;',1;<‘W7744,44444jz,wI , ,, 4,3 '4‘f7. 41 €311... ,ILL; 33} ' 3 {g4 114 ,‘-:" ' - ‘3 3'333'3 3 3: rL44, LML3wwwwumv:mwamw ~44 3 } ».E 4 ”L 45L” ”34,4,., 44~n4vfifi4wmamflfin ~>44 ‘ ,1, 3 3333 9.9433 'w'f,‘ 43,34! 31...,1 $1,433,523 .‘_T:4;,':_.}1'1'€L- .......... 3 5 ”5,31%” ,3 3343,, 333% 3} 3334 33. . 3. . 3" if". 11331.3)" 3.33 E M? 333' "11%;; , 'g‘xiéu {‘3‘ 3333133 ,331333331'3333 Ida, 333 3313:“. 3334:333‘ 3'33 3 3 3 3331333333133. i‘ 3 $1313“1 i593... 3411334 333" L!" 313,,{33433'3' 333313333 3333333 3 '3- 333/ 33'3 33333333333133- 33335 t 3‘3 L” 'IIII‘ LL? 33%,,” mu, IIUIIIHE ‘§%3‘§i‘3“i§3 33334.!333; gig“ ”I” 4 V3 4: 3333 , ‘ ' .733333'33' 3 ' 33%!3333133 33.3.4 1‘3 3333 In 3“ fijzu‘hh" 33:3313313h313333: 2.. 3'3"“ '34-? ”3?? :3“; . $1133: 32: ,_;':. 3 343 ' 3,3333 I “431,93” ‘ 3E3 ' :23. .2513} 3 33333 3333333 3333.44 LEE,“ 4,4 ,33,3,,., 33,3) 33 “,I‘} “4433343363,,3 :E*:L,L,LLWHLL4LM44®;€M3 .,, . ‘~3',._ ' “Lu-4343?? u 3"3’1443'13‘1341 333(333'339333'43333," 3 3333,35: 2.13-3442,3{f€ 3363 EH} ,,} 331343333; :3 3:3,3 3‘33 3 414343433 4} ,L 3€ EaJflq ”‘3'; 2»: a”): 0-: ”do-w '13.?! :”.T' s ‘. . l‘ ESL-'2}: ~ :2. _.. " .. "—0" ——A- fl... 9’;— “H21. -wt- 343,3},3131 4533333 3, }L3,9 ,, 333 3333335 3J3“ ..... J 3: 33335133? .3 A3323 "3’ “4,3,“, M333 {333%. 31339.,13' 141:3“ ”£33 3"; 33l335fl$133€€¢319 4334, 34 33343444 44‘ 3}} 4 -s 3 ‘33 4 :3 3‘;1 :hl my, ,“13,€§:, 333333.333 3313 \ 3333333} 3I. d 433,} ., 4, 3 3‘: 4494444441444 4 !. vii-S; highliih' H‘ 333.31}, 313:1}; 113, 33313“ E|33L3fl finzéai “ - .3 0!! 333:; :3: .14 . I . ‘v £3,213.“ 2:, , .3 - 4+“ 3 3 3‘4 .. 33:3 13,1453" 3 ,4“ $25,? $13.- §£:.[-4.x;!o),}3.45 331} 3 E4LLHLLW 343 3€&”}3“3 W} 43 lfl=fi3444' 33 -'3 ”333 43333333333333" €333 333333333 3333' ~ 3333 3‘44‘ ‘4 433‘ ;333,3i3 43143433 3 = .fiEU' LQWWLw3 E WELL “msvwfiL ' E, - " 333? 333 i133 333i}. 34 4; 33 133€€4,3 £43143, 3'33 3,34: ‘4: ”$343? #33533 333 4133313333: 3443, ii FF, 4 44, 4, 444 ~44 .44: ”3 3331 I. 3 "3'33 '4 33333 3’33 :331'3- "3333' LL 3 E3“ 333333333343 33.333 '34? 3 'vw' 'a 33 .. 1.,‘.:.‘-,.{'3‘, 3‘ ti}: 3,,434313431'31‘ '3? 2. id. E 3‘ o. 9&33 ‘ -. , isgéié: 3&33333‘3‘3J1l34433g3‘h]3 :L I}! I}?! :{i x “E: z": I} a“. ERIE: , | . "3 ‘ €éflq3333.‘333‘.33l I! 33.3 '41,?! ‘3 I ‘Eéé 334.3,. % . ”a,” E L ’ :33 “153.39,! 13 $332,! 3332“] L, 121,; I}; “33,33 ‘1‘ I i $33333 3333 453E533 . I 2"!" . ' ‘ ' ’ 1‘ 1“. O 3" l' 3 3 313333333133 333' . flak" 5:7 ,3: .l‘:. _ T“ ‘ . . 4: 3 35 h '3 .‘H‘ ,1 33333 .. . .2 ,m 3H ,44 343“”33W‘333, L ~ . ; , 33333333333 4,445,339 ML. 413,343, 33 ,,3[.33§ 3333:3333333L333 $343,133 4,3 3" 13444: .4444 44443434 3344444:*4444 , ‘3 ‘ 3 3 ’ 'zfifiEE .3LLL44 3334 3 3‘ 34’33434334 33 ”33* 33 3, 2443 . 4-344444433444434}, 33434333 54} 4.4437 , , 4., -4 333E44 4%344LLEFELLLLL43~ {$4333 fi,3”L”343 4" ' 31!: 53,131, {445.4,},LLLELL 3,334.41 43.3323 4 1,2244}: 433,3, 34,4 ,{ggsi' '3 3331363 333333 333333335:33”3:53.3333333'33333333333 '3 133333” 3 33333133333334} 3333'33333 E “TE. 333,331,533 433.33 . 333333333333333333333333333333333333'I 313,3 3€E3§£3EE3=33€33353$33333333§4333343333;3€35;i,§[11534 433., 3,14,433 {élt‘fiig‘ 323333 3333' 3‘33 H '3L3333‘33'333333u33‘3 " "343,33 3 43”“ MW (3 3 3 33333 1,134,, '4343333' “4,,” 333? H, “z €31.93 has! ; ' ,m 34.3.3 :31: ,7. .3} 3 333,4 LLLWLEEL‘3333EWLN‘WW43 ' ~ 3 4133,}i',3EL,3n3ZE-3~ 3" 44’33' , 3", 333‘ 3 33 4333333343, 33333344 . 4. 4 3‘4 333 4333,43“ . 4 3} 333 33,44“ L € .1 “I, 333 H. . E”: . 33EL 33E,” Emtswum,,3LNLmd3HW344} 333 ,E333," :1, §:y 3'I: :4, :- m 4 4, 4}} ,4 ~ 4, ,4 3' ,4 €,€€"',":‘.3;}:u,nb 19: 3,:,- 333,: 33 333' 3n, ‘3'}, 4 MM 334” ‘43:.‘13333343333433333433 ,} 3 33 :3“ ‘3 343 1° 3,33,, 3. 4,31,],3 ..,, "3m ’L'3}§§,,3 3333,31} 333343 3:3, $4,331,335 “311,33 “WM“ 3 353313. 3333 33333334 3 4m 331.. 1333333333! 333333 3333331333:31333'333iul3333m42 33 3,!) I333 fliifii‘é Date / L/7 /5 2/ 0-7639 IlllllllllUHIIIUIUUIIIIHllllHllllllUllllllllllllllllll ' --— s. 3 1293 10481 2288 If; LIBRARY Michigan State ‘; University This is to certify that the thesis entitled Use of Urban Recreation Resources By Chicago Native Americans presented by Carol Marie Pancner has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for 45' degreein Park and Recreation Resources . Q A Major professor )V‘ESI.) RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LJBRARJES remove this checkout from m your record. fitifié will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. USE OF URBAN RECREATION RESOURCES BY CHICAGO NATIVE AMERICANS BY Carol Marie Pancner A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Park and Recreation Resources 1982 ABSTRACT USE OF URBAN RECREATION RESOURCES BY CHICAGO NATIVE AMERICANS BY Carol Marie Pancner Cultural differences exist in the utilization of recreation resources. In order to better understand and meet the recreational needs of Native Americans. a study of Chicago Native American recreation behavior was conducted. Based on information obtained through preliminary contacts in the Native American community, 126 personal interviews were con- ducted with Native Americans using Native American interviewers; The data suggest that the recreation patterns of Chicago Native Americans have been influenced by tradition. Native Americans participated in team sports such as volleyball and basketball which have traditional Native American characteristics like team/group involvement and competition. Areas perceived and defined by Native Americans as "Indian territories" were the primary locations for their activity participation. Locations where family, friends, and other Indiana go were important reasons indicated by Native Americans for location selection. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My sincere appreciation and gratitude is extended to the members of my graduate committee, Dr. Maureen McDonough, Dr. Joseph Fridgen, and Dr. George Cornell. I would also like to thank Dr. John Dwyer of the U.S. Forest Service Experiment Station in Chicago and Mr. Hank Bonga of the Chicago American Indian Center for their assistance and support. A special thank you is extended to Dave Verbyla for his untiring patience and assistance in all phases of the computer programming. Finally, but most importantly, I thank my family and friends for their encouragement and support throughout this endeavor. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Problem Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Definition of the Environment and Space . 2 Use of Recreation Space by Specific Groups . 4 Territorality and Control of Recreation Space. . 5 The Native American Balance of Life . . . . 7 The Urban Relocation Nightmare . . . . . . . . 9 The Historical Role of Recreation . . . . . . . . 11 Contemporary Native American Recreation . . . . . 13 Problem Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2. METHODS AND PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Sampling Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Instrument Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Pre-testing of the Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Administration of the Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Chapter . Page 2. METHODS AND PROCEDURES (Continued) The Role of Volunteer and Observer . . . . . . . . . 32 Coding and Processing of Completed Surveys . . . . . 33 Limitations..................... 34 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Activity Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Use of Recreation Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 City/Neighborhood Park Use . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Forest Preserve Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 American Indian Center Use . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Most Frequent Activity Locations . . . . . . . . SO Establishing Reasons for Use of Recreation Resources 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O 60 Establishing Reasons for Liking Recreation Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 4. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . .I. 90 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Implications for Managers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Implications for Future Research . . . . . . . . . . 95 APPENDICES Appendix A. Interview Script . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Appendix B. American Indian Center Recreation Survey. . 102 Appendix C. Respondent Demographics . . . . . . . . . . 105 Appendix D. Most Frequently Participated in Activities. 109 Appendix E. Locations Used by Respondents to Participate in Their Most Frequent Act1v1t1e8 I O O I O O O O I O O O O O 0 O 110 LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 iv Table 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. LIST OF TABLES Page Most Frequently Participated in Activities . . . . . . . . 37 Frequency Distribution of Participation in Traditional Activities as Defined by the Question "Do you participate in Powwows, storytelling, etc.?" . . . . . . 38 Participation in Other Traditional Activities as Defined by Respondent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Use of Forest Preserves by Respondents . . . . . . . . . . 40 Use of City/Neighborhood Parks by Respondents . . . . . . 40 Frequency Distribution of City/Neighborhood Parks Locations Defined and Used by Respondents . . . . . . . 42 City/Neighborhood Park Locations by Activity . . . . . . . 44 Frequency Distribution of Forest Preserve Locations Defined and Used by Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Forest Preserve Locations by Activity . . . . . . . . . . 48 Frequency Distribution of the Activities Participated in by Respondents at the American Indian Center . . . . . . . 50 Locations Used by Respondents to Participate in Their Most Frequent Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Most Frequent Activities by Locations . . . . . . . . . . 53 Traditional Locations by Most Frequent Traditional ACtiVity o o o o {.0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 58 Frequency Distribution of Respondents' Reasons for Using the Locations of Their Most Frequent Activities . . . . 61 Reasons for Using Bowling Locations . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Reasons for Using Volleyball Locations . . . . . . . . . . 64 Reasons for Using Basketball Locations . . . . . . . . . . 65 Reasons for Using Softball Locations . . . . . . . . . . . 66 V Table 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32._ 33. 34. 35. C1. C2. C3. C4. C5. C6. D1. E1. Reasons LIST OF TABLES (Continued) for Using Baseball Locations . Reasons for Using walking for Pleasure Locations . Reasons for Using Driving for Pleasure Locations . Reasons Reasons for Using Picnicking Locations . for Using Bicycling for Pleasure Locations Reasons for Using Fishing Locations . Frequency Distribution of Respondents' Reasons for Locations of Their Most Frequent Activities Reasons Reasons Reasons Reasons Reasons Reasons Reasons Reasons Reasons Reasons for for for for for for for for for for Liking Liking Liking Liking Liking Liking Liking Liking Liking Liking Sex of Respondents Age of Respondents . Length of Residence in Chicago by Respondents Bowling Locations . Volleyball Locations Basketball Locations Softball Locations Baseball Locations Walking for Pleasure Locations Driving for Pleasure Locations Bicycling for Pleasure Locations Picnicking Locations Fishing Locations . 0 Occupation of Respondents . . . . Highest Year of School Completed by Respondents Tribal Affiliations of Respondents . Most Frequently Participated in Activities . Locations Used by Respondents to Participate in Their Most Frequent Activities . . . . vi Page 67 68 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 79 81 82 83- 84 86 87 88 105 105 106 106 107 108 109 110 Figure LIST OF FIGURES Page Flow Chart of Methods-and Procedures . . . . . . . . . .' 21 Parks and Forest Preserves in the Chicago Area . . . . . 23 Chicago Communities and the Neighborhoods of Uptown. . . 24 Selected Native American Organizations and Nearby Recreation Resources in Uptown . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 City/Neighborhood Park Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 City/Neighborhood Park Locations and Forest Preserve Areas Relative to Uptown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 vii Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION Professionals in the outdOOr recreation field are aware that cultural differences exist in the utilization of recreation resources. This awareness has partially originated in the natural resource litera- ture where studies indicate strong cross-cultural differences in attitudes to and utilization of the land (Burch, 1971; Forster, 1972; Spoehr, 1956; van den Berghe, 1975). The awareness of cultural dif- ferences in outdoor recreation resource use has primarily been supported by research in the areas of class, age, and urban/rural comparisons (Bultena and Field, 1977, 1980; Cheek and Burch, 1976). Empirical examination of ethnic or minority differences in recreation patterns has not received as much attention. Several authors suggest that there are Black/White differences in preference for certain types of recreation activities (Washburne, 1978; Yancey and Snell, 1971; washburne and Wall, 1980; Peterson, 1977; Wendling, 1980). These studies also indicate a preference among Blacks for urban recreation activities and sites rather than regional or remote sites such as wilderness areas. Other studies of Chinese and Japanese groups also indicate differential uses of outdoor recreation resources (Lee, 1973, 1972; Machlis and Field, 1980). Some consistency exists across these studies in tying the differential uses of outdoor recreation resources to differing views of the land (Knowlton, 1972; Lee, 1972, 1973; Yancey and Snell, 1971). Meeker (1972) summarizes the relationship between ethnicity, views of land use and nature, and national park visitation when he discusses the lack of enthusiasm for national park wilderness areas on the part of Blacks and Native Americans. His argument again rests on differing views of appropriate forms of land use based in cultural traditions. Cultural perceptions of the land and other natural resources have evolved over periods of time when these cultural groups were not as urbanized. The question of understanding ethnic or minority dif- ferences in the use of urban recreation resources becomes, in part, one of understanding the traditional views of land and other resources and the changes in those views related to urbanization. Other variables that have been identified as important in differential uses of recreation resources by urban ethnic groups include definition and control of recreation space, and sex role defini- tion (Lee, 1973; Suttles, 1968). As with perceptions of the land as a resource, the role of these factors in managing group behavior evolved prior to urbanization. In order to meet the diverse outdoor recreation needs of urban populations especially minority and ethnic groups, an examination of these needs must be made. Once these recreation needs are understood and defined, urban recreation resources can be better managed. Problem Justification Definition of the Environment and Space For a variety of reasons (fear, social control, social order), each culture has a unique perception of how Homo sapiens fit into the non-human environment (Spoehr, 1946; LynCh, 1960). The physical environment is deemed important because it serves as a spacial field in which social life can be organized (Suttles, 1968; Evans-Prichard, 1940). Therefore, physical space or "place" can be identified by those characteristics that fit into a scheme of order unique to a particular social group. Lee (1972:71) states that, "The type of use that organ- ized groups make of physical spaces is important in determining the definition of place they will share. The number and kinds of places shared by groups will vary with the cultural and social conditions of their existence, because patterns of work, consumption, recreation, worship, and mobility will be different." Several kinds of recreation places exist in urban areas. Lee (1972), Hester (1975), and the Chicago Department of Development and Planning (1967) categorize these recreation places as follows: Neighborhood outdoor places are located in or near residential areas. Jacobs (1961:95) states, "Neighborhood outdoor places are an integral part of the lives of the local inhabitants. Therefore understanding the use of space in a given neighborhood is the first step in comprehending neighborhood outdoor places." District outdoor places are located in or near a residential area. Lee (1972:79) states, "low income residents generally have less knowledge and make less use of district places than of neighborhood places." Regional outdoorgplaces are located in or near neighborhoods or districts. They are mainly used by residents from towns, cities, or counties who share a common cultural identity. Remote outdoor places are located in or near neighborhoods, districts, or regions. They are often widely known for their unique features which attract visitors from the local region, other regions, states, or foreign countries. Use of these recreation places varies with the knowledge and definition a particular group has for an area. For example, if a neighborhood group knows that their local park is unsafe at night or controlled by gangs, their use of this park may be limited. In addition, if a recreation place is defined as 'too far away to use' by one person, someone else may define this same location as 'far away and therefore for occasional use only'. It is therefore important to understand the definition of place a social group holds for a given area. This definition will help explain the use or non-use of a recreation place. The next sections discuss how specific groups define and use recreation space. Use of Recreation Space by Specific Groups Few studies have focused on the location where participation in recreation activity occurs for specific ethnic groups (Wendling, 1980). To date, research indicates that Blacks prefer urban local parks to more remote or wilderness areas (Washburne, 1978; Washburne and Wall, 1980; Yancey and Snell, 1971; Peterson, 1977; Dinkle, 1975; Lee, 1972). Washburne (1978) and Washburne and Wall (1980) suggest that use of space by Blacks varies by recreation activity. Their research further suggests that Blacks will travel outside their neigh- borhoods to use facilities offering a specific recreation activity like fishing. Lazewaki (1976) found that Native Americans who migrated to Chicago restricted their spacial activity to the Uptown area which is the study area of this research project. This migration to Uptown provided migrants with opportunities to live and socialize with other Native Americans. Therefore, activity locations like social centers, friends/relatives homes, and clothes shopping centers within Uptown were visited more frequently by Uptown Native Americans than non- Uptown Native Americans. This activity patterning by Uptown Native Americans reinforces the importance of Native American social ties to the Uptown community through frequent Native American use of Uptown locations. Other studies of Japanese and Chinese groups indicate that they prefer not to use regional or remote parks (Lee, 1972; Machlis and Field, 1980). These studies support that differential uses of space by specific groups exist. In part, use is determined by activity. Other variables, however, involving definition of place also influence the use of recreation resources. Two such variables, territorality and control of recreation space influence the use of recreation resources . Territorality and Control of Recreation Space Few territorial studies of parks have been conducted (Malmberg, 1980). Suttles (1968) found in a study conducted in the Adana area of Chicago that residents tend to assign certain recreation areas to specific ethnic groups. Suttles (1968:54) summarizes the criteria Adams area residents used in the assignment of these recreation areas: 1. Location - If a recreational establishment is located in an area of residents conceded to a particular ethnic group, the latter have a claim on it. 2. .§£2££ - If the recreational establishment has a staff, their ethnicity is one of the grounds on which a claim may be asserted. 3. Precedent - If a recreational place has a history of usage by one ethnic group, that group has a claim on it. Other groups entering a specific recreation area are viewed as intruders or 'guests. "A guest is someone who is treated with temporary courtesy but an intruder is considered someone who has taken the first step off the path of orderly social relationships" (Suttles, 1968:54). Suttles (1968:56) noted that most encounters with other ethnic groups are rare, but if two or more groups do meet, it is not without violence. Suttles (1968:113-115) provides an illustrative example of how territorality and control of space was used in the Adams neighborhood. "Once established, the Barracudas installed themselves in the northwest corner of Sheridan park. The significance of this location can be appreciated only if one understands the role of the park within the Italian section. Practi- cally every Italian street group in the area makes use of this park, and several of them.have their hangouts there. Other people in turn refer to the Italian groups collec- tively as the guys from the Park. Sometimes, the entire Italian community is spoken of as the 'people over by the park'. The park itself is partitioned into a finely graduated series of more or less private enclosures, with the most private hangout going to the reigning group and the least private to the weakest group. The northwest corner of the park is the most exposed of any portion, and this is where the Barracudas installed themselves. Even in this lowly spot, however, they were most resented by the other groups. To the Italians, the Park was almost a sacred charge and the Mexicans' intrusion was a ritual pollution rather than a mere loss of facilities. The Barracudas were harassed, ridiculed, and insulted. On their own part, they became belligerent and vaunted all sorts of outrageous claims about themselves. Soon the situation deteriorated, and the Italian group became extremely harsh with the Barracudas. Since the Barracudas were no match for even some of the younger Italian groups, they removed themselves to one member's house near Racine and Harrison." An investigation by Lerup (1972) of a park in Stockholm, Sweden also revealed that sociocultural divisions divide the park into terri- tories. The two most distinct groups, Southern European immigrants and students, occupy opposite ends of the park. Lee (1972:77) Observed local territorial definitions of space in a neighborhood park situated in a Chinese district of Pacific City. He noted that territorial use varies both specially and temporally. For example, the Cherry Street Boys of Pacific City are a powerful force in the use and control of outdoor spaces in their district (Lee, 1972:78). Social groups use space differently depending on their defini- tion and perceptions of that space. Territorality and control of Space can be displayed in a park by a division of sociocultural groups or a violent encounter of two opposing social groups. This use of space is quite different from the traditional1 Native American2 views of appropriate land use. Traditional values and definitions of the land and environment determined how resources would be used. Unlike other groups, Native Americans maintain a balance with nature by being able to reside with nature without significantly altering the environment. They have a unique cultural perception of how they fit into the non-human environ- ment. This relationship is important in understanding how'Native Americans use recreation resources. The Native American Balance of Life Native American views of the non-human environment differ from other segments of society. Perhaps this can be illustrated best by the following story. A White radio newscaster reported over American 1The term, traditional, is used here in the same historical context that early scholars used the word to describe the activities and values of Native American populations prior to or upon White contact (Morgan, 1851; Stevenson, 1904; Swanton, 1908, for example). 2Native American is defined here as a person of North American Indian Ancestry, commonly referred to as an American Indian. 8 National Public Radio that "there was no loss of life" from a fire which ravaged acres of trees, soil and other life forms (Vecsey and Venables, 1980:1X). The White radio newscaster separated human life from non-human life. To the Native American there does not exist a separation between human and non-human life. Native Americans believe that they are a link of a large circular chain with all other living things (Washburne, 1971; Vecsey and Venables, 1980; Udall, 1972). Vecsey and Venables (1980:X) elaborate on this interrelationship of all living things: "Humans represent a small part of this interdependent chain of physical existence. Any loss of life along the chain diminishes the whole. In contrast, the straight line of progress followed by many non-Indians does not reincorporate the unity of creation's circular chain perceived by many White ancestors." Native American religion and its concepts form the basis of Native American ecology. Native Americans view the earth as their mother. She is the source and sustainer of all life. The relationship between the land and the tribe define tribal identity, culture, environ- mental adaptation, and method of survival (Cahn, 1968; Deloria, 1969; Whalen, 1971; Washburne, 1975, 1971; Vecsey and Venables, 1980). Conservation is part of the Native American land use philos- ophy. Deloria (1970:180) summarizes this philosophy as follows: "Indian land use philosophy is so simple that it seems stupid to repeat it; man must live with other forms of life on the land and not destroy it." Native Americans have been called lovers and conservers of nature because they are able to reside with nature without disturbing or significantly altering the environment (Whalen, 1971; Maclead, 1936; Speck, 1951). George P. Marsh (1874:34-40) summarizes the Native .American land use philosophy as: "American Indians tend to upset the balances of nature far less than civilized folk, they appreciate and understand it more." Some historians and scholars do not, however, believe Native Americans hold these environmental perceptions of land and nature (Martin, 1978; Bellah, 1970). Instead, they consider the view of the Native American as an ecologist and conserver of nature a popular stereotype and myth. Native American environmental relationships to the land and nature are complex. But, comprehension of the relationship between .Native Americans and the non-human environment is basic to an under- standing of traditional Native American life. Some Whites do not care to comprehend this relationship. As a result, an environmental con- flict over land and natural resource use continues to be a central issue of Native American-White relations. Some recent issues include: fishing rights in Washington and Michigan, water and mineral rights in the Southwest, and subsistence rights in Alaska. The Urban Relocation Nightmare Urban relocation of Native Americans represents the last step in a historical progression of alienation from the non-human environ- ment. Initially, Native Americans were dispossessed from their lands and forced onto reservations which were usually unfit for subsistence. Today, reservations which offer Native Americans a vital link to the environment and a traditional life style are being left in favor of urban life. Over the past decades, there has been a migration of Native K Americans from the reservation to urban areas. Native American 10 relocation and the resultant adjustment problems have been well documented