Conference:  Issues, 
State of Knowledge, Future Directions.  Ogden, UT:  Intermountain 
Research Station, 1987, pp. 204-245.

                            Appendices
 Appendix 1A.  Outfitters and Organizations Survey, Cover Letter,
                          and Attachments

Note: This cover letter was sent on Wilderness Inquiry 
letterhead.

May 8, 1991

®FIRST NAME¯ ®LAST NAME¯
®ORGANIZATION¯
®ADDRESS¯
®CITY¯, ®ST¯  ®ZIP¯

Dear ®SALUTATION¯:

Wilderness Inquiry is working with the National Council on 
Disability on a nationwide study examining wilderness and persons 
with disabilities.

The study, mandated by the Americans With Disabilities Act of 
1990, will look at 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 established by the Wilderness Act 
of 1964.

If this study is to be effective, we need your help. Due to your 
knowledge of wilderness opportunities for persons with 
disabilities, we ask that you help us by reviewing the following 
questionnaire and map.

Laura Fredrickson from our office will be calling within a week 
or so to verbally collect your response to the enclosed 
questionnaire.  If you are unable to take the call, please 
complete and return the questionnaire by June 1st.

If you have questions concerning the study, please call. Thank 
you for you cooperation, it is valued and appreciated.


Sincerely,




Greg Lais
Executive Director

Enc:

cc: Mark Quigley, National Council on Disability
                    Organizations Questionnaire

Section 507, Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990
May 8, 1991

Name of organization_______________________________________
Nature of organization_____________________________________
Address____________________________________________________
Phone______________________________________________________
Contact person____________________Title____________________

1) How many people do you serve annually?__________

2) What is your annual budget?____________

3) How long has your organization been in business?_________

For the purpose of this study, persons with disabilities includes 
people with physical, cognitive, and sensory disabilities.

4) What percentage of your trips are integrated with people with 
disabilities? 

     0-25%_______             50-75%_______
     25-50%______             75-100%______

5) How many people with disabilities do you serve annually?_____

6) Who do you serve? (check all that apply)

     People who use wheelchairs         ______
     People with cognitive impairments  ______
     People with sensory impairments    ______
     People who use canes and/or crutches______
     Other (please explain)_______________________________
     ________________________________________________________

The Wilderness Act of 1964 created the National Wilderness 
Preservation System (NWPS). Congress designated that certain 
areas be protected in their natural condition as an enduring 
resource of wilderness.

Many remote, wild places have similar qualities and 
characteristics as the designated units of the NWPS, however, 
these are not part of the NWPS. Examples of wild areas that are 
not part of the National Wilderness Preservation System include 
Yellowstone National Park, Rocky Mountain National Park, many 
state parks, etc.

For the purpose of this study, we are only concerned with 
designated units within the National Wilderness Preservation 
System.

Please see enclosed map for specific listings and locations of 
NWPS units.

7) Do you conduct activities that involve persons with      
disabilities in the National Wilderness Preservation System?

     Yes_______ No_______

     If no, please skip to question number 20

     If yes, state which units______________________________
     _______________________________________________________
     _______________________________________________________
     _______________________________________________________

8) Please describe the people with disabilities that your   
organization has served on activities within the NWPS (check
all that apply):

     People who use wheelchairs              _____
     People with cognitive impairments       _____
     People with sensory impairments         _____
     People who use canes and/or crutches    _____
     Other (please explain)________________________________
     ______________________________________________________

9) If your organization has conducted trips within the NWPS,
how many has it conducted in the last 10 years?_______

10) If you have conducted trips within the NWPS, has the 
frequency of your NWPS trips involving persons with disabilities 
(please check one)

     Increased_______
     Decreased_______
     Remained stable_______
     We no longer conduct activities within the NWPS_______

11) If you have conducted trips within the NWPS, what modes of 
transport were used within the NWPS by persons with disabilities?  
(check all that apply)

     Kayak______    Dogsled_______ Other_______
     Raft_______    Horse_______
     Canoe______    Hike_______

12) Have you served persons with disabilities in the past
     but have discontinued to do so? Yes_______No_______
     If yes, why?
     
     Lack of qualified staff_______
     Legal/liability problems_______
     Other (please explain)_______

13) Have you had any problems conducting NWPS trips that are
     the direct result of

     NWPS restrictions (please explain)



     Having persons with disabilities in your group (please
          explain)



     Have had no problems_______

14) In your opinion, do any of the following prohibit
     persons with disabilities from enjoying the NWPS?
     (check all that apply):

     Permits_______
     Quota systems_______
     Use of designated campsites_______
     Use of latrines________
     Lack of information on accessible routes_______
     Restrictions on motorized use_______
     Lack of cooperation by agency (USFS, NPS)_______
     Lack of improved trails_______
     Lack of improved facilities (ramp, etc.)_______
     Lack of communication devices for deaf (TDD)_______
     Lack of tactile information, braille, signage, for
          visually impaired_______
     All of the above_______
     None of the above_______

15) Do you believe motorized use in the NWPS is necessary to
provide access to persons with disabilities?

     Yes_____No_____Please explain

16) Do you believe it is necessary to improve facilities
(i.e., paved trails, shelters, handrails, and ramps, etc.)
to provide access to the NWPS by persons with disabilities?

     Yes_____No_____Please explain

17) Do you have an evaluation form or a means for receiving
evaluation from your users? Yes_____No_____

     If yes, please describe the evaluation, and briefly 
     describe a "typical" response_______________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________
     If no evaluation used, why not?_____________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________

18) From your experience, do you think persons with 
disabilities are able to enjoy the NWPS? Yes_____No_____

     If yes, why?



     If not, why not?



19) Do you have specific recommendations and suggestions for
providing access in the NWPS for persons with disabilities?
Please explain.  Attach separate sheet if necessary.

20) If your organization does not conduct activities within
the National Wilderness Preservation System please explain why  
not: ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________

21) If your organization does conduct outdoor activities,
but not within the National Wilderness reservation System,
where do you conduct them?_________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________

Can you provide us with names of people with disabilities who 
have used the National Wilderness Preservation System who might 
be interested in participating in this study? 

Name_______________________   Name__________________________
Address____________________   Address_______________________
City, State________________   City, State___________________
Zip Code___________________   Zip Code______________________

Phone (___)_____-__________   Phone (__)_____-______________


Name_______________________   Name__________________________
Address____________________   Address_______________________
City, State________________   City, State___________________
Zip Code___________________   Zip Code______________________

Phone (___)_____-__________   Phone (__)_____-______________


Name_______________________   Name__________________________
Address____________________   Address_______________________
City, State________________   City, State___________________
Zip Code___________________   Zip Code______________________

Phone (___)_____-__________   Phone (__)_____-______________

If necessary, attach more names on separate sheet.

Please return this form to:

     Laura Fredrickson
     Wilderness Inquiry
     1313 Fifth St. SE, Box 84
     Minneapolis, MN  55414
 Appendix 1B.  Persons with Disabilities Survey, Cover Letter, and
                            Attachments

Note: This cover letter was sent on National Council on 
Disability letterhead.

August 30, 1991

®FIRST NAME¯ ®LAST NAME¯
®ADDRESS¯
®CITY¯, ®ST¯  ®ZIP¯

Dear ®SALUTATION¯:

We want to find out about your experiences in wilderness areas.  
Your name was given to us by ®SOURCE¯ as a person with a 
disability who has visited Federally designated Wilderness areas.   

You may know that Congress passed the Americans With Disabilities 
Act in July 1990.  In that Act, the National Council on 
Disability was asked to conduct a nationwide study examining the 
effect that Wilderness designations and management practices have 
on the ability of persons with disabilities to use and enjoy the 
National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS).

Wilderness Inquiry is a nonprofit organization that is working 
with the National Council on Disability to gather information 
from people like you.  If this study is to be effective, we need 
your help.

We realize there are many questions here for you to think about, 
but to help us make recommendations to Congress we ask you to 
consider each one as carefully and thoroughly as you can.  Please 
complete the following questionnaire and return it in the stamped 
envelope provided by September 30, 1991.

Your participation in this study is voluntary.  Your name will 
not be connected with your answers unless we receive specific 
permission from you to talk with you further about an issue.  If 
you have questions concerning the study, please call Greg Lais at 
(612) 379-3858.  Thank you for your cooperation.  Your input is 
valued and important.

Sincerely,



Ethel Briggs                  Greg Lais
Executive Director            Executive Director
National Council on           Wilderness Inquiry
  Disability

The Wilderness Act of 1964 created the National Wilderness 
Preservation System (NWP). Congress designated that certain areas 
be protected and preserved in their natural condition as an 
enduring resource of wilderness.

Many remote, wild places have similar qualities and 
characteristics as the designated units of the NWPS, however, 
these are not part of the NWPS. Examples of areas that possess 
such "wilderness-like" qualities would be Yellowstone National 
Park, Rocky Mountain National Park, and many state parks. 
However, these are not units of the NWPS.

For the purpose of this study, we are concerned only with 
designated units within the National Wilderness Preservation 
System.  Please see the enclosed map for specific listings and 
locations of NWPS units.

For the purpose of this study, persons with disabilities include 
those with physical, cognitive and sensory disabilities and the 
use of possible assistive devices.

1) Please name up to 5 wilderness areas of the NWPS you have
visited since having a disability.  (Please refer to enclosed
map for specific names and locations of NWPS units.)
     a) ________________________________________________
     b) ________________________________________________
     c) ________________________________________________
     d) ________________________________________________
     e) ________________________________________________

2) 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 littlesomewhat  very muchtremendous          
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      

3) How many trips have you taken to wilderness areas in the
NWPS since having a disability?

     1 trip_____    2-4 trips_____ 5 or more trips_____

4) What is the longest time you've spent in a wilderness area
in the NWP at one time since having a disability?

