View Full Version : Restrictions on wheels in Wilderness Areas?
Drew Bedo
2-Apr-2017, 15:29
A thread in the ULF forum got off topic in a discussion about rules in Federal Wilderness Areas that prohibit anything with wheels. The thread was about wheeled load carriers for the largeand heavy cameras and accessories.
We got off topic a bit discussing the prohibition of any wheeled device in a Wilderness Area. My question is; Is there no allowance for say, a hand powered wheelchair? The Americans With Disabilities Act is pretty universal. I am not saying that a Wilderness Area should have ramps and boardwalks, far from it. But a wheelbarrow or dolly for photographic gear should not seem too jariong to anyone but a obsessive purist in my view.
Anyone actually KNOW if there are any exemptions for persons with disabilities?
Bob Salomon
2-Apr-2017, 15:40
See https://www.google.com/search?q=handicap%20access%20in%20federal%20wilderness%20areas&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Drew Bedo
2-Apr-2017, 18:00
Well I did look at that report first off. The report doesn't seem to be a policy statement or regulatory guide, but rather a summery of the accessability of Federal lands under different agencies. Pretty good for most.
For wilderness areas, apparently, one can use a non powered wheelchair, which seems reasonable.
Yet the question central to these forums is really how to transpoert unwieldy photographic equipment. I am assuming that pack anamals are ok, but not really the optimal solution.
Anyone have more definite information? Why can't we use a wheel barrow-like device or a golf-bag pull cart based system? How does the medre rotation of revolving parts mar the wilderness experience?
David Lobato
2-Apr-2017, 19:36
Have you thought of horses or mules for yourself and your gear? That is perfectly legal where permitted. Hire a guide and he/she can handle the extra items necessary for wilderness travel; extra clothing, food, shelter, cooking gear, and more. Then you can travel the several miles on uphill grades to outstanding scenery, and return in one piece.
I was a wilderness ranger in California for ten seasons. So I suppose some might lump me in with the obsessive purists, LOL!
As far as I can find out, wheelchairs can be used in the wilderness, but it is clearly stated that only devises for moving a person are allowed -- and they must be of a type normally found in use indoors:
"...any wheelchair or mobility device, including one that is battery-powered, that is designed solely for use by a mobility-impaired person for locomotion, and that is suitable for use in an indoor pedestrian area."
Also the gov't is not required to maintain trails or other facilities to accomindate wheelchairs/handicapped people in a wilderness.
They are pretty specific in banning hand carts, bikes, wheel borrows, and the like. And I totally agree. I managed a wilderness area for ten years...but of course one does not manage the wild. One manages the human impact on the wild. No one seems to like a line drawn in the sand and folks will stretch rules as far as they can. So no wheels in the wilderness. Just the way it is. To work on the trails, we packed mules, hand tools and used cross-cut saws ('misery whips') instead of chain saws -- cutting trees off the trails up to 3 foot diameter.
Thousands of miles of non-wilderness trails if you need a cart.
goamules
3-Apr-2017, 05:41
I feel the wilderness rules are good to disallow any wheels, power tools like chain saws, etc. I wish they'd also disallow overflights at low altitude too. There are too few areas that are primeval, and as they were 1,000 years ago. The Leopold and Abbey ethic is to keep a few areas very primitive, and you have to work to enter them. The alternative is the roads with little pulloffs so you can stop your car, take a picture, and "pretend" you are in wilderness. Or Forest Service areas where you try to have solitude, but high speed quad riders have turned it into an extreme motocross track for thrills. Or zip lines, or the glass walkway over the edge of the Grand Canyon, or bikers wizzing by you on every trail. See what I mean? If you want a challenge, without nice clean restrooms and crowds of people that would get lost 1/2 mile off the trail, we need Wilderness. I'm glad for my time spent in it, often seeing no one. Making it "easier" for photographers or hunters or recreation is precisely against the whole idea.
When my family was too small to keep up with me backpacking into Wilderness, I bought mules. We took many trips packing in, just like our forefathers did 150 years ago.
Drew Bedo
3-Apr-2017, 05:47
Have you thought of horses or mules for yourself and your gear? That is perfectly legal where permitted. Hire a guide and he/she can handle the extra items necessary for wilderness travel; extra clothing, food, shelter, cooking gear, and more. Then you can travel the several miles on uphill grades to outstanding scenery, and return in one piece.
I am sure that pack anamals are effective. You left out llamas btw.
