Smoking & stroller wagons banned May 1!

[javeyloveschelsi]

Great news about the smoking zone going away.

I’m disappointed about the stroller ban though. We don’t currently have that type of stroller and have a Joovy sit and stand, so we aren’t affected, but I had planned on purchasing a Keenz wagon for when our littlest (who has autism) gets older so he could have had an area to escape to since the canopy comes down and so he wouldn’t drag his feet like he could in a traditional stroller. Since the weight limit was so high, we thought that would be great to last him a long while. We saw several on our trip but never once saw any sort of issue or problem due to them and the crowds were packed. Maybe we were just lucky to not have that issue, but I tend to have more issues with parents letting their kids run while swinging their toys around, smacking people with the toy (I saw this several times) then I do with kids riding in a stroller. I also have to laugh at the comment about happy kids up above. That’s a pretty broad statement. Throw in overstimulation and excitement (even if you maintain their regular schedule) and you never know how your kids will react—they are kids and are unpredictable little beasts We have been lucky so far with our kids and only have had a couple moments, but I could completely understand another child not being happy the whole time.

 

[theluckyrabbit]

Great news about the smoking zone going away.

I’m disappointed about the stroller ban though. We don’t currently have that type of stroller and have a Joovy sit and stand, so we aren’t affected, but I had planned on purchasing a Keenz wagon for when our littlest (who has autism) gets older so he could have had an area to escape to since the canopy comes down and so he wouldn’t drag his feet like he could in a traditional stroller...

Give Disney a bit more time to deal with this in real life and real time. They've been very good and willing to work with disabilities, so I'm pretty sure that as time goes on, you'll be hearing about how familes are finding ways to work with Disney on this. As management gets more and more feedback from families on how this is affecting them in the parks and on what they need/how they need it to work, Disney will listen. It's only been a day, but as the summer goes on, I'm sure you'll be seeing updates here on how this new rule is working out.

 

[beachdreamr1229]

I’m disappointed about the stroller ban though. We don’t currently have that type of stroller and have a Joovy sit and stand, so we aren’t affected, but I had planned on purchasing a Keenz wagon for when our littlest (who has autism) gets older so he could have had an area to escape to since the canopy comes down and so he wouldn’t drag his feet like he could in a traditional stroller.

Have you looked into getting a stroller wheelchair or just a regular wheelchair with a canopy? They tend to be sturdier. I don't know how severe your son's autism is, but people have been bringing their kids with autism to Disneyland for years without the keenz wagons. I teach high school students with severe autism and many of the families go to Disneyland frequently. Most just have their kids walk and take breaks in quiet areas or the hotel when they get overstimulated.

I'm sure Disneyland will offer a solution for families with kids with disabilities. They have always been very good at working out these types of issues.

 

[javeyloveschelsi]

Have you looked into getting a stroller wheelchair or just a regular wheelchair with a canopy? They tend to be sturdier. I don't know how severe your son's autism is, but people have been bringing their kids with autism to Disneyland for years without the keenz wagons. I teach high school students with severe autism and many of the families go to Disneyland frequently. Most just have their kids walk and take breaks in quiet areas or the hotel when they get overstimulated.

I'm sure Disneyland will offer a solution for families with kids with disabilities. They have always been very good at working out these types of issues.

No, we have not got that far yet. I had just been really excited when I heard they allowed that because it was a feasible option for him as he continues to grow and one we could easily transport. I know it’s possible for a special needs child to not need that stroller and to navigate Disney. We just went there two weeks ago with the other stroller we have and that works great for now as he is only 2. We don’t know what the future will hold for him and I know we will figure something out, I was only expressing my disappointment.

 

[Candleman]

This can be done without a wagon or a big stroller. Plan your trip around your child/ren's schedule. Do not plan your trip around everything the adults want to do and think let the kids sleep in the wagon or stroller and then be shocked when they cry/whine and want to run wild. Keep them on their schedule, if they nap at 11 for two hours, then go back to the room and let them nap. Even if they take another nap in the afternoon for a couple hours go back to the room. KEEP THEM ON THEIR SCHEDULE and you will have happy kids.

Yes, I am actually really good at that, which is why the wagon ban is a bummer. PERFECT place for my kid to sleep. I don't think it is reasonable to ask people to go all the way back to their room. That is almost an hour each way, plus the nap, might as well not even go.