in the literature. (For examples see: Ablon, 1965, 1972; Price, 1972; Graves, 1966; Sorkin, 1978, 1969; Hodge, 1971.) Some of the reasons for this migration include escape from unsatisfactory reservation life due to unemployment, friction with relatives, and poverty. Other factors that have influenced Native American relocation are: military service, Bureau of Indian Affairs relocation programs, schooling, and non-Indian marriages (Hodge, 1971; Synder, 1971; Margon, 1973; Garbarino, 1973; Officer, 1973; Sorkin, 1978; Ablon, 1965, 1972). Population data suggests that the percentage of Native Americans living in urban areas is increasing (U.S. Bureau of Census, 1980). The largest migrations have been to Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Chicago, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Tulsa (Officer, 1973; Neils, 1969; Sorkin, 1978). This migration has created several significant problems for the Native American. There has been an increase in unemployment due to a lack of education and training of some Native Americans because they originated from agriculturally based areas lacking industrial develop- ment. Poor health, poverty, and difficulty in coping with urban culture are other long standing adjustment problems. Increasing rates of alcoholism, homicide and suicide persist as a result of inadequate adjustment to urban life. Family organization has been disrupted due to relocation and alcoholism among male family members. Consequently, many women are working to provide additional income which disrupts traditional working patterns. Many Native Americans feel isolated from friends and family and a familiar way of life they are no longer able to pursue in urban areas. (Brown, 1982; Hodge, 1971; Synder, 11 1971; Price, 1972; Ablon, 1965, 1972; Neog et al., 1970; Sorkin, 1969, 1978). Because of the socio-economic problems surrounding urban adjust- ment, there seems to be an abundance of free time available to most Native Americans. Recreation can.serve as a social and emotional outlet for Native Americans unemployed and suffering adjustment problems. Menninger (1942) suggests that play provides opportunities for indivi— duals to be successful which compensates for the hardships of daily life. Other psychologists view play as therapeutic in the sense that it provides stability and mental health by providing opportunities to release tension and frustration (Erickson, 1950; Haun, 1965). In order to fully understand the potential role of recreation for urban Native American populations, it is necessary to look at the historical role recreation played in non-urban Native American Society. The Historical Role of Recreation Historically, recreation held a significant role in the lives of Native Americans. Games were primarily participated in for amuse- ment (Russel, 1908; Stevenson, 1904; Hodge, 1912; Morgan, 1851). However, games were also used as instruments of rites or were descended from ceremonial observances of a religious character (Culin, 1902:802). Stevenson (1904:317) states, "With some primitive people games are played primarily for divination, but ceremonial games of the Zuni are for the bringing of rain and they constitute an important element in their religious and social life." Other games were used to practice skills useful to warfare and adult roles. These were generally games of skill and dexterity. 12 The game of lacrosse was especially used by the Iroquois and Choctaw for this purpose. Other games including archery, racing games, ball games, javelin or dart throwing were sports played by adults to improve dexterity and skills useful to a warrior (Culin, 1902; Morgan, 1851; Eastman, 1971; Garbarino, 1976; Underhill, 1953; Stevenson, 1904; Swanton, 1908; Russel, 1908; Sando and Scholer, 1976). Drama, storytelling, and music were also important traditional recreation activities and served as a means to transmit oral tradi- tions and morals to the people (Sando and Scholer, 1976; Collier, 1947; Fletcher, 1970; Lurie, 1978; Fletcher and La Fleshe, 1911). Games of chance such as dice throwing, top spinning, and guessing games were popular activities usually accompanied by betting (Hodge, 1912; Culin, 1902; Stevenson, 1904; Russel, 1908; Sando and Scholar, 1976; Underhill, 1953). Games of chance occurred primarily at powwows and special feasts as a form of group entertainment. Singing and dancing were also an important group activity participated in at powwows and feasts (Driver, 1961; Wissler, 1922; Fletcher, 1970; Fletcher and La Fleshe, 1911). Culin (1902:809) and Hodge (1911:483-484) state that games of Native Americans were: 1. similar and therefore could be classified into a small number of groups; 2. morphologically similar and universal among all tribes; 3. descended from ceremonial observances of which a game was a significant part; 4. performed as religious ceremonies or as individual or group entertainment; 5. similar to ceremonial observances found on other continents. Historically, recreation served specific purposes and roles in 13 Native American society. However, in order to determine whether recreation is still important to Native Americans, an investigation of contemporary recreation patterns is necessary. Contemporary Native American Recreation Today, limited information is available about the current recreation patterns of Native Americans. Barta (1976) found that Tewa High School students preferred activities that were a combination of traditional and contemporary or White-influenced activities. Activities participated in by Native American students included: powwows, driving, bicycling, hobbies, hunting, fishing, camping, softball, baseball, bowling, walking, shooting pool, archery, jogging, and pinball. Students indicated that they would like to participate in more Native American activities and less White-influenced activities. In a study of the Uintah Youth Camp on the Uintah-Ouray Reservation, Jackson and Griffiths (1974) described some of the camp's activities.- They included: water front activities, foot races, target practice, archery, hiking, fishing, arts and crafts, movies, singing, and storytelling. Participation in these activities support Barta's (1976) finding that Native Americans participate in both traditional and contemporary recreation activities. In urban areas, Native American recreation patterns vary like other ethnic groups. Families and individuals participate in activi- ties which they enjoy. Garbarino (1971) recognized that Chicago Native American families enjoyed visiting city parks, zoos, and museums especially those containing.Native American materials. Ablon (1972), Price (1972), and Garbarino (1971) all noted 14 that most large urban centers have Native American organizations where such activities as Boy or Girl Scouts, canoe clubs, or powwows were held. In addition, there was an interest in such team sports as basketball and baseball. In a survey conducted by Price (1972), urban Los Angeles Native Americans responded that 462 of them participated in sports for recrea- tion, 16% watched T.V. and attended movies, 92 went to powwows, and 7% went to bars. Krutz (1973) found in a study of San Francisco Bay Native Americans that Riowas organized dance groups and performed at powwows. Great attention was given to traditional costume design and dance detail. In New York City, Native Americans participated in powwows, arts and crafts exhibitions, hand games, fashion shows, and dance groups (Einhorn, 1973). The Thunderbird American Indian dancers gave public performances to show the artistic value of their culture (Einhorn, 1973). The Chicago American Indian Center offered social activities geared to youth (Garbarino, 1973). A Christmas party and monthly teen dances were part of the Center's activities. In addition, the Center offered a summer day camp program and facilities to several organized youth groups (Garbarino, 1973). Some activity patterns of urban Native Americans have been established based on the observations and research of social scientists. This research supports participation by Native Americans in both tradi- tional and nontraditional activities. These findings are not, however, adequate to fully understand Native American recreation behavior. Other information focusing on frequency, reasons, and locations of 15 participation is needed. Problem Statement Given that there exists a variety of minority and ethnic groups in urban areas, the question becomes one of where to place emphasis in terms of examining patterns of recreation resource use. In recent years, there has been a migration of Native Americans from reservations to urban areas. This migration has created several significant problems for Native Americans. These socio-economic prOb- lems surrounding urban adjustment could perhaps, in part, be resolved by using recreation as a social and emotional outlet. However, to understand the potential role of recreation for urban Native Americans, it is necessary to look at traditional views of the land and recreation. Traditional views of the non-human environment and its uses and meaning differ from those of other segments of society. Native Americans believe the land should be enjoyed and used but not overused or exploited by unregulated mineral extractions for example, as many U.S. policies and corporate actions have suggested (Potts, 1980; Sandlin, 1977). These traditional views of the land have significant implications for utilization of outdoor recreation resources by this urban group. Because very little is known about the current recreation patterns of Native Americans in urban areas, an investigation of urban Native American recreation behavior is important in order to understand and meet their recreation needs. 16 Objectives The general objective of this study was to initiate a preliminary investigation of the outdoor recreation behavior of Chicago Native Americans. The specific objectives of this study are: -l) to determine where activities are taking place; 2) to look at why these particular resources are being used. To accomplish the above thesis objectives, the following research questions must be addressed: 1) What resources are being used by Native Americans? ’2) Why are these resources being used? 3) What is attractive about these resources? Definitions The following is a list of definitions used by the researcher. These definitions are provided to clarify the author's meaning of these terms throughout the thesis. Native American - A person of North American Indian ancestry, commonly referred to as an American Indian. The U.S. government defines as Indian as someone possessing one fourth degree blood quantum and a member of a federally recognized tribe. The researcher did not consider blood quantum as criterion for defining a Native American. Discrepancies exist in the definition of Native American within the federal system and tribal governments. For the purposes of this pre- liminary investigation of Native American recreation behavior, blood quantum is unimportant and therefore was not considered for respondent eligibility. 17 Traditional - No specific definition of traditional was pro- vided to respondents. It was believed that providing a definition might deter respondents from providing information of a more personal or controversial nature. Identification of how respondents would define traditional recreation activities was important for the analysis of the study. While a definition was not provided, it was hoped respond- ents would define traditional in a historical context. The researcher defined traditional in two contexts: 1) Historical as per the litera- ture in reference to the activities and values of Native Americans prior to and upon White contact, and 2) Customary or what was perceived as traditional by respondents. Contemporary recreation activities - Those recreation activities which have resulted from.White American influence. Chapter 2 METHODS AND PROCEDURES Introduction Historically, the social researcher or ethnologist has received varied acceptance froijative American communities. Adolph Bandelier was forced to leave Santo Domingo Pueblo as a result of his bold and aggressive ethnographic techniques (Riley, 1963:31). Other early American ethnographers used trickery and pressure to obtain information from Native American informants (Lurie, 1966:53). These methodological techniques employed by early researchers did little to encourage participation by Native American communities in future research. Today, conducting research in Native American communities is complicated and should be done only after a preliminary investigation of the community to be studied. Adair and Deuschle (1970:XIV-XV) suggest the following preliminary steps: 1. Those members of the donor society concerned with planned change must have a comprehensive knowledge of the culture of those for whom the innovations are designed. 2. In addition, there must be constant awareness on the part of those planning change of their own culture (or subculture), its values, structures, predilictions, and biases. 3- The political structure. . . must be understood and its leadership identified and worked through. 18 19 4. Communication between the two cultures must be facilitated, as well as communication between components of both the donor and recipient societies. These preliminary steps may not obtain community access, but they may help deter the impression that the social researcher is a "predator who is using the Indian to further his career" (Maynard, 1974:402). Many Native American communities have developed rules to control proposed research projects (Trimble, 1977:161). Other communities have allowed individuals to interact directly with researchers. Some situations encountered by researchers include respondents asking for personal favors and providing fictitious answers to questions (Trimble, 1977; Maynard, 1974). Maynard (1974:402) suggests that this is a reciprocal arrangement between researcher and respondent whereby "in return [for favors], the researcher receives information:' A research methodology to study ethnic and minority communities has yet to be defined. Guidelines, however, have been developed based on prior experience and research. Weiss (1977, 33-34) and Trimble (1977:170) suggest the following guidelines: 1. Make contact with the community leaders to obtain consent and promote acceptance of the study. 