Outdoors for Everyone: Opportunities that Include People with Disabilities.

Leisure service professionals and organizations are concerned with offering leisure opportunities that will maintain and improve the quality of lives of the people, all the people. Outdoor recreation and adventure programs are an area of service that is very important to the population as a whole. City park facilities, trails, lakes, county and state parks, National Forests, National Parks, and other public lands used for outdoor recreation are highly valued and heavily used by the general population. So too, outdoor recreation activities like fishing, boating, hiking, hunting, camping and nature study are very important to the leisure life of many Americans. And, there have been recent increases in participation in adventure activities like rock climbing, mountain biking, white water and ocean kayaking, canoeing, and wilderness travel and camping. Americans seem to love their outdoor recreation resources and activities and have taken to using them more and more.

When one indicates that outdoor recreation areas and programs are for "all of the people," one must include the approximately 19% of Americans who have a disability, as defined by federal law. The passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (P.L. 101-336) focused attention on ensuring that people with disabilities have the right to enter the economic and social mainstream of American life. Emphasis has recently been placed on the provision of inclusive recreation services where everyone, regardless of the presence of a disability, has choices, social connections and supports and where the goal of the program or service is for everyone to reach their highest potential (Dattilo, 1994).

It is a challenge for leisure service providers to provide outdoor facility and programmatic access to everyone, including people with disabilities. The very elements that make outdoor areas and programs attractive are their undeveloped nature, their ruggedness, the presence of natural forces at work, and the challenge to interact with nature more on nature's terms rather than our technological human terms. But these natural characteristics can also make outdoor recreation and adventure environments a challenge for people with disabilities, as well as for leisure service professionals trying to provide access.

A number of myths have grown out of our culture's preconceived ideas of what people with disabilities can and should do with their lives. Some of these myths concern outdoor and adventure recreation. This research update focuses on four of these myths, presents what the research says about each myth to determine if the myths are reality (they are not), and indicates what recreation professionals should do with this information.

Preferences for Outdoor Environments

One myth is that people with disabilities do not prefer the same kind of outdoor environments as do people without disabilities. This myth would hold that people with disabilities do not value outdoor environments, and they would like all outdoor environments made more accessible through development (i.e. leveling, paving, motorized access, etc.). This is a myth and not a reality. Research indicates that people with disabilities have the same basic preferences for outdoor environments as do people without disabilities. Moore, Dattilo and Devine (1996) found little difference between people with and without disabilities in their preferences for natural settings, and they found similarities in motivations to visit national parks.

Brown, Kaplan and Quaderer (1999) studied people with mobility impairments and their companions or caregivers regarding preferences for natural areas. Participants were shown a series of photographs of natural areas from national, state or city/county parks representing the kinds of places they might expect to see on a nature outing. Their study found that preferences for natural settings are consistent across degrees of mobility impairment; "In other words, individuals with mobility limitations are no different than any one else in the kinds of settings they would like to experience" (p. 218). A major conclusion of this study is that people with disabilities have the same preferences for natural settings as do people without disabilities, and the well established empirical research on environmental preferences applies to people with disabilities as well as to those without disabilities.

Part of this myth about setting preferences is the assumption that most people with disabilities want natural outdoor areas developed to provide easier access. McAvoy and Lais (1996) provide testimonial evidence from people with disabilities that this assumption is false. They found that people with disabilities appreciate undeveloped nature and are not making demands that wilderness areas and other protected natural areas should be developed to provide easier access. Indeed, people with disabilities in the Anderson, Schleien, McAvoy, Lais and Seligman (1997) study reported that the wilderness environment was a critical ingredient to them realizing some of the major benefits of a wilderness canoe/camping experience. They indicated that the wilderness environment intensified and focused individual efforts producing a dramatic impact on group development and enhanced social integration of group members.

Participation in Outdoor Recreation

Another myth is that people with disabilities do not currently participate in outdoor recreation or adventure activities because these activities are dangerous, risky, and out of the realm of possibility for the typical person with a disability. And, even if one would want to participate in these activities, the natural outdoor environment is too inaccessible to make participation possible. Like many myths, this one is false too. People with disabilities are participating in outdoor recreation and adventure activities in large numbers and in a variety of environments and activities.