 

[dcraythorn]

I know everyone is happy about the smoking ban. I don't smoke, but I feel like a lot remarks are very derogatory to people who do. I wish that people would remember that smoking is an addiction. Try as you may, sometimes it takes quite a few attempts and failures to finally quit. Why do you think that that the big tobacco companies are so under fire. They added more and more nicotine so that people would become addicted. So, lets just have at least a small amount of compassion for the addiction. And remember, if you have not walked in their shoes, don't judge.

And please don't get all upset about my post. We are adults and we are entitled to our opinions. Thank you.

 

[bethwc101]

Yes, I am actually really good at that, which is why the wagon ban is a bummer. PERFECT place for my kid to sleep. I don't think it is reasonable to ask people to go all the way back to their room. That is almost an hour each way, plus the nap, might as well not even go.

which is why a majority of people stay close to the parks.

 

[WonkaKid]

I wish that people would remember that smoking is an addiction.

I do remember. That's why I never took up smoking. If only people that become smokers could remember. Then non-smokers wouldn’t have to be asked to overlook it.

 

[Candleman]

which is why a majority of people stay close to the parks.

As do I. Again, just stating why I was upset about the Wagon ban. I get it, it makes sense, but the wagon was a perfect way for us to enjoy more time in the park with our little one.

 

[bethwc101]

As do I. Again, just stating why I was upset about the Wagon ban. I get it, it makes sense, but the wagon was a perfect way for us to enjoy more time in the park with our little one.

If you stay close then why does it take you an hour to get to your hotel?

 

[Candleman]

If you stay close then why does it take you an hour to get to your hotel?

Walk to the tram, wait for the tram, take the tram, walk to your car, put the stroller in the car, exit the parking lot, drive to your hotel. Getting back is even worse because you add security. It isn't a short process, an hour may be a bit excessive but it isn't a 15 minute trip to get out of the park and to your hotel.

 

[Kender]

There was just an episode of the Orville that suggested a smoke free future and showed just how addictive it was when reintroduced. It was, despite the alien aspect, a little too real and a fairly good commentary on the dangerous effects and the social impact.

Made me hope for a future where we can help those addicted to become unaddicted. It would be better for all.


On the wagons, I think many forget wagons were always banned. It's not a new rule.

Technically what's happening is a loophole is being closed. Think like using your cell phone to call/text while driving. In California, it was always technically against the rules (distracted driving). But laws were created to specifically address using your cell phone because the distracted driving law was not cutting it.

 

[beachdreamr1229]

Walk to the tram, wait for the tram, take the tram, walk to your car, put the stroller in the car, exit the parking lot, drive to your hotel. Getting back is even worse because you add security. It isn't a short process, an hour may be a bit excessive but it isn't a 15 minute trip to get out of the park and to your hotel.

Might I recommend a hotel on Harbor right across the street? Even staying at the Springhill on Harbor and Katella, it only took us 15-20 minutes to walk to and from the parks on our last trip. It makes all the difference when you have little kids staying somewhere that doesn't require you to drive to and from a parking structure. We live only an hour away and we still stay at a hotel on most trips because it's just easier.

I get being disappointed, but honestly, I read that you wanted to spend more time in Disneyland with your child. I don't know if it's possible, but when I used to take my twins when they were toddlers, they just slept in their reclining stroller seats. With my older son, he's taken a short nap on the train before. I get that it's a bummer for families that were looking to get around the former wagon ban with the new "stroller" wagons. If I had bought one, I'd probably be a little bummed, too. But there are quite a few ways to get your child a nap without a wagon.

 

[Candleman]

Might I recommend a hotel on Harbor right across the street? Even staying at the Springhill on Harbor and Katella, it only took us 15-20 minutes to walk to and from the parks on our last trip. It makes all the difference when you have little kids staying somewhere that doesn't require you to drive to and from a parking structure. We live only an hour away and we still stay at a hotel on most trips because it's just easier.

I get being disappointed, but honestly, I read that you wanted to spend more time in Disneyland with your child. I don't know if it's possible, but when I used to take my twins when they were toddlers, they just slept in their reclining stroller seats. With my older son, he's taken a short nap on the train before. I get that it's a bummer for families that were looking to get around the former wagon ban with the new "stroller" wagons. If I had bought one, I'd probably be a little bummed, too. But there are quite a few ways to get your child a nap without a wagon.

Definitely something to consider and I think you see how my disappointment is valid. We like to stay where we have a separate room for our son to sleep in peace, thus the embassy suites or a staybridge. Again, these are my personal choices to make our lives easier, just like using our Keenz Stroller/Wagon. Disney can make any rules they like. The Wagon rule makes sense, but I think the hate for them here is excessive.