2. Form an advisory board to assist in development of the research instrument, selection of indigenous interviewers, and interpretation of data. 3. Use indigenous bilingual interviewers to assist in bridging the cultural gap to community. 4. Develop cross-cultural methodological techniques. 5. Make project results available to community in a comprehensible and usable form. The procedures outlined by Adair and Deuschle, Weiss, and Trimble, were followed throughout this study. Preliminary contacts 20 were made in the Chicago Native American community. Through these contacts several objectives were accomplished: 1) information was gathered about recreation patterns; 2) advice was generated about the best way to contact a wide range of Native American groups; 3) assist- ance was obtained in making further contacts; 4) help was obtained in devising an instrument; and 5) assistance was provided in hiring Native American interviewers. All personal interviews with Native Americans were conducted using primarily Native American interviewers. Fifteen group- administered surveys were completed by two groups of Native American respondents who were attending volleyball and basketball night at the American Indian Center. These surveys were administered to each group of respondents as a test of their effectiveness as a future research instrument. Results of the study were disseminated to the Native American community in.a comprehensible form. Figure 1 illustrates the methods and procedures used throughout the research project. These methods and procedures will be discussed more thoroughly throughout this chapter. The initial sections of this chapter define the locations and respondents of the study. The frame- work for the data collection is discussed in the following sections: instrument development, survey administration, and the role of volunteer and observer. The concluding section discusses the limitations of the methods and procedures utilized throughout this study. Study Area Chicago was chosen as the study area of this research project for several reasons. First, the Chicago area has a relatively large 21 monsooooum new account no uuoeu roam .H enough «a on a u n o n a n N u NH an mmwm an a o a o n c n N a neon oucovaoaoou va- .uouaou acumen a-uuuol< .mmm: on sounds: ounce-cu haw-lam unchanao nouaeloo oouuuuae on. ooeoasehox quad cocoa one: season-sue sooaoeoo counsesoo nmiu>uoue~ sou-cutout uaolauunau 00.3 :thgdu I. coauuuuoou as: ou menace cases” nausea-a ea ve>dooou flow-.«IHON huuaalloo ensue: new: uuausoo Andaman voeono>ov and-suuoan man: an cavern Awooaoum xxxxxxuuu nauseous aoag>on an an on onus .nn .m .n 21. monsoooonm and avenues no guano 30am .H «woman xxxxxxuuxuux announce-on van .uoucou common awouuoad .mum: on saunas: ounce-cu hue-Isa .nq xuxnxxxu squad-e. nouaeloo .ou x venuuuoa one moaoaaehox dune .a xxuuuxnu cocoa auaa \eoaoaosue meanness .o Muxuuuxxxxnnx couoavsoo caew>houen .N u sou-cutoun uaaasuuosu .o u soon sou-onou on nonuwuuo-u on: on Monaco Bowman ensued-d he menu-ooh sown-«lune .n MHHHHN haunallou ozone: new: acouaoo nouuuau .c xxuuuuxxxx voeo~o>ov acclauuocn .n u mum: ea vow-Bu annex—cum .N xuxxxuuxu auuoaoua songs-a .~ «A ca 0 o N o n c n N N Na an ad a c N o n c n N A NN an on Noun Noam Oman 22 Native American population. Estimates of this population range from 10,709, counted by the 1980 U.S. Bureau of Census, to 20,000, cited by community organizations (Brown, l982:l). The Chicago Native American population increased roughly 20% from 1970 to 1980. Statistics suggest that migrations to Chicago will continue as people continue to leave economically depressed rural areas in favor of city employment. Chicago offers diverse recreational opportunities to its resi- dents through the efforts of the Chicago Park District and the Forest Preserve District (See Figure 2.). The availability of these recrea- tional opportunities were considered in choosing Chicago as the study area. The U.S. Forest Service North Central Experiment Station, is interested in examining minority recreation use patterns at the community level (Dwyer, personal communication 1981). Because most of the Native Americans relocating to Chicago during the 1950's and 1960's concentrated in the North Side community of Uptown, Chicago is a good location to analyze community recreation use patterns. Today, the Chicago Native American community is more dispersed. Only 122 of the area's Native American community resides in Uptown (U.S. Census Bureau, 1980). However, most Native American organiza- tions are still located on the Chicago North Side. They play an important role in the community by providing cultural ties to those Native Americans living elsewhere in the city. The Chicago North Side community of Uptown was defined as the study area of this research project (See Figure 3.). Uptown has a significant Native American population and recreation resources available to its residents which enables analysis of minority recreation use patterns at the community level. (See Figure 4.) 23 Parks and Forest Preserves in the Chicago Area Figure 2 . 24 NJ" mun" 6m Wong”: 24‘” Ashton“ IUD lnumumni Anon Fullerton 2‘00 Nam “in N Ch-uqofli Madmen “men 120) hum Camu- 22C!) J'sl Nathan ’vv-nq 1m nm 56m Sl-a Nun 95y» WM} 1 I 1m "9m g '77m 3 'b’m mm 3 g ‘38" a _ __ . ‘ 5. 5 5 1 _ ‘. x Sic". um um Van 24(1) Inn-Ion nun A or .r (. ll." (an... 5..., Figure 3. Chicago Communities and the Neighborhoods of Uptown 25 o3ouma ea spokesman coauoouoom hauuoz one odouusnanswuo dooauua< o>aumz nouooaow .e seamen sung .oauos sun. «an. uneven nausea 359391 .3 anon! stun-2 you 33.3.5 .uum uoaaom uaz scout-m nausea-0:3 mourns! .5qu 845 033.8 aqua»! gun-z usuusu BIN—van was»! PIUFU‘UQ 6844u0< fluvial; 44 ~.~ sou-um assoc N.— .328 3.3 ~.~ use: nssossuxsunu>ssuu aqua; u.u .3 s... 3:: unam— can~s>s3— u.u a.— ~.~ N.~ couch-ac ~.~ . sosnusa_ ~.N saunas: none-z veal—on; u.~ u.n soon-In ~.n ~.u .323: J: .82 sous-3 ~.~ ~.n nonussxsuso- snowmen“— ~.q ~.~ nodal: ~.~ —.N ~.~ anon anon acumen 0 h n s M u.~ n.« ‘36 sands/nutsav mao otdosg was!“ punoxv 318 "VT'l ‘3$A¥33' '.'I3PTIWD "u'I'P'II.8 lupus: IT'Q"TI°A IT'qa'!"l IT'Q3001 11‘93399 'T'l'l TI‘Q".I too; mans It Ills 'UTPP'TSI"¥""°Q°I Imam zones/0°! '31‘311 nan-wot; so; lnrtalatg gutflatflfifd an can-not; so; Ammnzv A5 533.3. .3 mcoauoooa some 333230553 a «Heme 44 —. ova-um unsuc— ouooaum nun-aw— u.— «xxx. noug-{OA 323.5 .302 .v- .1. u¢«,u~ acum— A; vs: 23”— u.— A; canon-no 1a 8.10... , «4 1n 3.9—u: a; mi noon-l anal—00,, 1H 1d 1‘ Bonus «A n.n a; 1d #4 a; uqnqguux .1; uao~< a; u..— ~.~ BOMBA— 1n «J a; unsung—20:. 0.955”; «J n..— :20... a; a.“ ~.~ 1n x»..— a and cad—Eu ~.~ H.~ O N M o H n. M C Q a; H 0 d '30 ands/£31513” mac “fan ‘33“ pawn as 'm ”Mom Inner tm‘fltoa £31433! I , .1an mm TM“! mates W1 TIN." too; mac 3' m Imports/WI- Imm Junta/031 Im'u mama so; 31:11qu Imuma mum 10; m ANmnzv A5 figaumé .3 28333 fig voonuofimfimzlufio 5 «Hana 45 Forest Preserve Use Only 35.7% of the respondents used forest preserve areas as opposed to 60.3% of the respondents who indicated that they used city/ neighborhood parks. Figure 6 illustrates the use of city/neighborhood parks and forest preserve areas relative to the Uptown community. Forest preserve areas defined and used by respondents include: LaBagh, other states, around Chicago, and along Lake Michigan (Table 8). In contrast to the city/neighborhood park responses where respondents accurately named specific parks like Chase, the forest preserve responses were not specific forest preserve names except for LaBagh and Swallow Cliffs. Instead, respondents indicated that Indian reser- vations, other states, and friends/relatives homes were also forest preserve locations. This seems to suggest that: l) respondents are not familiar with Chicago forest preserve areas and therefore do not know specific forest preserve names; and/or 2) respondents perceive and therefore define forest preserve areas differently from the Chicago Park District and Forest Preserve District. Because Native American respondents perceived forest preserves differently, this may account for reservations and friends/relatives homes being defined as forest preserves. LaBagh Forest Preserve was used by 31.1% of the respondents who used forest preserves (Table 8). The use of this forest preserve would be higher if locations close to LaBagh are included. Respondents had difficulty recalling names of forest preserve areas so they often referred to a particular forest preserve as being near an expressway or on some street. Because LaBagh Forest Preserve is located by the Edens Expressway and not far from the Kennedy Expressway, inclusion 46 UPTOWN 1|” I. City/Neighborhood El. I I E FOrest Preserve Areas m-- 0-. m Figure 6. City/Neighborhood Park Locations and Forest Preserve Areas Relative to Uptown 47 Table 8 Frequency Distribution of Forest Preserve Locations Defined and Used by Respondents (N845) 2 Response LaBagh ' 31 . 1 Suburbs ' . 13.3 Near Edens Expressway 8.9 Friend/Relative Home 6.7 Other States 6.7 Around Chicago 4.4 Along Lake Michigan 2.2 Swallow Cliffs 2.2 Haywood ‘ 2.2 Near Kennedy Expressway - 2.2 Wonder Lake 2.2 In Neighborhood 2.2 Other Locations 4.4 Don't Know 6.7 Non-response 4.6 100.0 of these two locations into the response percentage for LaBagh Forest Preserve would increase its use to 42.22. The majority of respondents 21.4% used LaBagh to picnic (Table 9). Other activities participated in at LaBagh were: walking for pleasure, bicycling for pleasure, reading, relaxing, and children's activities. Respondents also chose forest preserve areas in the suburbs, around Chicago, along Lake Michigan, and along Lake Shore Drive to picnic, bicycle for pleasure, and play softball (Table 9). In comparing the overall use of city/neighborhood park locations 48 Table 9 Forest Preserve Locations by Activity (2) (N=56) o H o s on u m o >~ :3 a: H u o o 'o .4 -H -u w .. a 8 5:. s 3 .2: a .2: .. .. . 3 °‘ 8 Q :4 .‘c’ 23 .4 H 4.: no 0 > 0 GO 5 O O U -H 4.: 5 no '0 - 'H «H a o u .4 a co ‘2 on a: .x *0 a: a)~ .: m .5 u -o .4 m o '3 5 -3 .3 .3 '8 a ‘3 3 I3 '3 '5 :3 L: o. :n n. s: a: a: a: t: a: c> #aBagh F.P. 1.8 1.8 21.4 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 [Suburbs 7.1 1.8 Pround Chicago 3.6 1.8 1.8 ear Kennedy Expressway 1.8 1.8 ear Edens. ‘ Expressway .3.6 1.8 Swallow Cliff F.P. 1.8 1.8 Illinnesota 1.8 1.8 Wisconsin 1.8 Indiana 1.8 Bong Lake Mich. 1.8 long Lakeshore Drive 1.8 baywood 1.8 Indian Reservation 1.8 Wonder Lake 1.8 1.8 Can't Remember 3.6 1.8 1.8 49 with forest preserve areas, it appears that the activities participated in by respondents are similar (picnicking, softball, and walking for pleasure for example). The specific locations used by respondents to engage in these activities are quite different, however, except for locations along Lake Michigan. The high frequency of use of LaBagh Forest Preserve by Uptown Native Americans can be explained, in part, by its proximity and accessibility to Uptown (See Figure 6 page 46). This suggests that these variables may be important in determining the use of LaBagh Forest Preserve. In the preceding section, it also appeared that proximity and accessibility were important reasons for respondents choosing city/neighborhood park locations within the Uptown community. This relationship will be examined further in a later section of this chapter. American Indian Center Use The American Indian Center is the primary Native American organization in the Uptown community offering recreation opportunities (See Figure 4 page 25). The Center attracts many relocated Native Americans who use its social and employment programs to aid them in urban adjustment. Many Chicago area residents also use the American Indian Center for social and recreational opportunities although they may no longer reside in the Uptown area. The American Indian Center is therefore an important recreational and social location for many new and established residents of the Chicago area. The majority of the respondents (57.92, N-126) indicated that they used the American Indian Center during the past year. Only 23.0% 50 of the respondents did not use the Center. The activities participated in by respondents who used the American Indian Center are summarized in Table 10. Powwows, volleyball, and basketball were the most frequent activities participated in at the Center. Most Frequent Activity Locations The use of recreation resources was also examined by identifying respondents' most frequent traditional and nontraditional activities. Specifically, respondents were asked to identify the places they used to participate in their most frequent activities. Table 10 Frequency Distribution of the Activities Participated in By Respondents at the American Indian Center (N-lZl) Z Response Powwows 33.8 Volleyball 24.0 Basketball 14.0 Meetings Summer Day Camp Other AIC Events Other Sports Traditional Dancing Thanksgiving Party Christmas Party Halloween Party Flea Markets Walking for Pleasure Softball Roller Skating Dayhiking Sewing Traditional Singing Youth Activities Family Activities Beadwork Refuse to Answer P‘h‘h‘h‘h‘k‘k3h3U1 G>G>G>G>G>G>G>G>GDG>\J\J\J\J\J\IUIUIC> 100.0 51 A total of 60 locations were used by respondents to participate in their most frequent activities. Only the most frequently used locations are summarized in Table 11. (Other locations are listed in Appendix E.) The most frequently used location was the American Indian Center. Other frequently used locations include: Ridge Bowl, friends/ relatives homes, along Lake Michigan, home, Wisconsin, Indian Ball Park, and along Lake Shore Drive. (See Figure 6 page 46.) The most frequent traditional and nontraditional activities participated in by respondents are examined by location in Table 12. Ridge Bowl was the most popular location to bowl. This is especially true on Friday nights which is bowling night for most of the Native American community who bowl. Ridge Bowl is used by the Native American community to bowl but more importantly, socialize. Extended family members come to watch relatives and friends bowl even though they themselves may not bowl. Bowling becomes a very informal, social activity at Ridge Bowl on Friday nights. Native Americans do, however, have team leagues at Ridge Bowl which are competitive in nature like White bowling leagues. Respondents used a variety of locations to walk for pleasure, drive for pleasure, and bike for pleasure. Locations used for walking for pleasure and bicycling for pleasure were in the Uptown neighborhood. However, driving for pleasure locations were primarily outside of Uptown in other states like Wisconsin and Minnesota. Respondents who had access to private transportation were able to use locations farther from the Uptown community. Team sports like volleyball, basketball, and softball were participated in by respondents most often at the American Indian Center. Indian Ball Park was also a popular location to play ball despite the 52 Table 11 Locations Used by Respondents to Participate in Their Most Frequent Activities (N=292) Z Response American Indian Center - 20.5 Ridge Bowl ’ 11.3 Friends/Relatives Home 5.8 Along Lake Michigan 5.8 Home 4.5 Wisconsin 3.8 Indian Ball Park ' 3.1 Along Lake Shore Drive 2.7 Margate Park 2.4 Downtown Chicago 2.1 Near Home . 