     1 day______    2-3 days______ 4 days or more______

5) What means of transportation have you used while traveling
within the NWPS since having a disability? (check all that
apply)

     Kayak_______   Canoe_______   Dogsled________
     Raft________   Horse_______   Hike___________
     Other (please explain)________________________

6) Did you use any of the following assistive devices on any of
your trips to the NWPS Check all that apply)

     Manual wheelchair_______      Walker_______
     Electric wheelchair_______    Crutches/cane_____
     Amigo_______                  Guide dog______

     Other (please explain)_________________________________

7) Do you typically visit the NWPS

     Alone_______
     With friends/family_______
     With an organized group or outfitter_______

8) Why did you choose to visit the NWPS?  (check all that
apply)

     To experience solitude_______
     To experience scenery/natural beauty_______
     To share the experience with family or friends_______
     To experience a personal challenge_______
     To experience nature on its own terms_______
     To enjoy fishing or hunting_______
     Other (please explain)______________________________
     ____________________________________________________

9) Did you check or attempt to check the accessibility of   
the NWPS before your trip?

     Yes_______No_______

10) If yes, did you find information from (check all that   
apply)

     Organization/outfitter leading trip_______
     NWPS manager (Forest Service, Park Service, etc.)____
     Friends who had visited the area before_______
     Other (please explain)_______________________________
     _____________________________________________________

11) If you did not check the accessibility before your NWPS
trip, why not?

     I did not think it was necessary_______
     I did not know where to look for information_____
     I could not find any information on accessibility_____

12) Did you visit the NWPS prior to having a disability?

     I did visit the NWPS prior to my disability_____ 
     I did not visit the NWPS prior to my disability_____
     I was born with my disability_____

13) Before visiting the NWPS, did you have concerns about going
into a wilderness area that specifically relate to your
disability?

     Yes_____No_____If yes, please explain:
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________

14) What were the highlights of your visit(s) to the NWPS? (check
all that apply)

     Personal achievement/feelings of accomplishment_____
     Solitude/peace______
     People or relationships_____
     Scenery or location_____
     Personal growth______
     No high points______
     Other (please explain)______

15) What were the low points of your visit(s) to the NWPS?  
(check all that apply)

     Lack of information about area I wished to visit_____
     Physical discomfort_____
     Trails/terrain too rugged______
     Undeveloped/primitive campsites_____
     Uncooperative group members______
     Poor access at entry point (parking, etc.)_____
     No low points_____
     Other (please explain)______
     _____________________________________________________


16) In your opinion, did your disability enhance or inhibit
the opportunity for you to enjoy the NWPS?

     Enhanced the opportunity for me_____
     Inhibited the opportunity for me_____
     Had no effect on the opportunity for me_____

     Please explain:_____________________________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________


17) Do you believe the restrictions on mechanized use within
the NWPS diminishes your ability to enjoy it?

     Yes_____No_____Please explain:______________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________


18) Do you have suggestions for improving the ability of
persons with disabilities to enjoy the NWPS?

     Yes_____No_____Please explain:______________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________


Many people visit areas that are not within the National 
Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS). These areas are rugged, 
wild, and remote, but they are not designated units of the NWPS.  
Often they are public or private areas that have not been 
developed.  For questions 19 and 20, we want you to think about
lands you have visited that are not within the NWPS, such as 
state parks, Yellowstone National Park, Allagash Wilderness 
Waterway, etc.

19) Do you visit wildlands outside of the NWPS? 

     Yes_____No_____If yes, please describe them by name and
     the state where they are located:
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________

20) Do the experiences you have in wild areas outside the NWPS
differ from your experiences inside the NWPS?

     Yes_____No_____Please explain:
     _____________________________________________________
     _____________________________________________________

Questions 21 - 24 are optional.  This is demographic data that
will be helpful to us, but we do not require you to answer it.

21) We want to know more about you.  Please tell us your:

     Age__________  Sex_________
     City and state of residence__________________________

22) Do you have a disability?

     Yes_____No_____
     If yes, please describe it by name:___________________

23) Do you (check all that apply)

     Use a wheelchair_____     Walk with cane/crutches______
     Use a guide dog______     Use other assistive 
                                 devices ______
     If other, please explain:______________________________

24) If you have other comments please share them here, or 
attach a separate sheet of paper:
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________
     ______________________________________________________

25) Would you be willing to have us contact you by telephone
for more detailed information on your opinions? 

     Yes____No____  If yes, please give us your name, 
     address, and phone number:

Name_______________________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________________
City____________________________State_______Zip_____________
Telephone (      )_________________________________________


            Thank you for participating in this study!

   Please return this response in the enclosed envelope, or to:

         Wilderness Inquiry  1313  Fifth St. SE, Box 84 
                      Minneapolis, MN  55414
                   (612) 379-3858  Voice or TDD

        Appendix 1C.  NWPS Managers Survey and Cover Letter

Note: The cover letters for this survey varied slightly from what 
is presented here.  The Forest Service and the National Park 
Service re-worded this letter and put it on their agency 
letterhead.  Wilderness Inquiry distributed surveys directly to 
the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Land Management.  
Surveys distributed by Wilderness Inquiry included a cover letter 
on Wilderness Inquiry letterhead.

®FIRST NAME¯ ®LAST NAME¯
®ORGANIZATION¯
®ADDRESS¯
®CITY¯, ®ST¯  ®ZIP¯

Dear ®SALUTATION¯:

We want to find out what level of use, if any, the wilderness 
area you manage receives from persons with disabilities.

You may know that Congress passed the Americans With Disabilities 
Act in 1990.  In that Act, the National Council on Disability was 
mandated to conduct a nationwide study examining the effect that 
wilderness designations and wilderness land management practices 
have on the ability of persons with disabilities to use and enjoy 
the National Wilderness Preservation System.

The National Council on Disability has contracted with Wilderness 
Inquiry to conduct this study.  Wilderness Inquiry is a 
nonprofit, Minneapolis-based organization that conducts 
wilderness adventures with persons who have disabilities.

Enclosed is a questionnaire designed for wilderness managers.  
This survey has been developed in cooperation with the four 
Federal wilderness management agencies (USFS, USF&W, NPS, BLM).

We understand that you may not have hard data on many of the 
questions asked in this questionnaire.  If you do not have hard 
data, please respond according to your best judgement.

We ask that you take a moment to complete the questionnaire and 
return it to XXXX by October 15th, 1991.

If you have questions concerning the study, please contact Greg 
Lais at Wilderness Inquiry (612-379-3858).  Thank you for your 
cooperation.

Sincerely,     Official from Federal Agency

               WPS Unit Managers Questionnaire
                      Wilderness Access

The National Wilderness Preservation System was established by 
Congress in passing the Wilderness Act of 1964.  The Americans 
With Disabilities Act of 1990 (Section 507) requires a study to 
determine the ability of persons with disabilities to enjoy and 
utilize the National Wilderness Preservation System.  You have 
been identified as a person in charge of managing a unit of the 
National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS).  Your assistance 
in completing this questionnaire is greatly appreciated.


1) How would you describe the primary terrain type in your 
wilderness unit used by visitors interested in recreation? (check 
only one)

     Mountainous_____              Lake and/or river_____
     Swamp, marsh wetland_____     Desert_____
     Forest/heavily vegetated_____ Coastal_____

We realize that most units of the NWPS prohibit the use of 
motorized vehicles.  However, in some units the use of motors has 
been grandfathered in.  For this reason we are including 
responses regarding motorized use in questions 2, 7, and 11.

2) People who visit your wilderness unit use which of the the 
following means of travel: (check all that apply)

     Raft_____      Kayak_____     Motorboat_____
     Canoe_____     Hike_____      Bicycle_____
     Horse_____     Dogsled_____   Airplane_____
     Ski_____       Snowmobile_____
                    All-terrain vehicle_____

     Other (please describe)_______________________________

Persons with disabilities include those who use wheelchairs, 
crutches, canes, and those who have visual and or hearing 
impairments, mental retardation, epilepsy, etc.

3) Have you ever received inquiries from persons with  
disabilities about the use of your wilderness unit?

     Yes____ No____ Don't know____


4) If yes, approximately how many inquiries do you receive 
annually?______

     Is this figure an   estimate_____
                         based on exact documentation_____

5) How many people with disabilities do you believe use your unit 
of the NWPS each year?_________ 

     Is this figure an   estimate_____
                         based on exact documentation_____

6) Does your wilderness unit have any information available that 
specifically addresses wilderness use by persons
     with disabilities?

     Yes____ No____

     IF YES, PLEASE RETURN A COPY WITH THIS QUESTIONNAIRE.

7) How do people with disabilities travel while in your 
wilderness unit? (check all that apply)

     Raft_____      Kayak_____     Motorboat_____
     Canoe_____     Hike_____      Bicycle_____
     Horse_____     Dogsled_____   Airplane_____
     Ski______      Snowmobile_____
                    All-terrain vehicle_____

     Other (please describe)_______________________________

8) Do you believe most people with disabilities visit your 
wilderness unit (check only one)

     Alone______
     With family/friends______
     In organized groups_____
     Don't know_____
     
     Is this response an  estimate_____
                          based on exact documentation_____

9) How do most people without disabilities visit your wilderness 
unit? (check only one)

     Alone_____
     With family/friends______
     In organized groups______
     Don't know______
     
     Is this response an  estimate_____
                          based on exact documentation_____


10) Does your unit allow for the use of wheelchairs by persons 
with disabilities?

     Yes_____ No_____ Don't know_____

     Comments___________________________________________
     ___________________________________________________
     ___________________________________________________


11) Does your unit make special provisions for use by persons 
with disabilities?

     Yes_____ No_____ Don't know_____

     If yes, what are they? (check all that apply)
     
          Special permits_____   
          Use of motors______
          Special areas_____
          Accessibility information_____
          Other (please explain)___________________________
          _________________________________________________


12) In your opinion, do the management policies of your agency 
for NWPS units inhibit the enjoyment of persons with 
disabilities?