 

[ChrissyLou]

Any comments/opinions I shared about the new smoking policy were not intended to be polarizing--or start a debate on the dangers or pitfalls of smoking (which I think are pretty much undisputed), I try to post without coming across as condescending or judgmental, I wish all did the same.

So in response to some comments: I don't think this change in policy is the same as asking those wishing to picnic to enjoy the picnic area outside the parks - those folks don't have to leave Disney property altogether. Every airport I've been to one simply has to go outdoors, again they don't have to leave the airport property.

I grew up in the 70's and was subjected to plenty of secondhand smoke and am thankful times have changed and the many regulations in regards to smoking in public places have taken place, but apparently I'm in the minority that I feel like the people who do still smoke should continue to be a afforded a place to do so, especially in theme parks the size of Disney Parks after 64 years of smoking being permitted. I mean with all the amazing, magical attractions Disney imagineers come up with it seems it wouldn't be that difficult to create at least one teeny, tiny spot inside their property that does not seemingly villianize/penalize their smoking guests AND that causes the least effect on the non-smoking guests. ALL Disney guests are contributing A LOT of money to be in the parks. The parks are not always easy and quick to get in/out of and now by having to leave there are going to be times they won't be able to get back in because the park will be at capacity.

It seems like all the "particulars" are not yet spelled out, so some questions are yet unanswered. Is there going to be a "designated area" or is that pretty much going to be the entire Disney perimeter? Maybe I'm envisioning a worse scenario than will actually play out, but it would seem to me that this policy would create a more concentrated area of smokers (subjecting those walking to and from Harbor Hotels (for example) walking in and out of plumes of smoke to enter the parks, and the non-smokers won't really have an option to avoid that if they want to enter the park. For me, I'd rather know there are two areas inside the park that I can avoid (if I chose to) or just quickly walk through that area. I don't know, maybe the new policy will be better (for non-smokers) and not that disruptive to the smokers, but maybe not.

Also, not addressed, so assume it is not the case, but that could be coming down the line--will cigarettes or vapes will be forbidden to be brought into the park altogether? If so, then again those Disney smoking guests will have to make the long haul back to hotel, car, store, etc. for their breaks. At WDW -- well that would be even more difficult and seemingly not really viable. From a business perspective I am not sure that sending your guests completely OUTSIDE the park (where they aren't spending their money with you - especially if they can't get back in) seems like the best scenario.

I guess this is as good a time as any for a Disney lover who smokes to quit - which I am sure is not easy and yet it seems so simple and cut and dried for us non-smokers -- regardless, I don't think it is up to me (or anyone else) to pass judgment. Personally the rude, classless, arrogant guests we occasionally encounter at the parks bother me far more than either of the smoking areas ever have, but that is a whole other discussion.

 

[bethwc101]

Any comments/opinions I shared about the new smoking policy were not intended to be polarizing--or start a debate on the dangers or pitfalls of smoking (which I think are pretty much undisputed), I try to post without coming across as condescending or judgmental, I wish all did the same.

So in response to some comments: I don't think this change in policy is the same as asking those wishing to picnic to enjoy the picnic area outside the parks - those folks don't have to leave Disney property altogether. Every airport I've been to one simply has to go outdoors, again they don't have to leave the airport property.

I grew up in the 70's and was subjected to plenty of secondhand smoke and am thankful times have changed and the many regulations in regards to smoking in public places have taken place, but apparently I'm in the minority that I feel like the people who do still smoke should continue to be a afforded a place to do so, especially in theme parks the size of Disney Parks after 64 years of smoking being permitted. I mean with all the amazing, magical attractions Disney imagineers come up with it seems it wouldn't be that difficult to create at least one teeny, tiny spot inside their property that does not seemingly villianize/penalize their smoking guests AND that causes the least effect on the non-smoking guests. ALL Disney guests are contributing A LOT of money to be in the parks. The parks are not always easy and quick to get in/out of and now by having to leave there are going to be times they won't be able to get back in because the park will be at capacity.

It seems like all the "particulars" are not yet spelled out, so some questions are yet unanswered. Is there going to be a "designated area" or is that pretty much going to be the entire Disney perimeter? Maybe I'm envisioning a worse scenario than will actually play out, but it would seem to me that this policy would create a more concentrated area of smokers (subjecting those walking to and from Harbor Hotels (for example) walking in and out of plumes of smoke to enter the parks, and the non-smokers won't really have an option to avoid that if they want to enter the park. For me, I'd rather know there are two areas inside the park that I can avoid (if I chose to) or just quickly walk through that area. I don't know, maybe the new policy will be better (for non-smokers) and not that disruptive to the smokers, but maybe not.