2.1 Other States 2.1 St. Francis Church 2.1 Different Places 2.1 In the Neighborhood 1.7 Chase Park ' 1.4 Claredon Park 1.4 Other Schools 1.4 Foster Avenue Beach 1.4 lack of supporting survey data. Indian Ball Park is a section of Lincoln Park which is informally controlled by Uptown Native Americans during the summer months. Respondents explained that baseball and softball teams regularily met there during the summer months. Another respondent explained that other cultural groups had tried to take the park away from the Native Americans but were unsuccessful. Therefore, the use and importance of Indian Ball Park is greater than indicated by survey data. 53 Table 12 Most Frequent Activities by Locations BOWLING (N-40) Z Response Ridge Bowl 75.0 Waveland Bowl 7.5 Broadway Bowl _ 2.5 Bel Bowl 2.5 Howard Bowl 2.5 Different Places 2.5 Non-response 7.5 100.0 WALKING FOR PLEASURE (N-37) Friend/Relatives Home 18.9 In Neighborhood 10.8 American Indian Center 8.1 Along Lake Michigan 8.1 Margate Park 5.4 Truman College 5.4 St. Andrews 5.4 Chase Park 5.4 Belmont Harbor 2.7 Hamlin Park 2.7 Downtown 2.7 Library 2.7 Near Home 2.7 Ridge Bowl ' 2.7 Wisconsin 2.7 Different Places 2.7 Non-response ‘_19;§_ 100.0 54 Table 12 (Continued) VOLLEYBALL (N831) Z Response American Indian Center 90.3 Loyola 3.2 Other Schools 3.2 Non-response ___§_._2_ 100.0 BASKETBALL (N-30) American Indian Center 80.0 Chase Park 3.3 Other Schools 3.3 Non-response ._1§;§ 100.0 DRIVING FOR PLEASURE (N-23) Along Lake Shore Drive 21.7 Downtown 21.7 Other States 8.7 Friend/Relative Home 8.7 Wisconsin 4.3 Near Kennedy Expressway 4.3 Home 4.3 Iowa 4.3 Minnesota 4.3 Ohio 4.3 Along Lake Michigan 4,3 Different Places 4.3 100.0 55 Table 12 (Continued) SOFTBALL (N-17) Z Response Indian Ball Park 35.3 American Indian Center 11.8 Claredon Park 11.8 Other States 11.8 Welles Park 5.9 Other Schools 5.9 Along Lake Michigan . 5.9 Non-response _11;§ 100.0 BICYCLING FOR PLEASURE (N-16) Around Chicago 18.8 Along Lake Michigan 12.5 Near Home 12.5 Friend/Relative Home 6.3 Foster Avenue Beach 6.3 Truman College 6.3 Margate Park 6.3 Warren Park 6.3 Belmont Harbor 6.3 Non-response _1§;§ 100.0 PICNICKING (N813) Friend/Relative Home 15.4 Wisconsin 15.4 Irving Park 7.7 Along Lake Michigan 7.7 LaBagh Forest Preserve 7.7 Indian Ball Park 7.7 Foster Avenue Beach 7.7 Different Places 7.7 Non-response 23.1 5‘3. Table 12 (Continued) SWIMMING AT AN OUTDOOR POOL 0N=10) Z Response Chase Park 10.0 Along Lake Michigan 10.0 Margate Park - 10.0 18th Street Beach ' 10.0 Along Lake Shore Drive 10.0' Other States I 10.0 Different Places 10.0 Non-response _§Q;Q 100.0 CARD GAMES other than poker or pokeno (N-lO) Friend/Relatives Home I 40.0 Home 30.0 Senior Site 10.0 Indian Ball Park 10.0 Non-response _l_0_.Q 100.0 FISHING (N'9) Montrose Beach/Harbor 22.2 Along Lake Michigan 22.2 Belmont Harbor 11.1 Wisconsin 11.1 Near Home 11.1 Fox Lake 11.1 Non-response _;EL:1 100.0 57 Table 12 (Continued) OTHER SPORTS (N=9) Z Response American Indian Center 22.2 Lincoln Park Zoo 11.1 Along Lake Michigan 11.1 Other States . 11.1 Other Schools 11.1 Different Places 11.1 Non-response ._22;2 100.0 L GOING TO THE BEACH (N-8) Foster Avenue Beach 25.0 Oak Street Beach 12.5 Montrose Beach 12.5 Along Lake Shore Drive 12.5 Non-re sponse i552 100.0 In order to obtain additional information on the use of recrea- tion resources, respondents were asked specifically to identify the locations of their most frequent historically traditional activities. These locations are summarized in Table 13. Sixty percent of the respondents participated’in powwows at non-specific powwow locations. Based on observations and conversations with respondents in Chicago, these locations were: The American Indian Center which offers monthly powwows; Navy Pier which is the site of the annual American Indian Center powwow; Indian reservations; and other states on the summer powwow circuit. Based on the findings presented in this section, the following 58 Table 13 Traditional Locations by Most Frequent Traditional Activity (Z) (N-20) m m cm -H a :4 .‘1 E e: .5: (I) U) U ... 5 2 °° 2 w o . £315 0 3 u a .3 .a a: -H o o (g o > U C‘- H g H 0 'H ”1'? '3 :3 3 o 3 if ALOCATION ‘6‘ 3 5 3 cg) 5‘ .9. “a '5‘. ‘< in :3 s4 9. c: c: a: a: Towwow Location 60.0 5.0 iKedvale Park -5.0 IAlong Lk. Michigan 5.0 lWisconsin 5.0 5.0 . innesota 5.0 hear Kennedy Expressway 5.0 Wonder Lake ' 5 .0 conclusions were made: 1) Native Americans used recreation resources within and outside the Uptown community. 2) The use of recreation resources by Native American varied by activity. 3) Uptown community recreation resources were used more frequently by Native Americans than district or regional recreation resources located elsewhere in the Chicago area. 4) City/neighborhood parks were used more frequently than forest 59 preserve areas. An exception, however, was LaBagh Forest Preserve which was used primarily for picnicking. 5) The American Indian Center was a popular Native American owned and operated facility used by the Native American community to participate in such team sports like basketball and traditional activities like powwows. 6) The use of Uptown community recreation resources like the American Indian Center, Ridge Bowl on Friday nights, and Indian Ball Park during the summer months suggested that Native .Americans are territorial in their view and use of recreation resources. Territorial behavior was historically displayed by most Native American tribes. Therefore it is not surprising that urban Native Americans are imposing certain historically traditional characteristics onto use of urban recreation resources. This finding was also supported in the previous section on activity patterns. Team sports like volleyball and basketball which have important traditional Native American characteristics like team/group involvement and competition were like team/group involvement and competition were the most popular activities chosen by Native Americans. In order to fully understand Native American recreation behavior and how traditional characteristics influence this behavior, other information needs to be examined. The reasons for using and liking specific recreation resources must also be examined. The reasons for using a particular resource can differ from the reasons for liking that same resource. For example, a respondent may use Chase Park because it is a team.meeting location for softball. However, the respondent may like Chase Park because it is across the street from his/her home 60 which makes it a convenient location to play softball. An examination of both variables is therefore needed to understand why Native Americans use and like particular recreation resources. The reasons why resources are being used will now be examined in the following sections. EstablishingTReasons for Use of Recreation Resources The reason for use of a particular recreation resource is, in part, determined by the activity to be engaged in at the location. Other less understood reasons for resource choice are related to cul- tural and traditional differences in the perception and use of these resources. The interplay of these and other variables influence the participant to use a given recreation resource. The variables identified by respondents as reasons for using the locations of their most frequent traditional and nontraditional activities are summarized in Table 14. Proximity was indicated by 12.4% of the respondents to be the most important reason for using a location. This finding helps explain why such a high percentage of Native Americans use recreation resources in or near the Uptown com- munity like the American Indian Center, Ridge Bowl, and Chase and Indian Ball Parks. Other reasons indicated by respondents as important for resource use were: friends/relatives go there, only place to go, and Indians go there. Identification of these variables by respondents as important reasons for location choice suggest that Native Americans prefer to use locations used by other members of their culture. This finding lends further support to the trend that Native Americans are territorial in their use of recreation resources. 61 Table 14 Frequency Distribution of Respondents' reasons for Using the Locations of Their Most Frequent Activities (N-307) Proximity Friends/Relative Go There Team Meeting Location Other Reason (Outside, Free) Accessibility Facilities Only Place to Go Indians Go There No Specific Reason Aesthetics Vacation/Sightsee Special Event (Powwow, Fair) Specific Purpose (Business, Educational) Activities Fun/Enjoyment Equipment Visit Friends/Relatives Spacial Aspects Social Gathering Familiarity Relaxing/Comfortable Children's Activities Exercise Interest Z Response 12.4 11.4 11.1 10.1 9.4 6.8 5.9 3.9 3.2 2.9 2.9 2.6 2.3 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.2 1.0 .7 .3 .3 100.0 62 The reasons why Native American choose to use particular resources within and outside of the Uptown community can also be examined by activity (Tables 15-24). Because the Uptown Native American community has a bowling league at Ridge Bowl, team/meeting location was the primary reason why respondents chose this location over other bowling locations. Accessibility and proximity were also indicated by respondents as influencing their decision to bowl at Ridge and Waveland bowling lanes (Table 15). Culturally influenced variables such as family/friends go there and Indians go there also influenced the use of these bowling locations. The American Indian Center was indicated by respondents as a popular location for team sports like volleyball and basketball (Tables 16 and 1?). Respondents indicated that family/friends go there, only place to go, and Indians go there were the primary reasons for using this location. Accessibility and proximity were also important reasons for using the American Indian Center. Other team sports like baseball and softball were organized or played at Indian Ball Park, margate Park, the American Indian Center, along Lake Michigan, Welles Park, and other schools (Tables 18 and 19). Team/meeting location, family/friends go there, Indians go there, and only place to go were again reasons why respondents chose to play ball at these locations. Proximity and accessibility were the primary reasons respondents used locations within the Uptown community to walk for pleasure (Table 20). Other reasons mentioned were specific reason or specific purpose like walk to work or school for example, suggesting destination was more important than just walking for pleasure. Respondents indicated that driving for pleasure usually occurred Table 15 Reasons for Using Bowling-Locations in 2 Response (N=94) 63 asrozaxg Kata uazptruo suoadsv IBIDBdS as 01 aavta Ktuo 931v ;o sornaqusav ' 1.1 uoseau or;roads on uoseau or;roads notaeooq Burnaan meal 1.] axaui co suvtpuI slaw; Spuatza/Kttmaa 5.3 3.2 17.0 81.11: James teroos atqaazo;moa/3utxataa usaiaaul Juamfiofua ‘ung 1.1 KJIIBIIIWBJ asodznd orgroads Juana Iatoads 1.1 1.1 aas3q819/uornsoeA seatnetau/spuerzg 3TBIA sarutArnov satntttova unemdrnbg Knmmla 2.1 1.1 2.1 fintttqtssaaav 2.1 2.1 1.1 1.1 ridge Bowl E veland a owl Eel Bowl lHoward Bowl Table 16 Reasons for Using Volleyball-Locations in 2 Response (N=73) 64 asroiexg 1.4 Kata ualpttqo suoadsv IBIDBdS co 01 aavtd fituo 5.5 931v ;o satiaqusav uoseau orgroads on uoseeu orgroads 1.4 notneooq Surnaan meal 1.4 31341 co suaIPuI axaql spuarzg/fittmeg 9.6 1.4 5.5 2.7 1.4 Bunnies 13911008 atqaulo;moo/3umxvtau usaiaqu 3nam£o£u3 ‘ung Kntzvttrmvs asodznd ar;roads mans I913 Dads aaanfits/uornsoeA saxrnetau/Spuarig 3181A satntAtnav SBIJIITOBJ 1.4 2.7 nuamdrnbg £3;mrxoxa £3111qtssaoov 2.7 2.7 American Indian Ctr. Loyola Univ. Other Schools Table 17 Reasons for Using Basketball-Locations in 2 Response (N=72) 65 astozaxg ABIa ualPIIQO snoadsv Israeds 09 or avers Arno L... 931v ;o surnaqnsav uossau orgroads on uoseau orgroeds norneooq Surnaan use; 1.4 4.4 A1 1.4 GIEQL 09 suerpuI alaqm Spuarxs/Kttmvs 5.6 Suzanna IP'FOOS an9110;m00/3utxvtau usazaJuI 3nam£o rug ‘ 1mg hrxwtms asodxna ot;poads Juaxg {steeds aaanBrs/uoraeoeA saxrnetau/spuarzg 3181A satntAtnov SBIJIIIDPE 1.4 Juamdrnbg Karmrxozd AJIIIqusaoov 1.4 4.1 American Indian Ctr. Other Schools Table 18 Reasons for Using Softball-Locations in Z Response (N=44) 66 asroxaxa Kata uaxptrqo snoadsv IBIDBdS 09 OJ avers Ktuo 2.3 6.8 991v go sornaqasav uoseeu or;roads on uoseau a]: noads norneooq Burnsan use; 4.5 2.3 2.3 azaql 03 suerpux azaqm Spuatza/Kttmna 2.3 4.5 2.3 2.3 But-194399 IVIOOS 2.3 4.5 etqanio;mog/8urxetau usazanul uuamfio Fug ‘ ung fintzetttmva asodzna at;roads nuaaa {steeds aasuqfirs/uorneoeA saAtnvIau/spnatzs 3181A sarurxrnav saInIIIaea 2.3 Juamdrnbg Anrmrxozg KJTIIQISSGOOV Indian Ball Park American Indian Ctr. Along Lake Michigan Other Schools Welles Park Table 19 Reasons for Using Baseball-Locations in 2 Response (N=23) 67 asrozexg. fiata ualpttqo snoadsv Ieroeds 09 or avers fituo 881V go surnaqnsav uoseeu-ot;roads on uoseau orgroads uorneooq Surnean use; 4.3 8.7 4.3 SJBQI 09 suerpul 4.3 4.3 azaq; spuarzg/Ktrmeg 4.3 Burzaqnea {eroos atqenzo;moo/3urxetau asazanuI unaonFuQ ‘ung KJIIBIIIWBJ asodzna orgroads nuaAs Iatoads aasuqfirs/uorueoeA saAIneIau/SPuatza 3181A sarnrxraov satnrtxaea 4.3 4.3 nuamdrnbg Karmtxoza finttthssaoov Margate Park Indian Ball Park American Indian Ctr. Welles Park Along Lake Michigan (58 Kira ulzpttua Aomuzv SH ~.a suns ans-us use-don nausea nsouvc< .u« can" ~.