     Yes_____No_____  

     If yes, why?___________________________________________
     _______________________________________________________
     _______________________________________________________

     If no, why not?________________________________________
     _______________________________________________________
     _______________________________________________________

13) Do you provide any of the following to the general population 
prior to their visiting wilderness areas? (check all that apply)

     Advice_____
     Informational wilderness travel materials_____
     Special training_____
     Other_____

14) What is the official name of the unit(s) of the NWPS that you 
manage? (please list them all if more than one)

     ____________________________________________________
     ____________________________________________________

15) For which federal agency do you work?___________________

16) What is your official job title?________________________

17) How many years have you personally been involved in the 
management of this wilderness area?________

18) Please elaborate on what, if anything, you think could be 
done to facilitate enjoyment of your NWPS unit by persons with 
disabilities:
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
____________________________________________________________

 Please return your response in the enclosed envelope, or to

      Wilderness Inquiry  1313  Fifth St. SE, Box 84 
                   Minneapolis, MN  55414  
                (612) 379-3858  Voice or TDD

THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THIS SURVEY.  THE RESULTS WILL BE 
MADE AVAILABLE TO THE WILDERNESS COORDINATOR FOR YOUR AGENCY, OR 
YOU CAN CALL WILDRNESS INQUIRY FOR A FINAL COPY.

   Appendix 2A.  Tabulations of the Responses from Organizations
                          and Outfitters

1) How many people total do you serve annually? ________

     1  = 0-100          
     2  = 101-500        7
     3  = 501-1000       2
     4  = 1001-2000      1
     5  = 2001+          5

DATA TITLE:People Served Annually

2) What is your annual budget?____________

     1 =  $0-100,000          2
     2 =  $100,001-120,000    2
     3 =  $120,001-175,000    3
     4 =  $175,001-200,000    1
     5 =  $200,001+           7

DATA TITLE:Annual Budget 

3) How long has your organization been in business?_________

     1 =  0-3 yrs        1
     2 =  4-10 yrs       6
     3 =  11-15 yrs      3
     4 =  16+ yrs        5

DATA TITLE:Years In Business

4) What percentage of your trips are integrated with people with 
disabilities?

     1 =  0-25%          3
     2 =  25-50%         2
     3 =  50-75%         1
     4 =  75-100%        9

DATA TITLE:% of Integrated Trips

5) How many people with disabilities do you serve annually?_____

     1 =  0-50           3
     2 =  51-100         0
     3 =  101-200        2
     4 =  201+           10

DATA TITLE:Dis Served Annually

6) Whom do you serve? (check all that apply)

     1 =  People who use wheelchairs              14
     2 =  People with cognitive impairments       15
     3 =  People with sensory impairments         15
     4 =  People who use canes and/or crutches    15
     5 =  Terminally ill                          2
     6 =  Other                                   1

DATA TITLE:Persons Served

7) Do you conduct activities that involve persons with 
disabilities in the National Wilderness Preservation System?

     1 =  yes       11
     2 =  no        4

DATA TITLE:Trips In NWPS

If yes, state which units:

Black Canyon of the Gunnison
Boundary Waters Canoe Area
Chama River Canyon
Chugach
Collegiate Peaks
Craters of the Moon
Eagles Nest
Denali
Desolation Canyon
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

8) Please describe the people with disabilities that your 
organization has served on activities within the NWPS. (check all 
that apply)

     1 =  People who use wheelchairs              9
     2 =  People with cognitive impairments       10
     3 =  People with sensory impairments         10
     4 =  People who use canes and/or crutches    10
     5 =  Terminally ill                          1
     6 =  Other                                   1

DATA TITLE:In NWPS, People Served

9) If your organization has conducted trips within the NWPS, how 
many has it conducted in the last 10 years?______

     1 =  1-20      0
     2 =  21-100    5
     3 =  101-200   10
     4 =  201+      0

DATA TITLE:Trips Over 10 Yrs

10) If you have conducted trips within the NWPS, has the 
frequency of your NWPS trips involving persons with disabilities 
(please check one):

     1 =  Increased           3
     2 =  Decreased           2
     3 =  Stable              6
     4 =  We no longer        0
          conduct activities 
          within the NWPS

DATA TITLE:Trips w/DIS

11) If you have conducted trips within the NWPS, what modes of 
transport were used within the NWPS by persons with disabilities? 
(check all that apply)

     1 =  kayak     5              5 =  horse     2
     2 =  raft      8              6 =  hike      8
     3 =  canoe     4              7 =  ATV       0
     4 =  dogsled   3              8 =  airplane  0

DATA TITLE:Modes of Transport

12) Have you served persons with disabilities in the past but 
have discontinued to do so?

     1 =  yes       0
     2 =  no        11

DATA TITLE:Discontinued Service

13) Have you had any problems in conducting NWPS trips that are 
the direct result of:

     1 =  Have had no problems          9
     2 =  NWPS restrictions             0
     3 =  Having persons with           2
          disabilities in your group 

DATA TITLE:Problems in NWPS

Comments:

Planning trips is more complicated because you need a lot more 
logistical information than what is available as far as the lay 
of the land and the information is just not available. You are 
more limited in where you can go.

Some trips require extended hikes to put-in points; would like 
transport to spots.

DATA TITLE:Comments 2

14) In your opinion, do any of the following prohibit persons 
with disabilities from enjoying the NWPS? (check all that apply)

     1 =  permits                            3
     2 =  quota systems                      1
     3 =  use of designated campsites        1
     4 =  use of latrines                    2
     5 =  lack of information on accessible  7
          routes
     6 =  restrictions on motorized use      3
     7 =  lack of cooperation by agency      1
     8 =  lack of improved trails            6
     9 =  lack of improved facilities        7
     10 = lack of communication devices for  1
          deaf (TDD)
     11 = lack of tactile information for    5
          visually impaired
     12 = all of the above                   1
     13 = none of the above                  0

DATA TITLE;Prohibit Persons w/Dis

15) Do you believe motorized use in the NWPS is necessary to 
provide access to persons with disabilities?

     1 =  yes       5
     2 =  no        6

DATA TITLE:Motors Necessary

     (please explain)_______________________________________

Comments: 

     Yes, to get to site locations.

     For adequate accessibility, but only in outlying areas just 
     outside wilderness.

     Motorized use would help in getting persons with 
     disabilities to put-in points on rivers.

     It would be advantageous to use a four-wheeler because of 
     the rugged terrain. Can't get a permit to do so.

     Rely on horses, water craft, and dogsleds to get people into 
     backcountry.

DATA TITLE:Comments 3

16) Do you believe it is necessary to improve facilities (i.e., 
paved trails, shelters, handrails, ramps, etc.) to provide access 
to the NWPS by persons with disabilities?

     1 =  yes       6    
     2 =  no        5

DATA TITLE:Improve Facilities

     (please explain)_______________________________________

     Existing facilities need to be brought up to standard.

     Toilet facilities should be developed in the outback; put-in 
     and take-out areas at the river's edge should be ramped. 
     Parking at entrance.

     If any improvements in NWPS for any other reason, then make 
     it totally accessible.

     Let's improve access on nonwilderness lands instead.

     Wilderness should be available to all people. Ways to make 
     things accessible without disturbing the quality of the 
     land. . .raised walkways over rugged terrain.

     Improve trails by widening but not by paving. Build public 
     cabins accessible for all persons--more amenities.

Areas up to wilderness.

DATA TITLE:Comments 4

17) Do you have an evaluation form or a means for receiving 
evaluation from your users?

     1 =  yes       11
     2 =  no        0

DATA TITLE:Eval Form

18) From your experience, do you think persons with    
disabilities are able to enjoy the NWPS? 

     1 =  yes       10
     2 =  no        2

DATA TITLE:Able to Enjoy

     (please explain)_______________________________________

     Most folks are just like able-bodied and desire 
     wilderness--awareness of possibilities and false 
     limitations.

     I have seen people with disabilities take on a lot of 
     determination and patience and the rewards I can see in 
     their eyes and in their attitudes to try something 
     challenging.

     Provides the opportunity for persons with disabilities to 
     have an able-bodied challenge and opportunity.

     It's important that the NWPS is preserved in its rustic 
     sense so all persons have the chance to experience the 
     primitive, wild setting.

     They can't enjoy them because there isn't an easy enough 
     route to get to the areas.

     These people want to challenge themselves and have some 
     adventure--the wilderness provides the background

     Persons with disabilities need to be made aware of what is 
     available to them.

     For the same reason anyone else enjoys the wilderness.

     Philosophically, yes, but due to the accessibility issue, 
     no! I believe persons of all ability levels should have the 
     opportunity to go into extremely remote areas--use 
     organizations like ours as the intermediary.

     I think persons with disabilities enjoy it for the same 
     reasons non-disabled enjoy it. Not enough information is 
     available to persons with disabilities as far as places 
     easily accessible.

DATA TITLE:  Comments 5

19) Do you have specific recommendations and suggestions for 
providing access in the NWPS for persons with disabilities? 
Please explain.  Attach separate sheet if necessary.

          Comment codes:                     # of      % of
                                             responses total (15)

0 = Not relevant to question asked.          0         0

1 = Encourage/promote use of outfitters      0         0
     and guides.                             

2 = Increase accessibility to areas outside  2         13
     wilderness (trailheads, parking,
     restrooms, TDDs).

3 = Increase access inside wilderness        3         20
     (boardwalks, widen trails, special 
     permits).

4 = Allow use of wheelchairs.                0         0

5 = Maintain existing regulations--seek      3         20
     access without compromising
     Wilderness Act.

6 = Motors and mechanized use needed for     1         7
     access (ATVs, motorboats).

7 = Training and education for wilderness    0         0
     staff on disability awareness.