But they don't travel well via air or car.
Drew Bedo
3-Apr-2017, 06:24
"I was a wilderness ranger in California for ten seasons. So I suppose some might lump me in with the obsessive purists, LOL!"
Vaughn: Thank you for your years of service managing wilderness areas.
"As far as I can find out, wheelchairs can be used in the wilderness, but it is clearly stated that only devises for moving a person are allowed -- and they must be of a type normally found in use indoors:"
"...any wheelchair or mobility device, including one that is battery-powered, that is designed solely for use by a mobility-impaired person for locomotion, and that is suitable for use in an indoor pedestrian area."
Well that is wonderful. Having worked at the Houston VA Hospital for twelve years, I have seen about every type of manual and powered wheelchair designed for pedestrian areas. Many of them will carry LF and ULF sized loads of gear for short distances over Golf Course type terrain.
[I]
"Also the gov't is not required to maintain trails or other facilities to accommodate wheelchairs/handicapped people in a wilderness."
Terrain has never been an issue for me. Wilderness is wild. However maintained structures do have to be accessible.
"They are pretty specific in banning hand carts, bikes, wheel borrows, and the like. And I totally agree. I managed a wilderness area for ten years...but of course one does not manage the wild. One manages the human impact on the wild. "
Thousands of miles of non-wilderness trails if you need a cart."
No need for a hand cart if a photographer can bring in a powered wheel chair.
Vaughn: Again, thanks for the work you did and for this solid informqation. So often we get stories and guesses without support.
Cheers to all
Drew Bedo
3-Apr-2017, 06:40
My College roommate was a volunteer Ranger in a small Wilderness Area in Origon for several summers. He told me a hilarious story about a visit from a political celebrity. To keep it short,the part I liked best involved my friend holding off a fleet of news helicopters with threats of writing big federal tickets for the pilots if they landed ( CFR-blah-blah, federal court, FAA and so on).
The celebrity politico was delighted to find that the one place he could ditch his entourage in the wilderness was at the top of the watch tower with my old roommate. They talked about trout fishing.
Very little of the 150 miles of trail I maintained in the wilderness would allow for a wheelchair! And after the 25 years since I left that job, the trails have deteriated to a point when people on foot have enough trouble! I would say on the average, one might get a 1/4 mile in with enough work in a wheelchair. Trails too steep, no more crews out there to remove fallen trees and brush, repair erosion on the trails, maintain creek crossings...actually, it is more of a wilderness now than when I worked there!
Maintained structures in a wilderness do not have to be ADA approved/handicapped accessible. (trails, outhouses, hitching racks, bridges, etc).
Michael Rosenberg
3-Apr-2017, 13:55
Of all the many trails I have hike in state and national forests, BLM land, and National Parks, the terrain and footing would be enough of a barrier to any wheeled contraption. And as for powered wheel barrows,, or mountain bikes, or ATM vehicles, they are very destructive. I remember hiking in the Escalante, and sinking up to the top of my boots in what turned out to be quicksand - but looked like a nice easy path. And pn slick rock the tires would be very destructive. The BLM forbids shod animals in it's lands because the hooves are destructive; but you can hire a Llama outfitter to haul your gear. We did that 3 years straight out of Bluff, but as the Llama wrangler would advise you the Llama doesn't care if the gear in the pannier is fragile or not. I would be very pissed if I hiked out in the wilderness and saw the landscape tore up by some wheeled conveyance in the middle of my composition.
And not everywhere does the world need to be made wheel chair accessible, even though I am very sympathetic.163417
Hire a student to carry your ULF gear like Smith and Chamlee.
Mike
goamules
3-Apr-2017, 14:15
I mule packed into the upper range of the Gila Wilderness about 10 years ago. The trails had not been maintained in a couple years, and there were a lot of downed trees. In several parts of the trail we had to pull out a bucksaw and cut downed trees out of the trail a half dozen times per hour. The slope was so steep, you couldn't even walk mules above or below the trail to get around the tree. One of my friend's horses mis stepped, and rolled down the switchback in front of me and my two mules, wedging himself against a tree further down. Even if they allowed wheelchairs in Wilderness (and they don't, you'll be fined immediately if they catch you trying your loophole to carry cameras) you'd make it about 1 mile before crying in frustration at all the mud, rocks, bees, wind, squirrels, and a few bears. Keep wilderness wild. Take your LF photos in the National Parks with paved walking trails.