~ swam cu «sue N. .uuu cuaeau slum «.a n.~ n. snag «.a a. coo: suonguaoz so>uu \ 09 0; OOIIJ ‘I‘O neurone: zulafiorua °ung '003q318/ sxsq; spa-tailitT'Id atqv=103inolinttvtvu 69131901 auras-n seatattax/spu-tza uncommom N :« msowumooqlouammoam How wsfixamz mean: How msommom ON manna 69 while they were vacationing or sightseeing (Table 21). Locations provided by respondents as driving for pleasure destinations were out- side of the Uptown area. These locations differ significantly from the walking for pleasure destinations located within the Uptown community. This perhaps suggests that Native Americans have limited access to and/ or money for automobiles. They may also prefer not to waste fuel driving around the neighborhood just to 'cruise' like other cultural groups. Respondents provided a variety of reasons for choosing locations to bicycle for pleasure and picnic (Tables 22 and 23). The majority of respondents bicycled along Lake Michigan where a bike path exists offering a spectacular view of the lake and city. Facilities were also indicated by respondents as important in location choice. This perhaps refers to bike trail maintenance rather than the facilities available while biking. Respondents who picnic indicated that they used locations which were both in or near the Uptown area (Indian Ball Park, LaBagh Forest Preserve for example). Respondents' reasons for choosing these locations reflect the diversity in personal taste and purpose. 'While accessibility, relaxing/comfortable, and Indians go there were reasons provided by respondents for using Indian Ball Park, proximity was important to another respondent in choosing a location along Lake Michigan to picnic. Fishing primarily occurred along Lake Michigan or in Montrose or Belmont Harbors (Table 24). The primary reason provided by respond- ents for using these locations was the resource (fish) was there. In summary, it appears that the reasons for using areas can be differentiated by activities. For example, facilities were important to respondents who bicycled for pleasure along Lake Michigan. Proximity was identified by respondents to be the primary reason Table 21 Reasons for Using Driving For Pleasure-Locations in 2 Response (N-58) 7O annmuq 531d “31PTTQD saaadsv {stands 0:) 0.1. aura Ktno tuv 3° Inn-qum unison at;roods on P.7 n.7 unseen atgroods notauaoq 8n::oan;uua; ‘J'QI 03 'u'TPQI um spng/ in"; .7 Sun-nuts I'FOOS atqtzzoleD/Surrtt'l i.7 asszaauI :uauLoFul ‘ung KJTJ'TIFI'J ammuma:n;nnds .7 am Inaads .7 1.7 aognqsts/uotataIA 5.2 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 searastva/Ipufltli 3131A 1.7 1.7 .31315133V 1.7 .313ITTO'J sup-drab: KJT'T‘OJd 41.7 Luann-aw Downtown long Lake hore Drive 3 Lake on ichigan Fther States 1.7 3.4 E innesota Ohio Iowa isconsin p r Kennedy pressway ifferent laces I: Table 22 Reasons for Using Picnicking-Locations in 1 Response (N=30) 71 asroiaxg Kata “BIPIIQO snoadsv {speeds 09 o; aoefg Ktuo 3.3 3.3 991v JO sorneqnsav uoseax orgroads on uoseeu orgroads 5.3 3.3 3.3 uorneooq Surnaan meal azaql 09 suerpuI 3.3 azaqm apuarzg/&Irmsg Surzaqaes Isroos atqenxosmoo/sutxvtau 3.3 usazanul Juanfio [Tug ‘ 1mg xntlerrnmas 3.3 3.3 3.3 asodzna orgroads Juana Isroads 6.7 aesanIS/uorasoeA saAtneIau/spuarzg JTSTA 3.3 3.3 seruIAInov SBTITIIDB& 3.3 Juamdrnbg KJIWIX01a 3.3 3.3 3.3 Knttrqxssaoov 3.3 Misc onsin Foster Ave. Beach Indian Ball Park Irving Park Different Places LaBagh Forest Pres. Along Lake Michigan 72 e.N museum acououuan c.N Hogan: usolaon ¢.N swam nouns: ¢.N e.~ .xm vacuum: ¢.N c.~ c.~ c.N m.< c.~ Q.N e.N 53:3:— 33 98? o.~ u>wun ouosm 93 93: a.e u.e uncanoo squash e.~ c.~ Samoa .0>< Hannah: 00:31:23 bra mpmo saoadsv Intends 09 01 3°‘Td £Ino Iaxv go surnaqnsav nausea 31;;aods ou‘ uneven or;roads notntooq Burn-unfiutax um 0:) 0mm: ”mu. spun-ml I'm-u mama's tunes vtmzowoflnnm 33.13381 sue-Lorna “an; KJIJ'TITIVJ aoodxna 3131:0dsl ¢.N e." «lo mo>wuonu \mecowu :uaxa Intends! ibsaqfirs/uoruvou .3433'T'HI'PU'FJJ 3131A 3.1314133V ”tam an uni-drab: KJTUTIDJd £11m qtsnaaw Aueuzv uncommom N :w maoaumooqlmuammmam How waaaomuam mean: how muonmom mN manna. Table 24 73 asrozaxz Kata ualptrqo snoedsv Ieroads %.2 oo 01 339Id Ktuo .4.2 881V go sornaqnsav $.2 4.2 uoseex orgtoads on uoseau orgroads 4.2 8.3 8.3 uornsooq Surnaan use; azaqm 09 susrpuI alaql Spnarzalfitrmes 4.2 u.2 Surzaqnvo Iatoos aIQBnloJWODIBquvIau asaiannI Juamfiofug ‘ung KntzetIths asodznd orgroads Juana Ieroads aaanflrs/uotuaoeA 4.2 4.2 searnetau/spuerlg JISIA sarnrxruov n.2 4.2 SBTJIIIDBJ Reasons for Using Fishing-Locations in 2 Response (N=24) Juemdrnbg Anrmrxoza £3IIIqtssaoov Beach/Harbor (Montrose Belmont Harbor Mlong Lake Michigan LWisconsin Near Home Fox Lake,IL Table 24 73 astolaxg Kata uaxptrqo suoadsv Isroeds 2 09 01 aveta fituo .4.2 831V go satiaqnsav 4.2 4.2 uoseau otgtaads 0N noseau or;toads 4.2 8.3 8.3 nornsooq Burnaan'meaL GJBQL 03 sustuI alaqm Spuatla/fittmas 4.2 A.2 Bananas IV‘FDOS atqanzo;moa/8urxetau usazanuI nuaon [I13 ‘ ung Kntzetttmns asodzna orgroads Juana tepoads aaanfirs/uotueaeA %.2 4.2 saxrueIaH/spuarzg 3181A sarntnrnov 4.2 4.2 SBIJIIIDBJ Reasons for Using Fishing-Locations in 2 Response (N=24) Juamdpnbg Katmrxoza finrtrqrssaoov ontrose each/Harbor F; Belmont Harbor mlong Lake Michigan Wisconsin Near Home Fox Lake,IL 74 determining use of recreation resources. Other important reasons for resource use include: family/friends go there and Indians go there. Based on these findings, it appears that Native Americans prefer to use recreation resources within the Uptown community which are used by friends, family, and other Indians (See Figure 6 page 46.). This recreation behavior supports the trend that Native Americans are terri- torial in their use of recreation resources. In order to obtain further support of this trend, an analysis of the reasons Native Americans like recreation resources must be made. The reasons for liking- a particular resource will be examined in the next section. Establishing Reasons for Liking Recreation Resources The reasons for liking a recreation resource can differ from the reasons for using a resource discussed in the previous section. As discussed earlier, respondents may use Chase Park because it is a team meeting location for softball. This park may be liked, however, for very different reasons (Indians go there and proximity for example). Therefore the reasons for liking a particular recreation resource must also be examined. The variables identified by respondents as reasons for liking the locations of their most frequent traditional and nontraditional activities are summarized in Table 25. Facilities were indicated by 15.72 of the respondents as the most important reason for liking a particular resource. Team/meeting location which was important for use of a particular resource was not as important to respondents in liking a location. Accessibility was viewed by respondents as more 75 Table 25 Frequency Distribution of Respondents' Reasons for Liking Locations of Their Most Frequent Activities (N=369) 2 Response Facilities 15.7 Friends/Relatives Go There 13.8 Accessibility 13.3 Proximity ' 10.6 Aesthetics -7.9 Spacial Aspects - 5.4 Social Characteristics 4.8 Comfortable/Relaxing 4.6 Indians Go There 3.8 Equipment , 3.4 Activities ~ 2.8 Familiarity . 2.2 None 2.2 Other/Specific Reasons 1.9 No Specific Reasons 1.9 Only Place/Nowhere Else To Go 1.8 Team Meeting Location 1.8 Supervised .5 Organized 5 Indian Reservation .3 Particular Resource There .3 100.0 important than proximity in liking a resource. In contrast, proximity was the most important reason respondents gave for using a resource. It appears from these findings that respondents like to use resources that are easy and convenient to reach like those located within or near 76 the Uptown community. (See Figure 6 page 46.) Resources which are aesthetically, socially, and spacially pleasing as well as comfortable and relaxing were characteristics respondents liked. This finding suggests that the traditional values Native Americans historically held towards family and nature are still appreciated by urban Native Americans. Friends/relatives go there and Indians go there were other important reasons why respondents liked a particular resource. Identi- fication of these variables by respondents as reasons for liking a particular recreation resource again suggests that Native Americans prefer to use locations used by other members of their culture. This finding lends further support to the trend that Native Americans are territorial in their use of recreation resources. The reasons why Native Americans liked particular resources will now be examined by activity (Tables 26-34). Accessibility and proximity were the primary reasons why respondents liked to use Ridge and Waveland bowling lanes (Table 26). In contrast, the primary reason why respondents used these locations was that a bowling league met there. Similar to the reasons for using these facilities, the pre- sence of family, friends, and Indians were also important reasons for respondents liking Ridge Bowl. Facilities, aesthetics, comfort, and social characteristics were also indicated by respondents as reasons for liking Ridge Bowl. As indicated in the previous section, the American Indian Center was a popular location for team sports like volleyball and basketball. The most important reason why respondents liked the American Indian Center was again the presence of family, friends, and other Indians (Tables 27 and 28). Other reasons for liking this location include: Table 26 Reasons for Liking Bowling-Locations in 1 Response (N=94) 77 pazruszlo 339$ pasrniadns uoseau or;roads aoznosau authorizeg notneazasau nerpuI Sumnon H Bumnhma o; 09 01 aoeta fiIuo v—l snoadsv {eroeds ,4 £11311th H sorusrxanoezeqo {91003 c; H H uoruaooq go sornaqnsav ,4 ,3 H atqefiorus ‘ma .4 N Surxetauietq3110JWDO :6 m 318q9:03 suerpuI ' ' ' q 1—0 H 3.13:1; Atrmeglspnarzg (5 ,.I .4 saInIAtnov Q H sapntaes .4 o; H H Juamdrnbg ,4 ,4 N H Inmate-Ia a": .4 C N mynqrssaoov 5' F; H H H 8 ... —¢ m: g 3 'o .4 s: an t: 3 m 0 vs o .4 :n u a: o m '0 > H g H a! (D p: :n :n Table 27 Reasons for Liking Volleyball-Location in 2 Response (N=73) 78 pazruefilo ages pasrxxadns uoseeu or;roads sainosau Jetnornzed uonezuesau nerpuI : Q' SUIIIJON .4 flutqnfixaag n on 0.1. 308m Ktuo a; saaadsv Isroeds KITJFTITWPH sorusrzaioexsqo {eroos uornsooq go soraaqnsav atqexofug ‘nng : <1: Surxetau/atqenzoJmoo F: 3:13:11, 09 susrpnI : a; 31811.1; litmus/swans 3: S$TJIAIJGV ‘?5 .3 SBIITITOFJ .5 .—I nuamdrnbg KJIWIXOJa N Anttrqjssaoov . so u m m .4 u o s o o .: 5° .2 3 5 .. H-H m a-o .c c: u _1 «aka 0 Table 28 Reasons for Liking Basketball-Locations in 2 Response (N=72 79 pBZIUBSJO ages pssrnzadns ‘7, F1 uos'eeu ornoads .aoznosaa lBIflOIlJBd uorneazasag usrpuI Summon Sutqufizana 0:) 01 809m Ktuo ‘°. In snoadsv terosds ‘i H KJIJVTITWPJ 9913911933191qu 131303 \‘E H uorneooq go surnaqnsev atquoCug ‘ung : Burxstau/atqsnzomo : q aiaql 03 susrpul ,4 .r W 3131.11, Ktmg/spuatzg S g; BEIJIAIJGV 9313111395 ‘9 ‘7. to .4 nuamdrnbg Anrm‘FXOJd a: so Aurtrqrssaoov ‘9 In a m. o .4 u o a .s o o u .2 cc: 6 o m a. a: o a -4 m 8 u u-4 m m'o n .c a s .c u 4: .4 g o 80 proximity, accessibility, and only place to go. These findings are similar to the reasons for using this location. This again supports the trend that Native Americans are territorial in their use of recreation resources. The reasons for liking softball and baseball locations were both similar and different from the reasons for liking the American Indian Center, Indian Ball Park, Margate Park, and Welles Park. Friends, family, and other Indians go there were similar reasons indicated by respondents for using and liking these locations (Tables 29 and 30). In contrast, however, respondents indicated they used Indian Ball Park, Welles Park, Margate Park, and other schools because organized league teams met there. Proximity and accessibility which were reasons respondents liked these locations did not appear as reasons for using these locations . In contrast to the accessibility and proximity reasons given by respondents for using locations to walk for pleasure, these reasons were not as important in liking a location (Table 31). Aesthetics, spacial aspects, facilities, and equipment were more important reasons for liking Chase and Margate Parks, St. Andrews Church, Wisconsin, and along Lake Michigan than proximity and accessibility. The primary reasons why respondents liked driving for pleasure location were related to the aesthetics and spacial aspects of the area (Table 32). As discussed in the previous section, some respondents drove for pleasure while vacationing and sightseeing. These locations which were primarily out-of—state and along Lake Michigan provided opportunities to view scenery and nature. Similar to the reasons respondents used Uptown community loca- tions to bicycle for pleasure, respondents liked the same locations Table 29 Reasons for Liking Softball-Locations in Z Response (N=44) 81 pazruefiio ages pasrxzadns uoseaa orgroads aoznoseu Jetnoraxea uornexzasau usrpuI Summon qunhma co 01. 