8 = Develop materials that provide           5         33
     information on access, provide
     clearinghouse for information.

9 = Repeal provisions of Wilderness Act      0         0
     that restrict motors, development, 
     and mechanized use.

10= Increase funding for better access,      0         0
     including facilities, promotion, and 
     scholarships.

11= Rely on people power/human companions    0         0
     to gain access to wilderness.           

DATA TITLE:Recommendations
Appendix 2B.  Tabulations of the Responses from Persons with
                         Disabilities

1) Please name up to 5 wilderness areas of the NWPS you have 
visited since having a disability. (Please refer to enclosed map 
for specific names and locations of NWPS units.)

NWPS unit name           # of respondents

Boundary Waters          44
Teton                    13
Denali                   10
Everglades               10
Badlands                 9
Frank Church/
   River of No Return    6
Kenai                    5
Lake Chelan-Sawtooth     5
Craters of the Moon      4
Hawaii Volcanoes         4
Hells Canyon             4
Yosemite                 4
Bob Marshall             3
Isle Royale              3
Joshua Tree              3
Mt. Rainier              3
Arctic Wildlife Refuge   2
Bandelier                2
Cedar Keys               2
Crab Orchard             2
Florida Keys             2
Haleakala                2
J.N."Ding" Darling       2
Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock   2
Olympic                  2
Petrified Forest         2
Presidential Range       2
Selway-Bitterroot        2
Twin Peaks               2
Wrangell-St. Elias       2
Alexander Springs        1
Alpine Lakes             1
Ansel Adams              1
Black Canyon/Gunnison    1
Bosque del Apache        1
Cache La Poudre          1
Castle Crag              1
Chama River Canyon       1
Charles C. Deam          1
Citico Creek             1
Columbia                 1
Gates of the Arctic      1
Gates of the Mountains   1
Glacier Bay              1
Glacier Peak             1
Golden Trout             1
Great Swamp              1
Gros Ventre              1
Guadalupe Mountains      1
Jarbidge                 1
John Muir                1
Lacassine                1
Lake Clark               1
Lizard Head              1
Mesa Verde               1
Moosehorn                1
Mt. Evans                1
Never Summer             1
Noatak                   1
Okefenokee               1
Pecos                    1
Pinnacles                1
Rainbow Lake             1
Rattlesnake              1
Russel Fjord             1
Saguaro                  1
San Juan Islands         1
San Pedro Parks          1
Seney                    1
South San Juan           1
St. Marks                1
Theodore Roosevelt       1
Three Sisters            1
Upper Buffalo            1
Upper Kiamichi River     1
Washakie                 1
Weminuche                1

DATA TITLE:Wilderness Unit

2) 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.

     1 =  Did not enjoy                 0
     2 =  Enjoyed very little           3
     3 =  Enjoyed somewhat              19
     4 =  Enjoyed very much             72
     5 =  Enjoyed a tremendous amount   113

DATA TITLE:Enj. Rating

3) How many trips have you taken to wilderness areas in the NWPS 
since having a disability?

     1 =  1 trip         11
     2 =  2-4 trips      31
     3 =  5+ trips       38

DATA TITLE:# of Trips

4) What is the longest time you've spent in a Wilderness area in 
the NWPS at one time since having a disability?

     1 =  1 day          6
     2 =  2-3 days       6
     3 =  4+ days        68

DATA TITLE:Trip Length

5) What means of transportation have you used while traveling 
within the NWPS since having a disability? (check all that apply)

     1 =  kayak     23             5 =  dogsled        15
     2 =  raft      23             6 =  hike           31
     3 =  canoe     57             7 =  motorized      4
     4 =  horse     17             8 =  other          4

DATA TITLE:Mode of Transport

6) Did you use any of the following assistive devices on any of 
your trips to the NWPS? (check all that apply)

     1 =  manual wheelchair   40   6 =  guide dog      0
     2 =  electric wheelchair 4    7 =  prostheses     4
     3 =  amigo               1    8 =  none used      13
     4 =  walker              0    9 =  white cane     3
     5 =  crutches/cane       26

DATA TITLE:Asst. Dev. on Trail

7) Do you typically visit the NWPS

     1 =  Alone                    7
     2 =  With friends/family      41
     3 =  With an organized group  58 
          or outfitter

DATA TITLE:Group or Alone

8) Why did you choose to visit the NWPS? (check all that apply)

     1 =  To experience solitude                       42
     2 =  To experience scenery/natural beauty         74
     3 =  To share the experience with family/friends  56
     4 =  To experience a personal challenge           62
     5 =  To experience nature on its own terms        65
     6 =  To enjoy fishing or hunting                  16
     7 =  Other (please explain)_____________________  0

DATA TITLE:  Why Visit

9) Did you check or attempt to check the accessibility of the 
NWPS before your trip?
     
     1 =  yes       37
     2 =  no        42

DATA TITLE:Check Access Before

10) If yes, did you find information from (check all that apply)

     1 =  Organization/outfitter leading trip          27
     2 =  NWPS manager (Forest Service, Park Service,  10
           etc.)
     3 =  Friends who had visited the area before      17
     4 =  Other (please explain)___________________    1

DATA TITLE:Source of Access Info

11) If you did not check the accessibility before your NWPS trip, 
why not?

     1 =  I did not think it was necessary             39
     2 =  I did not know where to look for information 4
     3 =  I could not find any information on          
          accessibility                                4

DATA TITLE:If Not, Why Not?

12) Did you visit the NWPS prior to having a disability?

     1 =  I did visit the NWPS prior to my disability  20
     2 =  I did not visit the NWPS prior to my         32
          disability
     3 =  I was born with my disability                28

DATA TITLE:Visit Prior

13) Before visiting the NWPS, did you have concerns about going 
into a wilderness area that specifically relate to your 
disability?

     1 =  yes       34
     2 =  no        46

DATA TITLE:Have Concerns

     (please explain)_____________________________

The concerns people mentioned are categorized below:

     1 = Concerned about personal endurance/capability 5
     2 = Toileting                                     5
     3 = Trail and facility access                     8
     4 = Want to be independent                        1
     5 = Availability/quality of adapted equipment     2
     6 = Unable to use my white cane                   1
     7 = Emergency evacuation                          1

DATA TITLE:Concern Comments

14) What were the highlights of your visit(s) to the NWPS? (check 
all that apply)

     1 =  Personal achievement/feelings of        66
          accomplishment
     2 =  Solitude/peace                          49
     3 =  People or relationships                 61
     4 =  Scenery or location                     75
     5 =  Personal growth                         51
     6 =  No high points                          1
     7 =  Other (please explain)                  1

DATA TITLE:Highlights

15) What were the low points of your visit(s) to the NWPS? (check 
all that apply)

     1 =  Lack of information about area I        4
          wished to visit
     2 =  Physical discomfort                     10
     3 =  Trails/terrain too rugged               19
     4 =  Undeveloped/primitive campsites         10
     5 =  Uncooperative group members             10
     6 =  Poor access at entry point              10
          (parking, etc.)
     7 =  No low points                           46
     8 =  Other                                   0

DATA TITLE:Lowlights

16) In your opinion, did your disability enhance or inhibit the 
opportunity for you to enjoy the NWPS?

     1 =  Enhanced the opportunity for me         19
     2 =  Inhibited the opportunity for me        29
     3 =  Had no effect on the opportunity for me 32

DATA TITLE:Enhance or Inhibit

17) Do you believe the restrictions on mechanized use within the 
NWPS diminishes your ability to enjoy it?

     1 =  yes       17
     2 =  no        61

DATA TITLE:Opinion of Mech.

     Please explain_______________________________________

A total of 29 people offered explanations.  These explanations 
have been divided according to the yes and no responses stated 
above.

Responses from people who indicated that the restrictions on 
mechanized use diminish their ability to enjoy it:

     Can't use ATV in all areas. I need to use this due to 
     paralysis.

     How do I get out in case of an emergency arises--need 
     mechanized usage.

     Don't want to see paved trails just so cars can drive 
     through.

     Trails difficult for manual chairs, could be helpful to use 
     ATV.

     Would like to be able to use a three-wheeler--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.

     Canoeing is much easier for disabled when there is no wake 
     from outboard motors.

     Disability or age should not stop people from going to 
     wilderness. Managers of the units should rent motorized 
     equipment...government shouldn't limit people from using 
     motors.

     If I were allowed to ride an off-road vehicle it would allow 
     me to see a lot of area I otherwise wouldn't be able to.

     I want to be able to travel by boat and have a close toilet 
     facility.

     Limited access of all-terrain vehicles.

     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.

Responses from people who indicated that the restrictions on 
mechanized use do not diminish their ability to enjoy it:

     It only enhances it.

     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.

     Gas-powered is too noisy and smelly, electric distorts 
     natural experience.

     There are enough areas on the planet that allow machines... 
     by adaptation  persons with disabilities can access the 
     total wilderness areas.

     Mechanized vehicles wouldn't solve anything.

     Mechanized use would undermine the concept of wilderness... 
     keep them out.

     Enjoy the wilderness in its natural state...just requires 
     some assistance from other people to help me adapt.

     Mechanized use would take away from the natural beauty of 
     the wilderness.

     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; then 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 mechanized devices.

     Visit the wilderness on its own terms; otherwise visit the 
     many other areas that are scenic where access is not 
     restricted.

     I believe mechanized wheelchairs should be allowed.

     Limiting mechanized use increases my ability to enjoy the 
     wilderness.

     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.

DATA TITLE:Comments on Mech.

18) Do you have suggestions for improving the ability of persons 
with disabilities to enjoy the NWPS?

Responses to this question were categorized as follows:

Comment codes:                               # of      % of
                                             responses total (80)

0 = Not relevant to question asked.          5         6.25

1 = Encourage/promote use of outfitters      6         7.5
     and guides.                             