You really need to check with the place you are going. There are LOTS of National Parks and Wilderness Areas, like the Guadalupe Mountains National Park in Texas and the Wild River Wilderness, in Wyoming, that have trails that were obviously, intentionally made for horses -- in my opinion, unfortunately.
Rules change from month to month. The biggest thing for "wild" areas is "MOTORIZED" anything. They are strict about that everywhere.
If you are truly, really, in a wild area, no one will ever see you -- and it probably will NOT be a ranger. And if it were, they won't know what to do with you because they have not memorized the current rules and they won't be carrying the current rules in their back pocket. In fact, they will probably just tell you "THANKS FOR ENJOYING THE BACKCOUNTRY!!!". That's been my experience for the last 40 years -- no Llamas, mules, goats, pigs, or horses ever in tow!!! From Canada to Mexico, it's just me and my TOKO and Fuji, Mamiya. Minolta and Schnieder lenses!!! Ok, and a sore back when I return to the car. You got me there.
Jac@stafford.net
3-Apr-2017, 15:21
I can imagine a solution that creates wheelchair accessible paths deeper into our wilderness than ordinary citizens can do, disregarding the extraordinary expense which includes monitoring the paths to obviate the inevitable poseurs and exploiters in motorized off-road toys.
It's a horror.
I can imagine a solution that creates wheelchair accessible paths deeper into our wilderness than ordinary citizens can do, disregarding the extraordinary expense which includes monitoring the paths to obviate the inevitable poseurs and exploiters in motorized off-road toys.
It's a horror..
I don't know how you are going to ever accomplish that. I've tried to cross the Continental Divide on the Wyoming Wind River range FOUR times. Just me and a backpack full of 4x5 gear. I never made it. Someone in a wheelchair would not get out of the parking lot. OK, a blind guy climbed Mt Everest, but he did not do it himsself.
Some of my favorite projects were figuring out re-routes for trails that had been put in by horse-use 80 to 150 years before (early cattle and sheep grazing -- then hunters), but also some sections that were just badly designed and created erosion problems that could not be corrected. Many were way too steep for backpackers...and not all that kind for horses/mules. I found laying out the new trail sections quite creative and rewarding. One of the main design criteria was a trail that would have minumum maintenance needs in the future. My last summer working those trails was 1990. Even with little or no maintance done since then, it is nice to see my handy work 30 or so years after I had pounded the ground.
As far as bikes and carts in the wilds, I am not a bad tracker -- certainly not a good one -- but I could follow the track of a wheeled device pretty easily in the wilderness. And nothing like a continous line to gather water and increase erosion!
OK, if you want a REAL challenge -- with or without a wheelchair or a 4x5 camera, try the BASS trail on the north rim of the Grand Canyon. You'll need, and be able to get, a NP permit because only CRAZY people go there. Expect the Wilderness permit provider to drill you about your canyon history. You will see no one else there. But you will get GREAT pictures. Getting the camera back out of the canyon? That's an other thing thing entirely. IF you have two hands and two feet you MIGHT be able to do it. And watch out for the rattlesnakes on the ledges!!! They will NOT ask you if you are using a "wheeled device".
I have done the loop twice with the 4x5 down from Hermits Rest, along the Tonto Trail, then up the South Bass Trail and return to Hermits Rest hiking along the rim...many years ago! Doubt if I'll make it down the North Bass Trail at this stage in my life, but it is good to know it is there! Spent a little time off trail on the north side, but most on trail on the south side. Beautiful place. Can't say I ever caught the place successfully photographically. So it goes.
And the Grand Canyon rattlesnakes are pussy cats. Don't step on them, but the cute little pinkish things just want to get out of your way. They are know for their laid back personalities.
Jac@stafford.net
3-Apr-2017, 18:08
.
I don't know how you are going to ever accomplish that. I've tried to cross the Continental Divide on the Wyoming Wind River range FOUR times. Just me and a backpack full of 4x5 gear. I never made it. Someone in a wheelchair would not get out of the parking lot.
Until that Tesla guy gets involved.
Until that Tesla guy gets involved.
He'll have to figure out how to get over waist deep snow. OK, a drone on a 4x5. Then I won't need to go there at all.
Drew Bedo
4-Apr-2017, 06:30
Everyhone posting in this thread have contributed valid viewpoints and presented them with a well meaning intent. I appreciate that.
A forum member wrote this to me in a private message.