The National Survey of Recreation and the Environment (NSRE) conducted a large national study of 17,216 Americans in 1994-5. This study found that people with disabilities participate in a range of outdoor recreation and adventure activities including walking, family activities, sightseeing, picnicking, fishing, bird watching, camping, hiking, boating and hunting (Cordell, 1999). McCormick (2001) conducted a thorough analysis of the data from the 1,252 people with disabilities who were included in the NSRE study. He found that people with disabilities indicated levels of participation in outdoor recreation and adventure activities equal to or greater than people without disabilities. As examples, there were no differences in participation rates for nature study or canoeing. In some adventure activities, people with disabilities had greater participation rates before the age of 35 than did persons without disabilities. The overall conclusion of McCormick's study was that the process of disability does not significantly influence participation rates in outdoor recreation activities.

Other studies have indicated that people with disabilities participate in even the most challenging of outdoor recreation and adventure activities. Studies by Robb and Ewert (1987), McAvoy, Schatz, Stutz, Schleien and Lais (1989), and by Anderson et. al.(1997) show that people with disabilities seek risk, challenge and adventure in the outdoors, as do their contemporaries who do not have disabilities.

Benefits of Participation

A third myth is that people with disabilities cannot attain a full range of benefits from outdoor recreation and adventure activities and programs because of their participation limitations. This is a myth and not reality. Research indicates that people with disabilities realize a full range of benefits as a result of participation in outdoor recreation and adventure activities and programs.

A number of studies have focused on outdoor recreation and adventure programs that included people with disabilities and have documented the psychological, social and mental health benefits that people with disabilities gain from participation. These include enhanced self concept and esteem, personal growth, increased leisure skills, increased social adjustment; enhanced body image and positive behavior changes (Robb and Ewert, 1987; McAvoy et. al., 1989). Fullerton, Brandon and Arick (2000) studied 15 residential summer camp programs that had a specialized program for children with disabilities. The disability types in their study included learning disabilities, autism, sensory disabilities, moderate and severe cognitive disabilities, physical disabilities and traumatic brain injury. Their results show that children with disabilities benefit from an outdoor camp program by "... demonstrating greater initiative and/or self-directed independence in the use of their repertoire of adaptive or social skills" (p. 93). The children showed an increase in self-initiated and self-directed activity, and this improvement was transferred in various ways back home, and in school, after the camp experience.

Research with integrated outdoor programs that include people with and without disabilities has found: improved attitude and lifestyle changes in recreation patterns, interpersonal relationships, and social patterns; increased willingness to take risks; higher feeling of self efficacy; and a number of spiritual benefits (McAvoy et. al., 1989; Stringer and McAvoy, 1992).The study by Anderson et. al.(1997) confirmed many of the above benefits, and also found that integrated programs resulted in increased outdoor recreation skills, improved sensitivity to the needs of other group members, and an increased respect for nature among the participants with disabilities. Some have claimed that people with disabilities realize unique benefits in outdoor recreation. The research indicates that the benefits they achieve are the same as those gained by people without disabilities. But it may be the case that many people with disabilities may appreciate these benefits a bit more because they did not believe they would have the opportunity to fulfill their outdoor recreation dreams and hopes for participation.

Barriers to Programs

A final myth is that leisure service agencies and businesses cannot develop inclusive outdoor recreation and adventure opportunities due to accessibility, administrative and staffing barriers. Like the above myths, this one is also false. Constraints to inclusive community recreation programs do exist, and include financial and staffing constraints, negative attitudes, and programming and marketing constraints (Scheien, Ray and Green, 1997). Texts like those by Dattilo (1994) and Schleien, Ray and Green (1997) offer recommended ways for leisure service organizations to plan and implement inclusive services. A study by Schleien, Germ and McAvoy (1997) analyzed successful inclusive community leisure services.

They documented a number of organizational and programmatic best practices that can assist organizations in overcoming barriers to inclusive programs. These included adapting program materials, equipment and activities; conducting formative program evaluations; collaborative program planning with other agencies; revision of agency mission statements to be more inclusive; and inclusive and targeted marketing.