2 = Increase accessibility to areas outside  9         11.25
     wilderness (trailheads, parking,
     restrooms, TDDs).

3 = Increase access inside wilderness        8         10
     (boardwalks, widen trails, special 
     permits).

4 = Allow use of wheelchairs.                0         0

5 = Maintain existing regulations--seek      4         5
     access without compromising
     Wilderness Act.

6 = Motors and mechanized use needed for     2         2.5
     access (ATVs, motorboats).

7 = Training and education for wilderness    0         0
     staff on disability awareness.

8 = Develop materials that provide           10        12.5
     information on access, provide
     clearinghouse for information.                    

9 = Repeal provisions of Wilderness Act      0         0
     that restrict motors, development, and
     mechanized use.                         

10= Increase funding for better access,      3         3.75
     including facilities, promotion, and 
     scholarships.                                               

11= Rely on people power/human companions    4         5
     to gain access to wilderness.

DATA TITLE:  Suggestions to Improve Access

19) Do you visit wildlands outside of the NWPS?

     1 =  yes       54
     2 =  no        15

DATA TITLE:Visit Non NWPS

Areas visited outside of the NWPS include:

Yellowstone 
Devils Tower, WY
Yellowstone
Glacier National Park
Grand Canyon
Dinosaur Monument
Rocky Mountain National Park
Green River, CO
Big Bend National Park
St. Croix River
Minnesota River 
Snow Mass,CO
Smokey Mountains
Acadia National Park
Quebec, Ontario
Prince William Sound
Big Lake
Porcupine Mountains
Deschutes River OR
Chequamegon Trail
Penobscot River
Northwest Territories
Allagash River
Olympic Penninsula
Canadian Rockies
NW Ontario
North Fork of Potomac
Youghiohiogheny, PA
New River, WV
New River Gorge,WV
Lake Powell
Jackson Hole,WY
Iditarod Trail, 
Stampede Trail
Yampa River,CO
Eldorado Canyon,CO
Snake River, ID
Adirondacks
Fern Canyon, CA
Grass Valley, CA
Arches National Monument
Chugach
Camp Courage
Blue Mound, MN
Black River.MS 
Shawnee Natl. Forest,IL
Flat Head River, MT
Belize
Great Slave Lake
Apostle Islands
Outer Banks,NC
Canyonlands National Park
S. Manitou Islands
Ammicon, WI
Afton State Park
Dog Island, FL

DATA TITLE:Area Names 

20) Do the experiences you have in wild areas outside the NWPS 
differ from your experiences inside the NWPS?

     1 =  yes       17
     2 =  no        35

DATA TITLE:Experiences Differ

     Please explain_______________________________________

A total of 14 people responded as stated below:

Wilderness is more rugged.

State parks more accessible.

Parks not in the NWPS are less rugged; trails are well traveled.

Out of NWPS, less challenging.

NWPS offers more solitude, less populated.

Non-NWPS have more of a commercial bent to them.

Non-NWPS have advanced structures.

Non-NWPS have paved trails.

Non-NWPS more wheelchair accessible.

More people visible and impact of people visible.

Many areas are making major improvements in facilities; policy 
adaptation for persons who are disabled.

Impact of man on pristine country is highly visible.

Experiences in the NWPS are more rugged.

Areas out of NWPS allow motorized use and large crowds.


DATA TITLE:Comments on Why Differ

21) We want to know more about you.  Please tell us your

     Age__________
Age range      18 to 72 years
Number of respondents by age by category
Age 18 - 29         19
Age 30 - 39         19 
Age 40 - 49         22 
Age 50 - 59         5 
Age 60 - 69         2 
Age 70 - 79         2 

DATA TITLE:Age

     Sex__________
     1 =  Male      44
     2 =  Female    34
     No response    2

DATA TITLE:Sex


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

DATA TITLE:State 

22) Do you have a disability?
     
     1 =  Cognitively impaired                    8
     2 =  Sensory impaired                        7
     3 =  Mobility impaired--non-wheelchair user  25
     4 =  Mobility impaired--wheelchair user      40

DATA TITLE:Disability

23) Do you (check all that apply)

     1 =  use a wheelchair         41
     2 =  use a guide dog          0
     3 =  walk with cane/crutches  15
     4 =  walk with a white cane   6
     5 =  prostheses               4
     6 =  none used                10
     7 =  brace                    2
     8 =  other, please explain    1

DATA TITLE:Asst. Dev. General Life

24) If you have other comments please share them here, or attach 
a separate sheet of paper:

Comment codes:                               # of      % of
                                             responses total (80)

0 = Not relevant to question asked.          6         7.5

1 = Encourage/promote use of outfitters      3         3.75
     and guides.                             

2 = Increase accessibility to areas outside  7         8.75
     wilderness (trailheads, parking,
     restrooms, TDDs).

3 = Increase access inside wilderness        1         1.25
     (boardwalks, widen trails, special 
     permits).

4 = Allow use of wheelchairs.                0         0

5 = Maintain existing regulations--seek      12        15
     access without compromising
     Wilderness Act.

6 = Motors and mechanized use needed for     0         0
     access (ATVs, motorboats).

7 = Training and education for wilderness    0         0         
     staff on disability awareness.               

8 = Develop materials that provide           3         3.75
     information on access, provide
     clearinghouse for information.

9 = Repeal provisions of Wilderness Act      0         0
     that restrict motors, development, 
     and mechanized use.                     

10= Increase funding for better access,      3         3.75
     including facilities, promotion, and 
     scholarships.                                               

11= Rely on people power/human companions    1         1.25
     to gain access to wilderness.           

DATA TITLE:Final Comments

Combined results from suggestions to improve access and final 
comments.  Redundancy has been removed (e.g., if person made same 
type of comment in response to each question they were not 
counted twice).  These figures have been used in suggestions in 
section 4 of the report.

COMBINED Comment codes:                      # of      % of
                                             responses total (80)

0 = Not relevant to question asked.          11        13.75

1 = Encourage/promote use of outfitters      8         10
     and guides.                             

2 = Increase accessibility to areas outside  16        20
     wilderness (trailheads, parking,
     restrooms, TDDs).

3 = Increase access inside wilderness        8         10
     (boardwalks, widen trails, special 
     permits).

4 = Allow use of wheelchairs.                0         0

5 = Maintain existing regulations--seek      15        18.75
     access without compromising
     Wilderness Act.

6 = Motors and mechanized use needed for     2         2.5
     access (ATVs, motorboats).

7 = Training and education for wilderness    0         0
     staff on disability awareness.               

8 = Develop materials that provide           12        15
     information on access, provide 
     clearinghouse for information.                    

9 = Repeal provisions of Wilderness Act      0         0
     that restrict motors, development,
     and mechanized use.

10= Increase funding for better access,      5         6.25
     including facilities, promotion, and 
     scholarships.                                               

11= Rely on people power/human companions    5         6.25
     to gain access to wilderness.
     Appendix 2C.  Tabulations of Responses from NWPS Managers

1) How would you describe the primary terrain type in your 
wilderness unit used by visitors interested in recreation (check 
only one)

     1 =  mountainous                        193
     2 =  swamp, marsh wetland               25
     3 =  forest/heavily vegetated           52
     4 =  lake and/or river                  22
     5 =  desert                             25
     6 =  coastal                            21

DATA TITLE: Terrain Type

2) People who visit your wilderness unit use which of the 
following means of travel? (check all that apply)

     1 =  raft      86        8 =  snowmobile     18
     2 =  canoe     76        9 =  all-terrain    21
     3 =  horse     215            vehicle
     4 =  ski       92        10 = motorboat      41
     5 =  kayak     61        11 = bicycle        23
     6 =  hike      272       12 = airplane       20
     7 =  dogsled   16        13 = other          4

DATA TITLE: Modes of Transport

3) Have you ever received inquiries from persons with 
disabilities about the use of your wilderness unit?
     
     1 =  yes       97
     2 =  no        164
     3 =  don't     40
          know      

DATA TITLE: Inquiries by Disabled

4) If yes, approximately how many inquiries do you receive 
annually?______ (actual number they provide)

DATA TITLE: Yes, How Many

     Is this figure an   1 =  estimate            93
                         2 =  based on exact      13
                              documentation
DATA TITLE: Based on 1

5) How many people with disabilities do you believe use your unit 
of the NWPS each year?_________  (actual number)

DATA TITLE: Persons with disabilities use unit

     Is this figure an   1 =  estimate            256
                         2 =  based on exact      6
                              documentation
DATA TITLE: Based on 2

6) Does your wilderness unit have any information available that 
specifically addresses wilderness use by persons with 
disabilities?

     1 =  yes       7
     2 =  no        292

DATA TITLE: Info on access

7) How do people with disabilities travel while in your 
wilderness unit? (check all that apply)

     1 =  raft      46        8 =  snowmobile     5
     2 =  canoe     32        9 =  all-terrain    13
     3 =  horse     146            vehicle
     4 =  ski       22        10 = motorboat      21
     5 =  kayak     26        11 = bicycle        11
     6 =  hike      182       12 = airplane       10
     7 =  dogsled   5         13 = other          0
     
DATA TITLE: Disabled Mode Transport

8) Do you believe most people with disabilities visit your 
wilderness unit (check only one)

     1 =  Alone               1
     2 =  With family/friends 161
     3 =  In organized groups 27
     4 =  Don't know          85

DATA TITLE: With Whom Visit

     Is this response an  1 = estimate            209
                          2 = based on exact      11
                              documentation
DATA TITLE: Based on 3

9) How do most people without disabilities visit your wilderness 
unit? (check only one)

     1 =  Alone               19
     2 =  With family/friends 270
     3 =  In organized groups 9
     4 =  Don't know          5

DATA TITLE: With Whom Visit 2

     Is this response an      1 =  estimate            227
                              2 =  based on exact      75
                                   documentation
DATA TITLE: Based on 4

10) Does your unit allow for the use of wheelchairs by persons 
with disabilities?