"At the end of the day we need to be respectful (of each other) because we are collectively in this game together. As photographers we need to unite on the craft and art."
and I agree with him.
On re-reading this thread, I think there is a misunderstanding. Many posts here suggest alternatives to Federal Wilderness Areas for persons with physical limitations; all of them wonderful places and the suggestions reasonable. A few contributers do seem a little annoyed that someone would want to force the broad issue of bringing wheels into the wilderness.
What is missed is that I am not advocating for wheelchair accessible pathways in the wilderness areas. However, it IS my position that a physically limited person should not be fined for trying to use an assistive device to get as far away from the car as is possible, given the terrain as it exists in nature. . . .just because it has wheels.
As Michael K. has pointed out, this thread is somewhat off topic. I agree. This forum is not the place to effect a change in federal policy. After all . . .t is just a rule, and it can be changed.
It is not "just a rule", it is an essential part of the whole concept of wilderness.
It would like changing the rule in baseball to where you are out if you hit the ball over the fence. It is just a small rule change, but it could be argued that it is no longer baseball.
Bob Salomon
4-Apr-2017, 08:18
It is not "just a rule", it is an essential part of the whole concept of wilderness.
It would like changing the rule in baseball to where you are out if you hit the ball over the fence. It is just a small rule change, but it could be argued that it is no longer baseball.
But rules do change. You used to be out if you were hit by a ball thrown at you. You didn't always have 4 balls and 3 strikes. You could strike out on a foul ball. The mound used to be a different height. And the pitcher used to have to throw four pitches to give an intentional walk.
Rules are always subject to change.
Oh I agree, I never said otherwise -- but changing the rules can change the nature of the game. Small changes in rules bring small changes in the game. Big changes, such as being out when hitting over the fence changes the nature of the game dramatically -- as would allowing wheeled carts, etc into the wilderness. We have been fighting off bicycles for ages -- just had another round recently.
Many of today's advocates for wheels in the wilderness are specifically looking to weaken the Wilderness Act -- to open the wilderness door to mining, salvage logging, etc.
Bob Salomon
4-Apr-2017, 08:32
Oh I agree, I never said otherwise -- but changing the rules can change the nature of the game. Small changes in rules bring small changes in the game. Big changes, such as being out when hitting over the fence changes the nature of the game dramatically -- as would allowing wheeled carts, etc into the wilderness. We have been fighting off bicycles for ages -- just had another round recently.
Makes you wonder exactly how those 19th century and early 20th century landscape photographers managed.
http://www.19thc-artworldwide.org/autumn11/review-of-nineteenth-century-landscape-photographers-in-the-americas-artists-journeymen-or-entrepreneurs
Well, there was no Wilderness Act back then.
aduncanson
4-Apr-2017, 10:16
I pushed my wife in her manual chair up to the Lady Bird Johnson Grove in Humboldt County back in the late '80s. This was prior to the ADA. It was a difficult push and I remember feeling that we did not belong there. I might have had a 4x5 press camera and a light tripod with me, but I remember being far more interested in getting back to the parking lot than in making pictures. This is Sunday picnic territory compared to the areas being discussed. Because of that I hope that access has been improved since then.
Reading the rules about wheelchair use in wilderness areas makes clear that I am not the only person who has considered that an ATV might be passed-off as a specialized recreational wheelchair. It looks like even the small cargo trailer that I envision dragging behind my wife's current, very conventional, power chair, would be a no-go as well.
David Lobato
4-Apr-2017, 10:18
The concept of a designated wilderness is that it has a value beyond our sense of self importance. Wilderness has a value beyond our comprehension of the world. Thus it needs protections and preservation. Sure, even our old age will keep us out some day. But it's knowing it's there and protected is significant to me.
I'd suggest checking with whoever is running the area you wish to visit. Over here, we have Acadia NP which has carriage trails for horses (because that's what the federal government received) and I have no idea whether it's cart or wheelchair allowed but it would be easy. Maybe baby carriages is the magic word. Most of the normal foot trails you'd not make it past the parking lot with a wheelchair. Perhaps you need an apprentice to carry gear.
I'd suggest checking with whoever is running the area you wish to visit. Over here, we have Acadia NP which has carriage trails for horses (because that's what the federal government received) and I have no idea whether it's cart or wheelchair allowed but it would be easy. Maybe baby carriages is the magic word. Most of the normal foot trails you'd not make it past the parking lot with a wheelchair. Perhaps you need an apprentice to carry gear.