339m 51110 : snoadsv {stands ‘7 N m hrlfltmes a; sonsrzano'ezeqa {woos "N” noneooq 3:0 surnaqnsav :2 : atqvfiotua ‘una Burerex/atqenzogmoo azaql 09 susrpul ‘7 <7 N N azeql Atrmeg/spuarzg ‘7 ‘7 ‘7 ‘7 € <7 Q Q BEIJIAIJDV Barnum: 2 : nuamdxnbg ‘7 N Anrmrxozd ‘7 ‘7 N N hnmrssaaav :1 3 2 2 H m o F. H 4.) O X '3 5 3'3 .3 $3 In 8:: m s 6 EM .4 m en a o s on m m -4 m «pH u o 'H .M :4 H I: .C‘. a) .4 -o u 8's 0 u .c .4 c m a .4-4 H a ban. 4u aaznosau xitn°tazaa harassment: carpal flurxatau/aIQIazogaoo eats; Itt-Ialsau-tza 3313311331 satnltzaaotzuqa titans untavaoq go ommo flow zv uncommom N cw macaumquIousmmon you wnfixamz mnaxfiq you m: m an magma Table 32 Reasons for Liking Driving for Pleasure-Locatins in 1 Response (N=58) 84 psztntflzol 3378! postnasdns unsung orgrssds 1.7 1.7 asznossu surnatazsd 1.7 corneazassu ustpnI Summon flunuuhaxg 1.7 1.7 0:: 0.1. am; Ktuo sassdsv tstssds 1.7 1.7 tantrums sorasrzssoszsqa rsroos notnsooq go sorgsqassv .3.4 3.4 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 atqsfio Eng ‘ an; Smalatmzosrmo 1.7 1.7 ”an 09 8mm: szsqg lttmug/spustzg "runny 8313111331 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 nusmdrnbg bmmza Lam Ctr-"aw 1.7 1.7 long Lake hore Drive [Downtown l‘s‘ IOther States long Lake Michigan A HOhio Iowa Wisconsin Near Kennedy Expressway Different Places 1.7 85 because the facilities, aesthetics, and social and spacial character— istics were pleasing (Table 33). The distribution of locations and reasons for liking picnic areas indicated in Table 24 varies significantly by response. A larger response rate is therefore needed to determine the importance of any particular variable. However, similar to the reasons for using a particular picnic location like LaBagh Forest Preserve, the diversity in reasons for liking these locations indicates that respondents have specific personal tastes and purposes in choosing locations. Respondents indicated that they fished in Wisconsin, Lake Michigan, Montrose and Belmont Harbors, and Fox Lake. Similar to the reasons for using these locations, the presence of the resource (fish) was mandatory to engage in the activity (Table 35). Other reasons like aesthetics, spacial aspects, familiarity, accessibility, and proximity which reflected respondents' personal preferences and tastes were reasons respondents liked these locations. In summary, facilities were the primary reason why respondents liked a particular resource. Other important reasons for liking loca- tions were: proximity, accessibility, family, friends, and other Indiana go there. These reasons lend additional support to the trend that Native Americans prefer to use locations used by other members of their culture. The reasons for liking and using resources differed only significantly in culturally determined variables like spacial aspects and aesthetics. These variables were important for liking resources but did not necessarily determine the use of those resources. For example, respondents chose to bowl at Ridge Bowl primarily because a bowling league met there. The facilities, spacial aspects, and people Table 33 Reasons for Liking Bicycling for Pleasure-Locations in Z Response (N=42) 86 pazrusfizo 339$ pesrxladns uos sex 3]: gr Dads aoxnosag IBInDIJJPd norneniasau nerpuI flutqnou Burqnfiaaxg 09 o; aoetd Ktuo snoadsv Isroeds ‘7 ‘7 N N KJIJBIITWBH sornsrlaaoslsqa 191305 '7 N uoneooq go sonaqnsav 7 7 7 “3 N N. N Q atqexofug ‘ung Burxetag/atquJOgmoo ‘i N else; 03 suerpul ‘7 N azaqg, .{Irmeg/spuarig ‘7 °°. q- ~¢ sanIAnov 7 7 a: 04 3313111095 7 “3 “3 a: q- ~¢ nuamdxnbg ‘7 N Anpmrxoza ‘7 N KJIIIqtssaoov a: s . .33 fi .s fl m .4 m u :g o w > o a. n .3 ~\ m ‘n c: a. n a m > o u .4 m 'U ’H H G U G C“ 00 a u 0.: m o 0 «pa 0 m a u u g a: u E s.s ”:3 I} o 8 3 :4 ‘6' ‘6 '5‘» .3 3 h.n:a: k.¢a e: z: 3: :n ‘¢:= Table 34 Reasons for Liking Picnicking-Locations in Z Response (N=30) 87 pazruefllo ages 3.3 pesrAJadns uoseeu orgroads aoznosag zetnopazea uornexxasau nerpuI SutqnoN 3.3 Sutqnfiiang 09 01 9°9Id Ktuo snoadsv Teroeds KnrzetIrmea 3.3 sorgsrlanoeieqa {91303 3.3 norgeooq go sorgaqgsav 3.3 3.3 atqefiofug ‘ung Bnpxetau/stquJOgmog azaql 09 suerpul alaqm fitrmea/Spuarza 3.3 3.3 satntnrnav 3.3 3.3 SBIIIII3PH 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 nuamdrnbg 3.3 3.3 KlIWIXOla Anttrqgsseoov 3.3 Wisconsin Foster Ave. Beach Indian Ball Park Irving Park Different Places LaBagh Forest Preserve Along Lake Michigan Table 35 Reasons for Liking Fishing-Locations in Z Response (N=24) 88 pazrueSxo ages pasrAJadns uoseau orgtoads aoxnosau zetnornzea 4.2 4.2 4.2 uoIJeAJasag uerpuI Bumqnon Burqgfiiaaa 09 or avers KIuo . sgoadsv Ieraeds Knrzartrmea 8.3 . sorgsrzaaoezeqs {eroos uorneaoq go surnaqnsav anerfug ‘ung Burxetau/atqenlogmoo Giana 09 suctpuI azaqg Ktrmeg/spuatlg 4.2 sarntAtnav 8911111993 4.2 auamdrnbg :{J'FW'FXO-Id 4.2 AJIIIqusaoav 4.2 4.2 4.2 Montrose Beach/Harbor Belmont Harbor Along Lake Michigan Wisconsin Near Home Fox Lake,IL 89 who went there were reasons why respondents liked Ridge Bowl and found it an attractive location to bowl. Some of the reasons provided by respondents for liking and using a particular resource reflected personal preferences and needs and/or group preferences. For example, choosing a location because it was relaxing/comfortable, aesthetically or spacially pleasing was a subjective decision reflecting personal taste and preference. In addition, choosing a location because it was free or had particular facilities or equipment reflected personal needs. In contrast, loca- tions which were team/meeting locations, used by family, friends, and other Indians may have reflected group preferences in location choice rather than individual preferences. Individual and group preferences are both, however, influenced by values and norms based in culture and tradition. Therefore the decision to like or use a particular resource is, in part, Culturally determined. Chapter 4 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Conclusions Cultural differences exist in the recreation behavior and patterns of urban ethnic and minority groups due to socio-economdc factors, accessibility, discrimination, traditional values and norms, and other such variables. Through the identification of differences it is possible to better understand and meet the recreational needs of these groups. One way to identify cultural differences for Native Americans is to look at traditional/nontraditional comparisons. Based on the findings of this study, the following conclusions were made: . 1. Native Americans participated in both historically and customarily traditional as well as nontraditional activities. Bowling was the most popular activity participated in by Native Americans. This activity was followed by walking for pleasure, basketball, volleyball, baseball and softball, driving for pleasure, picnicking, and swimming at an outdoor pool. These findings were inconsistent with national recreation surveys where team or group sports are not the most popular activities. Some activities like bowling which would historically not 90 91 be considered traditional activities were perceived and defined by Native Americans as traditional activities. 5. Native Americans used recreation resources within and outside the Uptown community. 6. The use of recreation resources by Native Americans varied by activity. 7. Uptown community recreation resources were used more frequently by Native Americans than district or regional recreation resources. 8. City/neighborhood parks were used more frequently than forest preserve areas. An exception, however, was LaBagh Forest Preserve located near the Uptown area. 9. The American Indian Center was a popular recreation resource for the Native American community. 10. Native Americans appeared to be territorial in their use of ‘ certain recreation resources like the American Indian Center, Ridge Bowl, and Indian Ball Park. 11. The reasons for using and liking recreation resources varied. 12. Proximity was the primary reason why Native Americans chose to use recreation resources. 13. Facilities were the primary reason why Native Americans liked recreation resources. 14. Other reasons important for using and liking recreation resources were culturally influenced variables like family, friends, and other Indians go there. As indicated earlier, team or group sports like volleyball and bowling were the most popular activities chosen by Native Americans. The characteristics of these activity choices are consistent with 92 traditional Native American approaches to recreation which emphasize group/team.activities which are competitive in nature. This trend in urban Native American recreation patterns, seems to suggest that Native Americans have not changed from traditional recreation activities but rather have been influenced by tradition to engage in urban activities which have important traditional characteristics like group/team involvement. It also appears that traditional activity characteristics have been imposed on certain historically nontraditional activities like bowling. These characteristics influence the way Native Americans participate and the places they choose to participate. .For example, Ridge Bowl on Friday nights becomes not only a team meeting location to bowl but a place for non-bowling family and friends to socialize. Historically, Native Americans were territorial in their use and view of space. Urban Native Americans appear to be influenced by tradition to use locations within their perceived or defined territory. This helps to explain the high percentage of use by Native Americans of city/neighborhood parks, the American Indian Center, and other private facilities within the Uptown community like Ridge Bowl. The reasons for using and liking these Uptown community resources also support this finding. Proximity, accessibility, and friends, family, and other Indians go there were important reasons for Native Americans to use and like these resources. There is a relationship between proximity/accessibility and cultural variables such as family, friends, and other Indians go there. Native Americans use resources within the Uptown community because they are close and like resources within Uptown because they are accessible. Because these resources are close to Uptown, there is 93 some assurance that family, friends, and other Indians will also be there. These variables, therefore mutually support the trend that Native Americans prefer to use Uptown community recreation resources which are used by other members of their culture. Given these trends in urban Native American recreation patterns, it appears that traditional characteristics and cultural values and norms influence which activities Native Americans participate in, how they participate, and where and why they choose specific locations like the American Indian Center. Therefore understanding the recreation behavior of Native Americans becomes, in part, one of understanding who Native Americans are as a people and culture, and understanding what they value and believe in terms of tradition. Implications for Managers Recreation resource managers need to consider the importance of location and traditional activity characteristics when providing opportunities in the urban area. Perhaps providing facilities in the Native American community or expanding activity offerings reflective of traditional Native American recreation values will help meet the recreation needs of this ever increasing urban population. Specifically, both historically and customarily traditional as well as nontraditional activity opportunities should be made avail- able to the Native American community. Some of these activities should have characteristics indicated by Native Americans as important for their participation. These characteristics include: family/group participation, competition, and social and educational opportunities. Activities should be geared to specific age groups especially children 94 and senior citizens whose needs are often unmet. Finally, activities should be offered at times which best serve the needs of the Native American community during their leisure hours. (For a more detailed report of Native American recreation programming needs including sug- gestions for recreation program planning, refer to Pancner and McDonough, 1982.) Some of the activities participated in by Native Americans appear on the surface to be similar to white contemporary recreation activities (bowling for example). However, upon closer examination of the behavioral aspects of Native American activity participation, subtle differences appear in the way Native Americans participate, with whom they participate, and where and why they choose specific locations to participate. Managers need to therefore look very closely at activity patterns rather than making management decisions based on superficial observations. The reasons why Native Americans use and like particular recrea- tion resources have important implications for the types of facilities Native Americans use. Facilities which were close and accessible to the Uptown community were used more frequently than facilities outside the Native American community. Facilities used by family, friends, and other Indians were important reasons for Native Americans to use and like particular resources. Therefore, the importance of these variables needs to be considered when providing facilities for Native Americans in urban areas. 95 Implications for Future Research As indicated earlier in the methods and procedures chapter, social researchers have received varied acceptance from Native American communities. In part, this is due to a tendency among social researchers to "over research" communities which have been cooperative in past research efforts. Another problem has been the manner or technique employed by social researchers to obtain information. Because of these problems, recreation researchers need to design future studies with an awareness and sensitivity to the cultural group to be studied. Several methodological steps should be followed: 1) The project should be approved by the community. 