     1 =  yes            183
     2 =  no             100
     3 =  don't know     17

DATA TITLE;Allow Wheelchairs

     Comments_______________________________________________

     Comment codes:                          # of responses

     0 = Not relevant to question asked                3
     1 = Reference to difficulty of terrain            21
     2 = Indicates confusion on wording of question    2
     3 = Reference to accessibility outside of NWPS    2
     4 = Reference to ease of terrain                  1
     5 = No developments or adaptations for wheelchair 3
     6 = Treat wheelchair as pedestrian                1
     7 = Indicates a lack of understanding of policy   1
     8 = First time ever asked about wheelchairs       3
     9 = Nonmotorized only                             1

DATA TITLE:Comments Wheelchair

11) Does your unit make special provisions for use by persons 
with disabilities?

     1 =  yes            59
     2 =  no             224
     3 =  don't know     8

DATA TITLE: Special Provisions

     If yes, what are they? (check all that apply)
     
     1 =  special permits     15 
     2 =  use of motors       11
     3 =  special areas       11 
     4 =  accessibility       14
          information
     5 =  other               1

DATA TITLE: If Yes, What

     (please explain)______________________________________

DATA TITLE: Comments Provisions

12) In your opinion, do the management policies of your agency 
for NWPS units inhibit the enjoyment of persons with 
disabilities?

     1 =  yes       67
     2 =  no        233
     No response    3

DATA TITLE: Policies Inhibit

     If yes, why?___________If no, why not?________________
     
     Comment codes:                          # of responses

     0 = Not relevant to question asked.               10

     1 = Reference to difficulty of terrain            22
     2 = Agency policy does not inhibit, but 
          provisions of Wilderness Act 
          do inhibit.                                  12

     3 = Need to work/network more with 
          disabled persons.                            7

     4 = Policies do not inhibit any more 
          than they do for nondisabled.                14

     5 = Wheelchairs are prohibited in wilderness.     4

     6 = We should emphasize experiences and 
          facilities outside of wilderness.            8

     7 = Need more funding for access.                 10

     8 = Wilderness preservation takes 
          precedence over access.                      5

     9 = Revise current policies to                    7
          increase accessibility.

DATA TITLE: Comments on Policies


13) Do you provide any of the following to the general population 
prior to their visiting wilderness areas? (check all that apply)

     1 =  advice                        248
     2 =  informational wilderness      219
          travel materials
     3 =  special training              15
     4 =  other                         6

DATA TITLE: Info to General

14) What is the official name of the unit(s) of the NWPS that you 
manage? (please list them all if more than one)

DATA TITLE: Unit Name

15) For which federal agency do you work?___________________

     1 =  BLM       13
     2 =  NPS       39
     3 =  USFS      210
     4 =  FWS       42

DATA TITLE: What Agency

16) What is your official job title?_________________________

17) How many years have you personally been involved in the 
management of this wilderness area?________

18) Please elaborate on what, if anything, you think could be 
done to facilitate enjoyment of your NWPS unit by persons with 
disabilities:

Comment codes:                               # of      % of
                                             responses total 
(304)

0 = Not relevant to question asked.          20        6.6

1 = Encourage/promote use of outfitters                
     and guides.                             41        13.4

2 = Increase accessibility to areas outside
     wilderness (trailheads, parking,
     restrooms, TDDs).                       34        11.2

3 = Increase access inside wilderness 
     (boardwalks, widen trails, special 
     permits).                               30        9.9

4 = Allow use of wheelchairs.                5         1.6

5 = Maintain existing regulations--seek 
     access without compromising
     Wilderness Act.                         11        3.6

6 = Motors and mechanized use needed for 
     access (ATVs, motorboats).              4         1.3       

7 = Training and education for wilderness                   
     staff on disability awareness.          5         1.64

8 = Develop materials that provide 
     information on access, provide
     clearinghouse for information.          47        15.5

9 = Repeal provisions of Wilderness Act that 
     restrict motors, development, and                      
     mechanized use.                         3         1

10= Increase funding for better access, 
     including facilities, promotion, and 
     scholarships.                           8         2.63 

11= Rely on people power/human companions to 
     gain access to wilderness.              1         .33

DATA TITLE: Overall Comments

19) Is this NWPS unit jointly managed with other agencies?

     1 =  yes       112
     2 =  no        192

DATA TITLE: Jointly Managed

20) What state is your unit in?

DATA TITLE: State

 Appendix 3.  Outfitters, Organizations, and Wilderness Advocates
             Contacted for Participation in the Study

Mark Havens
Accessible Adventures
250 NE Tomahawk Island Drive
Portland, OR  97217
503/789-1019

Bob Jordan *
Activities Unlimited, Inc.
P.O. Box 324
Helena, MT  59624
406/442-7809

Nancy Ertter 
Alternate Mobility Adventure Seekers
BSU P.E. Dept
1910 University Dr.
Boise, ID  83725
208/385-3030

Tom McPike
Bay Area Outreach/Rec
605 Eshleman Hall/U of CA Berkeley
Berkeley, CA  94720
415/849-4662

Gary Robb
Bradford Woods 
5040 State Road 67 North
Martinsville, IN  46151
812/885-0227

Scott Engram
Breckenridge Outdoor Ed. Ctr.
P.O. Box 697
Breckenridge, CO  80424
303/453-6422

Patrick Reinhart
Challenge Alaska
P.O. Box 110065
Anchorage, AK  99511
907/563-2658

Jim Wise
Cooperative Wilderness 
  Handicapped Outdoor Group (CW HOG)
Box 8118
Pocatello, ID  83209
208/236-3912


Bill Dvorak
Dvorak's Kayak Expeditions
17921 Hwy 285
Nathrop, CO  81236
(719) 539-6851

Diane Poslosky
Environmental Traveling Companions
Fort Mason Center, Bldg. C
San Francisco, CA  94123
415/474-7662

Everglades Program *
North Carolina Outward Bound School
121 No. Sterling
Morganton, NC  28655

Al Coar *
Outward Bound
690 Market St. #500
San Francisco, CA  94101
415/398-9626

David Cappetta
Voyageur Outward Bound
10900 Cedar Lake Road
Minnetonka, MN  55343
612/542-6255

Shorty Powers *
P.O.I.N.T (Paraplegics On Independent Nature Trips)
3200 Mustang Dr.
Grapevine, TX  76051

Tom Smith
Racoon Institute
PO Box 35A
Cazenovia, WI  53924
(608) 983-2327

Claire Coonan
Special Populations Learning Outdoor 
  Recreation & Education (S'plore) 
699 E. South Temple, #120
Salt Lake City, UT  84102
801/363-7130

David Espeseth
SOAR
P.O. Box 14583
Portland, OR  97214-4583
503/238-1613

Charlie Ross
Sobek Expeditions
P.O. Box 1089  
Angels Camp, CA  95222
209/736-4524

Dale Abell
The Ability Center
5605 Monroe St.
Sylvania, OH  43560
419/885-5733

Phyllis Cangemi *
Total Access Camping
23777 Mulhooland Hwy, #118
Calabasas, CA  91302

Darrell Knuffke
The Wilderness Society
777 Grant St., Suite 606
Denver, CO 80203
303/839-1175

Michael Kellett
Wilderness Society
20 Park Plaza, Suite 536
Boston, MA 02116
617/350-8866


* Did not respond


    Appendix 4.  National Council Member and Staff Biographies


National Council Members

Sandra Swift Parrino
     As National Council chairperson, Sandra Swift Parrino has 
played an active role on key issues affecting the lives of people 
with disabilities.  Nominated by President Reagan in 1982, 
appointed chair by the President in 1983 and reappointed by 
President Bush, Sandra Parrino has supported the rights of people 
with disabilities before Congress, in the media, and before 
groups nationwide.  Under her leadership, the National Council is 
a driving force with respect to creating public policies that 
affect the nation's people with disabilities.
     During her tenure as chair, the National Council has worked 
toward creating and enacting legislation for people with 
disabilities; issued a policy statement, National Policy for 
Persons with Disabilities; convened hearings nationwide to 
solicit comments and recommendations from people with 
disabilities about discrimination; issued a major report, Toward 
Independence, which outlined key components of a comprehensive 
civil rights law protecting people with disabilities; initiated 
the first national survey of attitudes and experiences of 
Americans with disabilities in conjunction with Louis Harris and 
Associates, Inc.; issued On the Threshold of Independence, a 
report outlining specifics of the Americans With Disabilities 
Act; created and developed the Americans with Disabilities Act; 
participated with President Bush at the signing of the Americans 
with Disabilities Act; conducted the first National Conference on 
the Prevention of Primary and Secondary Disabilities; and issued 
reports with regard to minorities with disabilities, personal 
assistance services, health insurance, the financing of assistive 
technology, and the education of students with disabilities.
     Before becoming National Council chair, Sandra Parrino 
founded and directed the Office for the Disabled, in the Towns of 
Ossining and Briarcliff Manor, N.Y., where she created a regional 
program for public and private organizations that focused on 
programs for people with disabilities and compliance with 504.  
She has more than 25 years' experience on boards, councils, 
commissions, committees and task forces at the federal, regional, 
state and local levels, and as an expert witness, community 
leader, organizer and activist.
     Sandra Parrino has represented the U.S. government on 
disability issues in many countries.  She has been invited by the 
Department of State to represent the United States at the 
Meetings of Experts in Finland, and China and represented the 
United States at the United Nations Center for Social Development 
in Vienna several times.  In 1990, 1991, 1992 she was invited by 
the Department of State to be a delegate at the Third Committee 
on Social Development of the United Nations.  In 1991, she was 
invited by the People's Republic of China to assist them in their
efforts to help people with disabilities.  At the request of the 
government of Czechoslovakia, she and the National Council were 
invited to conduct the Eastern European Conference on 
Disabilities for participants from Czechoslovakia, Poland and 
Hungary.
     Sandra Parrino graduated from Briarcliff College with a B.A. 
in history, and completed courses at Bennett College, GuildHall 
School of Drama in London, and the Yale School of Languages. In 
1992, Mrs. Parrino received an Honorary Doctorate of Humane 
Letters from St. John's University in New York.  Her husband, 
Richard is a  rheumatologist.  They have three children, two of 
whom have disabilities.  Sandra Parrino was born in New Haven, 
Conn. and now resides in Briarcliff Manor, New York.