Good point. First of all, a wheeled ANYTHING would never get out of the parking lot and into a REAL wilderness area -- Acadia has NO wilderness. Nice place, but NO wilderness. And in 40+ years of hiking in wilderness areas from Canada to Mexico, I have only run into ONE ranger in the back country -- on a trail. Most of my backcountry experiences have been completely OFF trail. These are places where even I had a hard time climbing. A wheel chair or any wheeled device would be impossible. Image any wheeled anything in this situation -- Glacier National Park (which actually has Wilderness) -- and my 4x5 TOKO Nikki II with a Fuji lens.
163464
Give me a break. We are discussing a NON-ISSUE. I was the Volunteer Coordinator for the entire State of Colorado for the Sierra Club for over ten years. Take your wheelchair or photo-cart into any wilderness area. The only problem you will have is getting it in there -- and getting it out!!!
One does need to be aware of the various differences in land designations and how the rules are also different depending on the agency involved. I have seen backpackers with dogs turned back by rangers in the wilderness when the trail left US Forest Service administered wilderness and into the National Park wilderness. I have heard that there is a very short stretch of the trail to Mt Whitney crosses NPS land -- so no dogs on Mt Whitney. And yes, they watch closely. Service dogs that aid with sight and/or sound impared people are allowed on NPS trails, service dogs for comfort or emotional needs are not. Which I found interesting.
Many of the trails in Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park (one of the most beautiful places on earth), and especially my favorite, the Prairie Creek Trail, have been re-conditioned and are wheelchair accessible (a lot depends on the winter storms and how soon they can get out to clear the trails). Not a wilderness area, but it comes close to being one. In the late 80's, I remember the trails being hard to find, let alone follow!
All sorts of all-terrain wheelchairs out there now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX7qbOdgHzA
Which would explain the requirement that the wheelchair be able to be used in a normal situation indoors (which also restricts width -- it has to get thru doors).
OK, Let's go far afield. The topic was WHEELS in a DESIGNATED Wilderness Area. So why add in dogs in NON-wilderness areas? Let's stay on topic.
David Lobato
4-Apr-2017, 18:55
Staying on topic of wheels, physical preparation is necessary for wilderness travel, even if allowed on wheels. Desk jockeys just can't turn off the laptop and hit the trail on foot. Training is necessary, sign on a 10K run wheelchair division race, or start a rigorous training regime. The Pikes Peak road is not wilderness, so a practice trip muscling to the top and rolling down (how to descend that 3000 feet with your hands for brakes) would be good preparation.
One does need to be aware of the various differences in land designations and how the rules are also different depending on the agency involved. I have seen backpackers with dogs turned back by rangers in the wilderness when the trail left US Forest Service administered wilderness and into the National Park wilderness. I have heard that there is a very short stretch of the trail to Mt Whitney crosses NPS land -- so no dogs on Mt Whitney. And yes, they watch closely. Service dogs that aid with sight and/or sound impared people are allowed on NPS trails, service dogs for comfort or emotional needs are not. Which I found interesting.
Many of the trails in Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park (one of the most beautiful places on earth), and especially my favorite, the Prairie Creek Trail, have been re-conditioned and are wheelchair accessible (a lot depends on the winter storms and how soon they can get out to clear the trails). Not a wilderness area, but it comes close to being one. In the late 80's, I remember the trails being hard to find, let alone follow!
All sorts of all-terrain wheelchairs out there now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX7qbOdgHzA
Which would explain the requirement that the wheelchair be able to be used in a normal situation indoors (which also restricts width -- it has to get thru doors).
OK, let's add DOGS and ATV's to the discussion -- which started out as WHEELS on a camera cart in a DESIGNATED WILDERNESS.
Talk about muddying the waters!!!
Go take a hike...;)
And you might tone down the yelling, youngster.
Drew Bedo
5-Apr-2017, 08:33
I perceive the issue as what I would call "The Right to Try", or maybe "The Right To Decide"'. As a visually impaired person, there are things that I do not want to attempt. In an urban environment, this usually involves crossing a street. Because I cannot see a car a half-block away, I will walk an additional 100 yards or more to cross at a light while fully sighted pedestrians J-walk (run). Yet I would be deeply offended if told that because I am legally blind I cannot make the decision( to make the attempt to cross or not) for myself.