Also, not addressed, so assume it is not the case, but that could be coming down the line--will cigarettes or vapes will be forbidden to be brought into the park altogether? If so, then again those Disney smoking guests will have to make the long haul back to hotel, car, store, etc. for their breaks. At WDW -- well that would be even more difficult and seemingly not really viable. From a business perspective I am not sure that sending your guests completely OUTSIDE the park (where they aren't spending their money with you - especially if they can't get back in) seems like the best scenario.

I guess this is as good a time as any for a Disney lover who smokes to quit - which I am sure is not easy and yet it seems so simple and cut and dried for us non-smokers -- regardless, I don't think it is up to me (or anyone else) to pass judgment. Personally the rude, classless, arrogant guests we occasionally encounter at the parks bother me far more than either of the smoking areas ever have, but that is a whole other discussion.

I assume this will be the case at DLR. If DCA, DL, Esplanade, all DLR hotels, and DTD are all non smoking, what would be a smokers reason of bringing it with them through security?

 

[ChrissyLou]

I assume this will be the case at DLR. If DCA, DL, Esplanade, all DLR hotels, and DTD are all non smoking, what would be a smokers reason of bringing it with them through security?

I don't know how feasible it would be to ban cigarettes at the security turnstiles as they aren't metal, (vapes might be another story), but the point of bringing it in with them would preclude them from having walk all the way back to their car, hotel (which could be a two mile plus round trip walk, or more) or a nearby store to get a cigarette versus having one with them and being able to walk out of the park, walk out of security and to wherever the closest designated smoking location is.

I know, I know, it seems most people, aren't going to be sympathetic to someone's needs contrary to theirs and might even think, "well it serves them right for having such a horrible habit." I'm not debating the evils of smoking, but if they do go the route of disallowing those items from being brought into the park that further alienates/punishes a whole group of their guests. It may seem like there aren't that many smokers anymore, but I'm guessing the numbers are much larger than most of us realize. From what I've read, "Smoking will now be limited to specific areas outside park entrances and at Disney resort hotels." (So it seems the Disney hotels will continue offering a designated smoking area.)

As everyone knows people disregard rules or find creative work-arounds all the time, but I still believe the majority of guests (smoking and non) follow the rules more than they don't.

 

[BecAus]

As everyone knows people disregard rules or find creative work-arounds all the time, but I still believe the majority of guests (smoking and non) follow the rules more than they don't.

I agree, I am not a smoker but my husband is, despite trying to quit many times. He has been a heavy smoker for the last 35years since he was 15.
He always trys to be courteous and never smokes where he's not allowed to. He never smokes inside even when it is allowed - we travel to Bali a lot and they are very lax with their rules there, still very much the done thing to smoke in restaurants etc.. around other diners. He wouldn't do that though out of respect to others, myself and the kids who don't smoke.
I read the property rules for Disney - it only states smoking will be banned in the parks, esplanade and DTD. No mention of it being banned at the hotels so assumably they will still have their one or two allocated smoking areas.
Also doesn't mention not being able to bring cigarettes into the parks. I think they will probably still be allowed but CM's will just enforce the no-smoking rules as they do now.
I see both sides, I think they should be able to find some out of the way area for smokers to do their thing but not impact other guests. I agree that where they are situated now, like on Big Thunder Trail, does impact other guests and also when it was down near ROA.
In our experience they did a much better job of the smoking locations when we were at USF - they were more out of the way and didn't seem to impact other guests that I noticed.
I will read up the latest info on the Disney website as to where the allocated smoking areas are and my husband will follow those rules as he always does.

 

[azdisneylover]

Yes, I am actually really good at that, which is why the wagon ban is a bummer. PERFECT place for my kid to sleep. I don't think it is reasonable to ask people to go all the way back to their room. That is almost an hour each way, plus the nap, might as well not even go.

No, it is reasonable to ask parents going on a trip to factor in your child/ren's sleeping needs. This helps in factoring in which hotel/motel to pick. Lodging on Harbor Blvd is a favorite on the boards here because of the proximity, a very easy walk for a nap or two.

 

[StormyCA]

I don't think they're going to ban people from bringing in tobacco products or vapes. They aren't illegal in and of themselves. I mean, you can carry them into a restaurant, mall, etc, where smoking is forbidden, you just can't light up.

I can see, however, if 'illicit' lighting up becomes a real problem they may institute a policy whereby if you're caught smoking you have to throw them away. Kind of like when they went from letting selfie sticks and just telling you that you couldn't use them to making people toss them if they got caught using them. Of course, it then went to a total ban, so who really knows?