Kent Waldrep, Jr.
     Kent Waldrep has been involved with disability issues on a 
local, state, and national level since suffering a spinal cord 
injury in 1974 while playing football for Texas Christian 
University. Since 1981, Waldrep has served on the National 
Council by presidential appointment. He is National Council vice 
chair and chairman of the Research and Prevention Committee. He 
has been instrumental in formulating the National Council 
initiative on preventing primary and secondary disabilities.
     Waldrep, one of 15 original ADA drafters, gave the 
legislation its name. He has lectured nationwide on subjects 
ranging from national disability policy to medical research 
targeted at curing paralysis. He founded the American Paralysis 
Association and the Kent Waldrep National Paralysis Foundation. 
He has appeared on Good Morning America, the Today Show, the NBC 
Nightly News, and CNN, and has been featured in People and Look 
magazines, USA Today, and others.
     He was selected by the U.S. Jaycees as one of 1985's 10 
Outstanding Young Men in America and received a special award 
from the Texas Sports Hall of Fame and a Sports/Fitness Award 
from the President's Council on Physical Fitness. Kent Waldrep 
Days are celebrated in four Texas cities and Birmingham, Alabama. 
He serves on many boards, including the Texas Rehabilitation 
Commission. He is past chairman of the Texas Governor's Committee 
for Disabled Persons and now chairs the Dallas Rehabilitation 
Institute. He also is chairman of Turbo-Resins, Inc., a 
family-owned and -operated aviation-repair business. He lives in 
Plano, Texas, with his wife Lynn and two sons, Trey and Charles 
Cavenaugh.

Linda Wickett Allison
     Linda Allison of Dallas, Texas, is a long-time advocate of 
people with disabilities. She is a board member of the National 
Paralysis Foundation and a trustee for the International Spinal 
Research Trust. Allison, who grew up in Fort Worth, has three 
children. Her daughter Marcy was paralyzed from the waist down in 
a 1979 automobile accident. Marcy graduated from the University 
of Texas School of Law in 1986 and practices law in Austin. 
Allison's late husband, James N. Allison, Jr., owned the Midland 
Reporter
Telegram and other newspapers in Texas and Colorado and was 
former deputy chair of the Republican National Committee.

Ellis B. Bodron
     Ellis Bodron of Vicksburg, Mississippi, has been a 
practicing attorney since 1947.  He served 36 years as a member 
of the Mississippi Legislature--one term in the House of 
Representatives and eight terms in the Mississippi Senate.  
Bodron also chaired the Senate Finance Committee from 1961 until 
1983.
     Bodron, who is blind, is associated with several civic 
organizations, including the Vicksburg Lions Club, Vicksburg 
Chamber of Commerce, and the University of Mississippi Alumni 
Association.  In addition, Bodron is a member of the Advisory 
Board of Directors, Deposit Guaranty National Bank.
     Bodron has also been a member of the Agriculture and 
Industrial Board, which preceded the Board of Economic 
Development, and the Committee of Budget and Accounting and Board 
of Trustees of the Mississippi Public Employees Retirement 
System.
     Ellis Bodron graduated with a Bachelor of Arts and a 
Bachelor of Laws Degree from the University of Mississippi.  He 
is married with two children.

Larry Brown, Jr.
     Since 1981, Larry Brown of Potomac, Maryland, has been the 
Xerox business and community relations manager for the 
Mid-Atlantic Region, Coastal Operations, Custom Systems Division. 
In 1991 he became Government and Community Relations Manager with 
Integrated Systems Operations.
     Brown was a running back for the Washington Redskins for 
eight years. During that time he received many awards, including 
Most Valuable Player in the National Football League for 1972, 
and was recently inducted into the Washington, D.C., Touchdown 
Hall of Fame.
     After retiring from football in 1977, he worked at E.F. 
Hutton as a personal financial management adviser. He has been 
special assistant to the director, Office of Minority Business 
Enterprise, Department of Commerce. He is involved with youth, 
people with disabilities, and senior citizens. Brown has spoken 
at schools, colleges, and universities on topics such as 
motivation, discipline, and camaraderie. He works with many 
organizations, including the Friends of the National Institute on 
Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, the Deafness Research 
Foundation, and the Vincent Lombardi Foundation.

Mary Ann Mobley Collins
     A former Miss America who lives in Beverly Hills, 
California, Mary Ann Collins has a career in film, television, 
and on Broadway. She has co-hosted the National March of Dimes 
telethons with her husband, Emmy-award winning actor Gary 
Collins, and serves as National Chair of the Mother's March 
Against Birth Defects. She is a member of SHARE, a Los 
Angeles-based women's organization that has raised more than $6 
million for the
Exceptional Children's Foundation for the Mentally Retarded. She 
serves on the National Board of the Crohns and Colitis 
Foundation.
     Collins helped raise funds for the Willwood Foundation in 
her native Mississippi, which provides homes for young adults 
with mental and physical learning disabilities. She has received 
many awards and honors, including the 1990 International 
Humanitarian Award from the Institute for Human Understanding, 
Woman of Distinction 1990 from the National Foundation for 
Ileitis and Colitis, and the HELP Humanitarian Award of 1985 from 
HELP for Handicapped Children. She has filmed documentaries in 
Cambodia, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Somalia, Kenya, Sudan, and 
Bolivia on the plight of starving children and people with 
disabilities.

Anthony H. Flack
     Anthony Flack of Norwalk, Connecticut, is president of 
Anthony H. Flack & Associates. He has been a member of the board 
of Families and Children's Aid of Greater Norwalk and has worked 
with the Child Guidance Center of Greater Bridgeport, the Youth 
Shelter in Greenwich, Hall Neighborhood House in Bridgeport, and 
the Urban League of Greater Bridgeport. Flack is a member of the 
Allocations and Admissions Committee, United Way of Norwalk, and 
received the Bell Award for outstanding service in the field of 
mental health at the Bridgeport Chapter, Connecticut Association 
of Mental Health.

John A. Gannon
     John Gannon of Cleveland, Ohio, and Washington, D.C., 
founded John A. Gannon and Associates. His firm has offices in 
Columbus and Cleveland, Ohio; Denver, Colorado; and Washington, 
D.C. A fire fighter for more than 30 years, Gannon was an active 
leader of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) 
Local 93. Starting as a member of the local IAFF committee, he 
eventually became president, a position he held for 10 years 
before being elected to national office.
     In September 1988, Gannon was elected IAFF President 
Emeritus. He had served as president of the 170,000-member 
organization since 1980. Under his leadership, the IAFF expanded 
its role in occupational safety and health.
     Concerned about the hazards of his profession, he guided and 
directed a series of programs to promote greater safety and 
health protection. One program sponsored research on safer 
garments and equipment for fire fighters. Gannon also fostered 
development of the IAFF Burn Foundation, which raises funds for 
research on the care of burn victims. In 1985, the Metropolitan 
General Hospital, in Cleveland dedicated a John Gannon Burn and 
Trauma Center in recognition of his support for the hospital.
     Gannon was elected vice president of the AFL-CIO, with which 
the IAFF is affiliated. Within the AFL-CIO he is vice president 
of the Public Employee Department. On the Executive Council, he 
is a member of several committees. He serves on the board of the 
National Joint Council of Fire Service Organizations and in 1982 
served as its chairman. He is a member of the board of the
Muscular Dystrophy Association. Gannon attended Miami University 
in Ohio and Glasgow University in Scotland, and studied at 
Baldwin-Wallace College and Cleveland State University.


John Leopold
     John Leopold of Pasadena, Maryland, has 18 years' experience 
in elected state office. He was elected to the Hawaii State House 
of Representatives in 1968 and re-elected in 1972. In 1974, 
Leopold was elected to the Hawaii State Senate. In 1982, he 
became the first Republican in Maryland history elected from 
District 31 in Anne Arundel County to the Maryland House of 
Delegates, where he served until 1991.
     An advocate of people with disabilities, Leopold is a member 
of the Learning Disabilities Association of Anne Arundel County, 
the Anne Arundel County Committee on Employment of People with 
Disabilities, and the University of Maryland Hospital Infant 
Study Center Planning Advisory Board. He has served in other 
appointed and elected positions, including the Hawaii State Board 
of Education in 1968, the National Advisory Council for the 
Education of Disadvantaged Children in 1977, and the Maryland 
State Accountability Task Force for Public Education in 1974.
     Leopold has written and produced cable television 
commercials in Maryland, written a weekly interview column for a 
local publication, and hosted and produced a weekly radio public 
affairs program. He graduated from Hamilton College in Clinton, 
New York, with a B.A. in English.

Robert S. Muller
     Robert Muller of Grandville, Michigan, began his career with 
Steelcase, Inc., in 1966 and is now an administrator. He is an 
adjunct associate professor in the Department of Psychology at 
Aquinas College and in the Department of Education at Calvin 
College in Grand Rapids. He serves on the board of trustees for 
Hope Network and Foundation in Grand Rapids, which serves 1,700 
adults with disabilities. In April 1981, he received an honorary 
degree in educational psychology from the Free University in 
Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
     Muller holds a B.S. in business administration from Aquinas 
College and in 1978 was voted Outstanding Alumnus of the Year. He 
has lectured at colleges and universities nationally and 
internationally. He is a board member for several national, 
state, and local organizations.
     In May 1987, Muller and his wife hosted a first-time event 
at the White House with the Vice President. The Celebration of 
Disabled Americans at Work was cosponsored by several major 
corporations. He now serves as president of the National 
Roundtable on Corporate Development for Americans with 
Disabilities. In 1985, Muller received the Liberty Bell Award 
from the Grand Rapids Bar Association. In 1988, he was national 
co-chair of the Disabled Americans for President Bush campaign.