A recent study by Scholl, McAvoy and Smith (2000) analyzed a family outdoor adventure program that included families with children with disabilities. Their study found that a result of participation was an increase in the families' knowledge of strengths within the family, an increase in confidence as a family unit, and an increased attitude within the family that they could continue family vacations that included their child with a disability. The study documented the best professional practices that make inclusive family outdoor recreation activities possible: a careful attention to safety; the provision of appropriate but real challenge; opportunities for the families to socialize within the family and with other families; a balance of group and individual activities; and qualified staff to provide technical and person support to the families.

RELATED ARTICLE: RESEARCH INTO ACTION: CREATING INCLUSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES.

People with disabilities are as diverse as the rest of the population. Some prefer indoor recreation activities and some prefer outdoor opportunities. Lacks of program and facility accessibility and information has prevented some people with disabilities from full participation in outdoor recreation in the past. Outdoor recreation is becoming more available to a wider set of Americans due to: legislation (ADA) and its interpretation; an awakened sense of empowerment and advocacy; and relatively recent program options. People with disabilities are now demanding a place at the table when decisions are being made regarding outdoor recreation facilities, and they are expecting that service providers will include them in outdoor program offerings. Research indicates that people with disabilities prefer the same kind of outdoor environments as everyone else, receive the same benefits from outdoor recreation as do other participants, and they want a full spectrum of outdoor recreation activities ranging from picnicking with their families to wilderness expeditions.

How to Use this Information

If a leisure service organization wants to offer outdoor recreation opportunities to include people with disabilities, the first step is to make a commitment to have inclusion as a major organizational goal. Once that commitment is made, then resources like staffing, training, equipment, facilities, and marketing can be made available to meet that inclusion goal. Based on the research cited in this article, the following are some strategies, and some web sources, to move toward inclusive outdoor recreation:

1. Do not make assumptions about what people with disabilities can or want to do in the outdoors. Ask them. Consult national studies like the one by McCormick (2001). Seek input from persons with disabilities through advisory committees, surveys or focus groups, and by contacting disability advocacy groups.

2. Be aware of the accessibility levels of facilities your organization manages, and those a program utilizes. Determine ways these accessibility levels can be communicated to participants with disabilities. The standards and guidelines for outdoor recreation facility accessibility are currently being developed and revised.

* Contact the Access Board for up-to-date information on standards and guidelines, available on-line at www.accessboard.gov

* The National Center on Accessibility at Indiana University has information on facility accessibility standards, and accessibility research results concerning beaches, picnic facilities, and trails. Available on-line at www.ncaonline.org

* An example of a statewide park accessibility information system, including 76 state-county-city parks, is available on-line at www.wildernessinquiry.org/mnparks/

3. Develop professionally managed inclusive outdoor recreation programs that offer a range of activities and a range of challenge/skill levels. Remember that persons with disabilities are diverse and they want a range of diverse outdoor opportunities.

* The largest non-profit organization offering inclusive outdoor adventure programming is Wilderness Inquiry in Minneapolis, MN. See their listing of programs, available on-line at www.wildernessinquiry.org

* Another program with diverse offerings is Outdoor Explorations, available on-line at www.outdoorexp.org

4. Train staff in strategies for inclusion. This can be done by hiring inclusion experts from the community (contact local disability advocacy groups and therapeutic recreation specialists), by consulting major texts and articles listed in this paper, and by getting information from information centers on inclusion, such as the Institute for Community Integration at the University of Minnesota, on-line at ici.umn.edu

5. Aggressively market inclusive outdoor programs. Many people with disabilities just assume that leisure service organizations will not include them in service offerings for outdoor activities. Target marketing to families, living areas that include people with disabilities, and disability advocacy groups in addition to traditional market segments and target areas. Examine your marketing media to see if it includes representations of people with disabilities participating in outdoor activities.

Leo McAvoy is a professor and chair in the Division of Recreation and Sport Studies at the University of Minnesota. His recent research interests include outdoor recreation and people with disabilities, American Indian sense of place, and wilderness education and management.

Research Update is edited by Cheryl A. Estes, Ph.D., assistant professor in recreation and leisure studies at East Carolina University in Greenville, North Carolina.