Every few years there is a sensational mountain rescue event that is widely reported by the mainstream news outlets. The event may end with a successful recovery of the mountaineers, or it may end with tragic fatalities. Each time this happens, some ill-informed reporter suggests that climbers should not be allowed in the mountains in winter, or when storms are likely; whatever condition the reporter thinks contributed to the need for a rescue.
Each time this is proposed, some legal expert or administrative authority points out that bad judgement cannot be legislated away.
It is my opinion that: In a wilderness area, If some wheelchair athlete feels the need to see how far he can push it, there should be no restriction other the natural terrain. If he can bring along an LF camera and other gear, I say let them go for it.
I perceive the issue as what I would call "The Right to Try", or maybe "The Right To Decide"'. As a visually impaired person, there are things that I do not want to attempt. In an urban environment, this usually involves crossing a street. I will walk an additional 100 yards or more to cross at a light while fully sighted pedestrians J-walk. Yet I would be deeply offended if told thatbecause I am legally blind I cannot make the decision to make the attempt to cross or not for myself.
Every few years there is a sensational mountain rescue event that is widely reported by the mainstream news outlets. The event may end with a successful recovery of the mountaineers, or it may end with tragic fatalities. Each time this happens, some ill-informed reporter suggests that climbers should not be allowed in the mountains in winter, or when storms are likely; whatever condition the reporter thinks contributed to the need for a rescue.
Each time this is proposed, some legal expert or administrative authority points out that bad judgement cannot be legislated away.
It is my opinion that: In a wilderness area, If some wheelchair athlete feels the need to see how far he can push it, there should be no restriction other the natural terrain. If he can bring along an LF camera and other gear, I say let them go for it.
These are good points, but they are WAY off target. We started out talking about a photographer taking a wheeled cart full of camera gear into a DESIGNATED wilderness area -- not very likely to happen in any event. But now we are talking about someone in a wheelchair taking large format gear into a wilderness area. I've seen a LOT of weird things in my life, but I know I will never see that! We are discussing a NON-ISSUE.
Drew Bedo
5-Apr-2017, 09:10
It is not "just a rule", it is an essential part of the whole concept of wilderness.
.
I could be wrong, and I often am, but I understood this ban on wheels in wilderness areas to be a regulation rather than statute law. If it is mere a regulation promulgated by a federal agency, all it takes to render it inoperative is an executive order.
In any case, my understanding from reading this and other recent threads, is that the current regulations do allow wheelchairs, both manual and electric as well as some service dogs. So persons with physical limitations are not barred from using some assistive devices or even a dog to get around as best they can.
It is amazing what can be loaded onto an indoor appropriate wheelchair. There is a whole niche industry oriented at that.
Drew Bedo
5-Apr-2017, 09:19
All sorts of all-terrain wheelchairs out there now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX7qbOdgHzA
Which would explain the requirement that the wheelchair be able to be used in a normal situation indoors (which also restricts width -- it has to get thru doors).
Right you are on indoor appropriate wheelchairs vs ATV chairs: I have seen one with tank tracks!
...
It is my opinion that: In a wilderness area, If some wheelchair athlete feels the need to see how far he can push it, there should be no restriction other the natural terrain. If he can bring along an LF camera and other gear, I say let them go for it.
From the Wilderness Act of 1964 (original and present wording):
PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN USES
(c)
… 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.
"no other form of mechanical transport" -- anything is up to interpretation, but this federal law (not regulation) has been interpreted to define any wheeled device as a form of mechanical transport. Quite logical. Presently, thru the ADA, wheelchairs, even electrical wheelchairs are now allowed in the wilderness...and I assume with anything they can fit on their chair. Can't tow a trailer, though. And the gov't has no obligation to maintain wilderness trails and facilities for wheelchair use.
So I totally agree with you, Drew, to a point (restrictions are the natural terrain and the design/condition of the trail). If people want to go for it, go for it (but then I also favor a no-rescue approach to wilderness use for everyone.)
The next useless but interesting question would be, can someone in a wheelchair be towed by a horse in the wilderness? (yes?)
Jeff Conrad
5-Apr-2017, 18:24
Wheelchairs are specifically allowed under § 507 of the ADA, codified at 4 USC § 12207:
(c) Specific wilderness access
(1) In general
Congress reaffirms that nothing in the Wilderness Act [16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.] 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.
(2) “Wheelchair” defined
For 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.