George H. Oberle, PED
     George Oberle of Stillwater, Oklahoma, has more than 35 
years' experience in the field of health, physical education, and 
recreation. He began his career as a high school teacher and 
coach and has been a professor and director of the School of 
Health, Physical Education and Leisure at Oklahoma State 
University since 1974. Oberle is a consultant to many 
organizations in the area of administration and adaptive physical 
education. In 1988, he worked with the Kennedy Foundation to 
organize and direct a new program of unified sports for the 
Special Olympics.
     Oberle chaired the College and University Administrators' 
Council (1980-82); he was president of the Association for 
Research, Administration, Professional Councils and Societies 
(1984-87); and served as a board member of the American 
Association of Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 
(1985-89). Awards include the 1985 Centennial Award from the 
American Association of Health, Physical Education, Recreation 
and Dance; and Meritorious Service Awards from Indiana and 
Oklahoma.
     He was selected for Men of Achievement in 1975 and 
recognized in Who's Who of the Southwest in 1977. Oberle received 
his doctorate from Indiana University in administration and 
adapted physical education, and has written many books and 
articles. He lectures extensively about wellness promotion, 
adapted physical activity, sports, and recreation for people with 
disabilities.

Mary Matthews Raether
     Mary Raether of McLean, Virginia, is associated with St. 
John's Child Development Center, a nonprofit organization 
providing instruction, employment training, and independent and 
group home living skills for people with severe mental 
disabilities, especially those with autism. Raether has been an 
officer and trustee of St. John's since 1985 and has chaired the 
public relations committee and participated on the executive, 
nominating, investment, and development committees.
     Raether has been active in civic, educational, and religious 
organizations in the Washington metropolitan area. While 
community vice president of the Junior League of Washington, she 
developed emergency grant procedures and fund-raising information 
services for small and emerging nonprofit organizations. Raether 
has 10 years' experience as legislative assistant to Reps. George 
Bush and Barber Conable. She specialized in tax, social security, 
Medicare/Medicaid, and trade issues. She considers her efforts in 
clarifying the tax status of lobbying by nonprofit organizations 
an outstanding career accomplishment. She received a B.A. from 
the University of Texas at Austin in 1962. She is married and has 
two children.

Anne Crellin Seggerman
     Anne Crellin Seggerman, of Fairfield, Connecticut, is the 
founder of Fourth World Foundation, Inc., a company engaged in 
the development of interfaith media.
     A member of the Bridgeport Urban Gardens and Youth at 
Risk/Breakthrough Foundation, Seggerman founded and serves as the 
chairman of the board of the Fairfield County Chapter of Huxley 
Institute for Biosocial Research.  She previously was a member of 
the President's Committee on Mental Retardation.
     Seggerman is listed in Who's Who of American Women and has 
received numerous honors including an Honorary Doctor of Humane 
Letters Award from Sacred Heart University, the Association of 
Knights and Ladies of the Holy Sepulchre, and the American 
Association of the Order of Malta.  She was previously appointed 
to serve on the Housing of Handicapped Families of the Department 
of Housing and Urban Development.
     Seggerman is experienced in providing care, treatment, and 
rehabilitation to chronic and acute schizophrenia, and has 
extensive experience with alcoholics and children with learning 
disabilities. She is married, with six adult children.

Michael B. Unhjem
     Michael Unhjem of Fargo, North Dakota, is president of Blue 
Cross/Blue Shield of North Dakota. The youngest member in state 
history elected to the North Dakota House of Representatives, 
Unhjem is a member of the National Conference of Commissioners on 
Uniform State Laws. In 1988, he served as president of the 
National Mental Health Association.
     He has been involved in local and national organizations, 
including the Advisory Mental Health Council of the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services; the Governor's 
Commission on Mental Health Services; the National Alliance for 
Research on Schizophrenia and Depression; and the National Mental 
Health Leadership Forum. Awards include the 1989 Special 
Presidential Commendation from the American Psychiatric 
Association, the 1988 Distinguished Leadership Award from the 
North Dakota Psychological Association, and the National 
Excellence in Leadership Award from North Dakota.
     He was recognized by Who's Who in American Politics and 
Who's Who in North Dakota. Unhjem graduated magna cum laude with 
a B.A. in history and political science from Jamestown College in 
North Dakota in 1975. In 1978, he earned a J.D. with distinction 
from the University of North Dakota School of Law in Grand Forks. 
He is married and has two children.

Helen Wilshire Walsh
     Helen Walsh of Greenwich, Connecticut, is a board member of 
the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, the largest U.S. 
rehabilitation center. She has been involved in disability 
advocacy for many years and has been associated with the 
Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine at the New York Medical 
Center, where she served as associate trustee. She has served as 
vice president, president, and chairman of the board of 
Rehabilitation International USA.
     Walsh has been a member of the President's Committee on the 
Employment of People with Disabilities, and was appointed by the
President to serve as a member of the National Advisory Council 
of Vocational Rehabilitation. In 1976, Walsh received the Henry 
J. Kessler Award for outstanding service in the rehabilitation 
field. She has received the Rehabilitation International Award 
for Women and the Anwar Sadat Award for outstanding work in the 
field of rehabilitation.



National Council Staff

Ethel D. Briggs
     Ethel Briggs is executive director of the National Council 
on Disability. In seven years at the National Council, Briggs 
served as the acting executive director, deputy executive 
director, and director of Adult Services. Briggs is former chief 
of the Office of Staff Development and Training for the 
Washington, D.C., Rehabilitation Services Administration. Prior 
experience includes employment as a rehabilitation counselor 
supervisor, vocational rehabilitation counselor and part-time 
college instructor at George Washington University. Briggs, a 
long-time advocate for people with disabilities, graduated from 
North Carolina Central University and holds a master's degree in 
counseling from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 
She was recognized by Dollar & Sense Magazine as one of the Top 
100 African American Business and Professional Women of 1989. 
Briggs also was recognized in Outstanding Women in America in 
1976 and by Who's Who in American Colleges and Universities in 
1971.

Harold W. Snider, PhD
     Harold Snider, selected as deputy executive director in June 
1990, was previously the first director of outreach for people 
with disabilities at the Republican National Committee. He served 
as executive director of the American Impact Foundation and was 
president of Access for Handicapped, Inc. Snider holds a B.S. in 
international studies from Georgetown University, a master's 
degree in history from the University of London, and a doctorate 
in history from Oxford University in England. He is the author of 
two books on disability, The United States Welcomes Handicapped 
Visitors and Museums and Handicapped Students: Guidelines for 
Education.

Billie Jean Hill
     Billie Jean Hill joined the staff of the National Council on 
Disability as program specialist in March 1992.  Previously, Hill 
was director of communications and editor for the Blinded 
Veterans Association and, earlier, she served as founding 
director of a statewide broadcast service for persons with 
reading disabilities with Mississippi Educational Television in 
her home state.  She was appointed to work on a governor's 
commission in Mississippi to report on the needs of children and 
youth in rural Mississippi who are disabled.  Hill studied 
journalism and education at
Mississippi University for Women and at the University of London 
in England.  She serves as chairperson of the Board of 
Publications for the American Council of the Blind.

Janice Mack
     Janice Mack, who serves as the administrative officer for 
the National Council, was formerly employed with the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Mack graduated from 
Calvin Coolidge High School.

Mark S. Quigley
     Mark Quigley joined the staff as a public affairs specialist 
in May 1990. He previously served as a consultant to the U.S. 
National Commission on Drug-free Schools. He is a former program 
coordinator at the U.S. Interagency Council on the Homeless, and 
former director of communications at the White House Conference 
on Small Business. Quigley graduated magna cum laude in 1979 from 
Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale with an A.A. in 
general studies. He received a B.A. in government and politics in 
1983, and an MPA in public administration in 1990 from George 
Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia.

Katherine D. Seelman, PhD
     Katherine Seelman joined the National Council staff in 1989 
as a research specialist. She is former director of Public 
Education, Research and Technological Services at the 
Massachusetts Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. She 
was a research scholar at Gallaudet University in Washington, 
D.C., and a consultant to the American Association of Retired 
Persons.
     Seelman received a doctorate in public policy and a master's 
degree in political science from New York University, and a B.A. 
in political science from Hunter College in New York. She is the 
author of many published articles, including "Communication 
Accessibility: A Technology Agenda for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing 
People," International Journal of Technology and Aging; 
"Communication Accessibility for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing People; 
An Expanded Concept of Access," Journal of Disability Policy 
Studies; and "A Comparison of Federal Laws Toward Disabled and 
Racial Ethnic Groups in the USA," Disability, Handicap and 
Society.

Brenda Bratton
     Brenda Bratton, executive secretary for the National 
Council, was formerly employed as a secretary at the National 
Transportation Safety Board. Bratton graduated from Farmville 
Central High School and the Washington School for Secretaries.

Stacey S. Brown
     Stacey Brown is staff assistant to the chairperson and has 
been employed by the National Council since 1986. Prior 
experience includes employment as a receptionist and clerk with 
the Board for International Broadcasting and with the Compliance 
and Enforcement
Unit of the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 
Board, where he was a student assistant. Brown is a graduate of 
Howard University in Washington, D.C., where he earned a B.A. in 
political science in 1987.

Consultant

Gregory J. Lais
     Greg Lais is the executive director of Wilderness Inquiry, 
Inc., a Minneapolis-based nonprofit organization specializing in 
adventure travel and wilderness issues involving people with 
disabilities.