[Emphasis added]
“Mechanical transport” is defined in § 2320.5 of the Forest Service Manual:
2320.5—Definitions
3. Mechanical Transport. Any contrivance for moving people or material in or over land, water, or air, having moving parts, that provides a mechanical advantage to the user, and that is powered by a living or nonliving power source. This includes, but is not limited to, sailboats, hang gliders, parachutes, bicycles, game carriers, carts, and wagons. It does not include wheelchairs when used as necessary medical appliances. It also does not include skis, snowshoes, rafts, canoes, sleds, travois, or similar primitive devices without moving parts.
[Emphasis added]
Because it isn’t subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking, the Forest Service Manual doesn’t carry the force of law. But it presumably guides the actions of FS personnel.
Unlike the DOI agencies, the FS originally interpreted “mechanical transport” to apply only to something powered by a nonliving power source. But after numerous complaints, they apparently conceded that they were in error. The history is discussed in this paper (http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/peg/publications/report/reportmechanization0403pdf.pdf) (PDF) by the Campaign for America’s Wilderness.
Thanks Jeff, for posting that.
Since we we seem to have covered this subject fairly well, I was asked to quickly cover the present situation on Federal lands concerning pro photography and the need for permits. This is has been sort of taken care of, but there is still mis-information out there (by both gov't employees and the public).
In previous discussions on this here and elsewhere, the latest gov't memos have been posted and it was suggested printing them out to show an errant ranger the light, if needed.
From this gov't site: https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/news/commercial-film-and-photo-permits.htm
Still photographers require a permit only when
1 the activity takes place at location(s) where or when members of the public are generally not allowed; or
2 the activity uses model(s), sets(s), or prop(s) that are not a part of the location's natural or cultural resources or administrative facilities; or
3 park would incur additional administrative costs to monitor the activity.
Unfortunately, early on many Parks and National Forest folks used the word "props" to include tripods. No longer the case.
Note that whether you plan on selling the images/prints or not, is not a factor that requires one to get a permit.
Expect to be hassled if you are blocking the way of visitors (such as in the middle of a trail, forcing everyone to go around you).
Multiple strobes on stands should be fine, but I could see this as getting towards the borderline of acceptable to the Park...it will depend on how much you are impacting visitor use, the attitude of the ranger and your attitude.
Having a large number of assistants might attract unwanted attention, and probably require a permit.
Do not alter the scene by removing branches, etc.
Take nudes in view of visitors might get an interesting response from the rangers -- but an Artist-in-residence in Yosemite got away with it many years ago.
Jeff Conrad
6-Apr-2017, 20:41
There is an official definition of “sets and props” at 43 CFR § 5.12:
Sets and props means items constructed or placed on agency lands to facilitate commercial filming or still photography including, but not limited to, backdrops, generators, microphones, stages, lighting banks, camera tracks, vehicles specifically designed to accommodate camera or recording equipment, rope and pulley systems, and rigging for climbers and structures. Sets and props also include trained animals and inanimate objects, such as camping equipment, campfires, wagons, and so forth, when used to stage a specific scene. The use of a camera on a tripod, without the use of any other equipment, is not considered a prop.
I haven’t heard of too many problems with the definition so far, but I have heard of a couple of instances in the Bay Area in which NPS personnel seemed to interpret a “prop” as anything other than a camera on a tripod; at issue in both cases was a single stand-mounted strobe.
I think the definition is both logically and procedurally a mess; I think a court would have a tough time construing it, and I think it would be difficult to reconcile with Public Law 106-206. But getting into that would seem a topic for a different thread.
I can see where a single stand-mounted strobe would (and should) not allowed in some Park locations -- just like tripods are not allowed in many busy places.
I'll be visiting one of my sons at his college in upstate New York next month. Thinking of bringing the 4x5. Before photographing on campus, I might check in with the campus police and let them know what I am up to. I did not worry about it last year with the Rolleiflex, but a 4x5 is a horse of a different color.
Jeff Conrad
6-Apr-2017, 22:02
I can see where a single stand-mounted strobe would (and should) not allowed in some Park locations -- just like tripods are not allowed in many busy places.
As might be setting up a picnic table on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, which presumably there is some means of preventing. But it shouldn’t be done by gaming definitions of “prop.” The NPS people who wrote the definition told me that NPS personnel need the flexibility to make decisions appropriate for different situations. While I sympathize, providing this flexibility via ambiguous definitions makes a law void for vagueness.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.