2) An advisory board should be established comprised of community members. This board can help establish project credibility, develop a culturally sensitive instrument and select and hire indigenous interviewers. 3) The value of observa— tion should not be dismissed as unimportant in gathering additional and supporting information. 4) Finally, and most important, researchers have a responsibility to the respondents and community to make study results available in a comprehensible and usable form. Finally, a study of this type should not be repeated in the Chicago Native American community because it may lead to "over researching". This study was accepted by the Uptown Native American community because reports and funding requests were written by the researcher to public and private agencies which are in the position to improve the recreation opportunities and facilities in the community. Therefore unless future recreation studies can be justified to the Uptown Native American community by ensuring tangible benefits (improved facilities and opportunities for example), these studies may 96 not be looked upon favorably. A better idea is to use the information obtained from this study and other available studies to identify recrea- tion patterns which can then be researched in another Native American community. One suggestion for future research is related to the relation- ship between variables like proximity, accessibility, and culturally influenced variables like family, friends, and other Indians go there which mutually support the trend that Native Americans prefer to use recreation resources which are used by other members of their culture. This relationship suggests that examination of neighborhood parks needs to be conducted to determine whether use differences exist based on cultural variables. The findings of this study support the importance of studying recreation patterns of minority and ethnic groups. Recreation researchers and managers must therefore have a commitment to this area of research if they are to really meet the recreation needs of all people. APPENDICES APPENDIX A 97 APPENDIX A Interview-Script Hello, my name is . The American Indian Center and Michigan State University are conducting a study to find out what kind of recreational activities urban Native Americans participate in. The results of this study will be used to plan for better recreational opportunities for urban residents and to better suit your needs. We would appreciate your participation in this study. Your participation involves answering a few questions about your present recreational patterns. Would you will be willing to participate? In no, insure respondent that the interview is completely confidential and their cooperatioon is important to the study. If respondent still refuses, thank and terminate conversation. If yes, go onto questions. 98 l. I am going to read you a list of recreet ion activities. Please tell me if you have participated in any of these activities during the last twelve months. ACTIVITY LESS NO PARTICIPATION YES PART. 4 TIMES LESS walking for pleasure bowlégg 9221.21 day hiking mm picnicking visiting museums and zoos ski downhill or cross-coggtry) horseback rggégg spgrts and genes (basketballI softball, tennis, card games, etc.) SPECIFY AND LIST drizégg for pleasure bicycligg for pleasure men fishing ice-skating or roller-sketggg tob or sleddégg boating If ygg,gCangg§gg; power other like rsftéggI seilggg goggg to the beach Eggggggg at an outdoor 20914, any others? (SPECIFY AND LIST) 2. You said that you participated in , last year. What is your second most frequent activi 1st 2nd NOTE: READ LIST OF THOSE ACTIVITI , etc. more then 4 times Which one of these activities do you participate in most frequently? ty? The third? 3rd IF NO ACTIVITIES WERE PABTICIPATED IN BY RESPONDENT MORE THAN 4 TIMES, 88 PABTICIPATED IN AT ALL. 99 REPEAT QUESTIONS 3-8 FOR EACH ACTIVITY INDICATED IN QUESTION 2 3. 5. 10. 11. You said that is the activity which you participated in most often last year. Please think about the last time you (activity). Where did you (activity)? OBTAIN NAME, ADDRESS, ANY INFO TO LOCATE SITE LATER ON A MAP. (IF LOCATION IS RESPONDANTS'S HOME, DO NOT OBTAIN ADDRESS, ETC. OMIT QUESTIONS 5-8.) Is this the location where you USUALLY (activity)? Yes No If no, Where do you usually go and why? Why did you choose to go to (location)? What is it about this location that you really like? PROBE FOR INFORMATION ON FACILITIES, COMFORT, ASTEETICS AND ACCESS Would you return to (location) for (activity)? Yes No How did you find out about this location? family magazine T.V. friends radio church work school newspaper newsletter/brochure other (specify) Do you trust this source of information? Yes NO ' What kinds of information did you receive about this location froa (source)? EXAMPLES OF INFORMATION MIGHT BE TIME, LOCATION, KINDS OF ACTIVITIES OFFERED, ETC. Do you consider the information to be an accurate description of what you observed at this location? Yes No If no, What was different about the location when you got there? Of the recreation activities that you don't do, which one would you most like to participate in? Why? What is the most important factor preventing you from participating in (activity)? Do you ever use county forest preserves? Yes No If yes, how frequently and for what activities? Where these forest preserves located? OBTAIN NAME AND ADDRESS If no, Why? 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 100 Do you ever use city or neighborhood parks? Yes No If yes, how frequently and for what activities? Where were these parks located? OBTAIN NAME AND ADDRESS If no, Why? Do you ever participate in activities like attending powhwows, beadwork, storytelling, etc? Yes No If yes, Which ones and how often do you participate in them? Are there any other activities you would consider traditional, that you participate in? Which one do you do most often? Where do you do this activity? Think about urban Native American recreation patterns. Have you seen changes in the recreation patterns of urban Indians over the past 5 years? Yes No ‘ If yes, What are these changes? Why do you think they have occured? What do you think are some of the differences between traditional and modern recreation activities? ' Would you like the American Indian Center to offer more traditional recreational activities? Yes No Why would you like these activities to be offered? During the past yggr, did you or your family participate in any recreational activities at the Indian Center? Yes No If yes, What did you do? Of these activities, which one did you enjoy most? What was it about this activity that you especially like? If no, Why not? What additional activities would you like the center to offer? For you? For your family (if applicable)? When would you prefer these activities to be offered? Morning Afternoon Evening M TU W TH F 5 SU 101 NOW I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A PEW BACKGROUND QUESTIONS. THE INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL ONLY BE USED FOR STATISTICAL COMPARISONS. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. SEE: MALE FEMALE How long have you lived in the Chicago area? What is your age? What is your tribal affiliation? Are you an enrolled member of this tribe? Yes No If no, then are you a member of a terminated tribe? What is your occupation? What is the highest year of school you have completed? Elementary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 High School 9 10 11 12 GED College l3 14 15 16 Post-College 17 18 19 20+ TEANRS FOR YOUR COOPERATION IN THIS STUDY. WOULD YOU LIKE A COPY OP TEE SURVEY RESULTS? Yes APPENDIX B 102 APPENDIX B American Indian Center Recreation Survey AMERICAN INDIAN CENTER RECREATION SURVEY Participation in this survey is completely voluntary, however you are encouraged to fill out the questionaire completely so that your opinions and interests are represented. This information will be kept totally confidential and you as a participant will remain anonymous. As a result of your responses, the A. I. C. will evaluate its existing programs to better suit your needs and interests. Your cooperation in this study is greatly appreciated. Thank you very much for_your time. 1. During the last 12 months, what three recreational activities did you part- icipate in most frequently? ACTIVITY LOCATION (Where did you do activity? Give name of park, address,4etc.) Example: Softball Chase Park, Ashland Ave., Chicago Most frequent Activity: 2nd most freq. Activity: 3rd most freq. Activity: NOW WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE SPECIFIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE ACTIVITY YOU DO MOST FREQUENTLY. THIS IS THE ACTIVITY YOU ANSWERED IN IA. 2. What is it about this activity you especially like? 3. Is the location you gave in 1A., the place where you usually go to participate in your most frequent activity? Yes No If no, where do you.usually go? 4. What do you like about this location? 5. How did you find out about this location (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) family school newsletter/brouchure friends T.V. other (specify) church radio work newspaper 6. Of the recreational activities that you don't do, which ggg_would yOu most like to participate in? 7. What is the most important factor preventing you from participating? 1. 3. 1. 3. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 103 Do you ever use county forest preserves? Yes No If yes, What did you do there and where were they located? Activity Name and location ofgpreserve used If no, Why not? Do you ever use city or neighborhood parks? Yes No If yes, What did you do there and where were they located? Activity Name and location of parkiused If no, Why not? Do you ever participate in activities like attending pow-wows, story-telling, beadwork, etc? Yes No If yes, Which one do you do most often? Where do you do this activity? Would you like the A. I. C. to offer more traditional recreational activities? Yes No Why would you like these activities to be offered? What additional activities would you like the A. I. C. to offer? For you? For your family (if applicable)? When would you prefer these activities to be offered? (CHECK THOSE THAT APPLY) Morning Monday Thursday Sunday Afternoon Tuesday Ftiday Evening Wednesday~ Saturday NOW WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWERING A FEW BACRGROUND QUESTIONS. THE INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL ONLY BE USED FOR STATISTICAL COMPARISONS. 1. 2. 3. 4. Sea: Male Female Age: How long have you lived in the Chicago area? What is your tribal affiliation?. Are you an enrolled member of this tribe? Yes No If no, then are you a member of a terminated tribe? Yes No 104 5. What is your occupation? 6. What is the highest year of school you have completed? (CIRCLE THE ONE WHICH APPLIES) Elementary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 High School 9 10 11 12 GED College 13 14 15 16 Post-College 17 18 19 20+ THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR COOPERATION IN THIS STUDY. IF YOU WOULD LIKE A COPY OF THE SURVEY RESULTS, COPIES WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE A. I. C. IN SEVERAL MONTHS. APPENDIX C 105 APPENDIX C Respondent Demographics Table Cl Sex of Respondents (N=126) Z Response Male 47.6 Female 51.6 Non-response .8 100.0 Table CZ Age of Respondents (N=126) Years Z Response 9 - 12 643 13 - 17 11.9 18 - 21 19.0 22 - 25 23.1 26 - 30 12.7 31 - 39 14.3 40 - 59 9.5 60 and over 1.6 Non-response .___l;§ 105 APPENDIX C Respondent Demographics Table Cl Sex of Respondents (N=126) Z Response Male 47.6 Female 51.6 Non-response .8 100.0 Table C2 Age of Respondents (N=126) 13253 Z Response 9 - 12 6.3 13 - 17 11.9 18 - 21 19.0 22 - 25 23.1 26 - 30 12.7 31 - 39 14.3 40 - 59 9.5 60 and over 1.6 Non-response _1_._6_ 100.0 106 Table C3 Length of Residence in Chicago by Respondents (N=126) Years Z Response 1 or less 14.3 2 - 5 4.8 6 - 10 14.3 11 - 15 16.7 16 - 20 25.3 21 - 25 13.5 Over 25 7.1 Non-response 4.0 100.0 Table C4 Occupation of Respondents (N=126) Z Response Professional 10.3 Clerical 9.5 Student 30.2 Manager/Executive .8 Craftsmen/Technician 5.6 Hourly Service Worker 19.8 Homemaker 4.8 Military .8 Retired .8 Unemployed 11.1 Non-response 6.3 100.0 107 Table CS Highest Year of School Completed by Respondents (N=126) Year \OCDO‘UIb 10 11 12 13 14~ 15 16 17 21 GED Non-response Z Response .8 .8 6.3 2.4 2.4 6.3 6.3 31.0 6.3 14.3 4.8 6.3 .8 .8 9.6 .8 100.0 108 Table C6 Tribal Affiliations of Respondents (N=126) Z Response Chippewa . 23.8 Winnebago 14.3 Sioux 9.5 Choctaw 7 . 1 Oneida 6.3 Menominee 4 . 8 Chippewa/Cherokee ‘ 3.2 Menominee/Chippewa 3.2 Navajo 3.2 Mesquakie/Oneida 1.6 Chippewa/Winnebago 1.6 Omaha/Ottawa 1.6 Sioux/Winnebago ' 1 . 6 Ottawa 1.6 Alaskan 1.6 Mandan/Arickara 1.6 Ogalala Sioux .8 Creek/Seminole .8 Sioux/Chickasaw .8 Sioux/Blackfeet .8 Crow .8 Oklahoma/Choctaw .8 Potawatomi/Mohawk .8 Seneca .8 Pueblo .8 Santo Domingo .8 Winnebago/Mesquakie .8 Non-response 4.6 100.0 APPENDIX D Most Frequently Participated in Activities Most Frequently Participated in Activities (N=126) 109 APPENDIX D Table D1 Ice/Roller Skating "Visiting Museums/Zoos Shoot Pool Bingo Camping Hunting Tennis Jogging Video Games Football Board Games Skiing Boating Weightlifing/Conditioning Boxing Pokeno Other Games Nontraditional Dancing Reading Attending Plays/Movies Watch T.V. Sewing Powwows Traditional Singing Dice Games Sexual Activity Traditional Fashion Show Swim at Indoor Pool Lease 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8- 4.0 4.0 3.2 3.2 3.2 2.4 H ma‘ ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 100; APPENDIX E 110 APPENDIX E Locations Used by Respondents to Participate in Their Most Frequent Activities Table El Locations Used by Respondents to Participate in Their Most Frequent Activities (N-292) Location Z Response Native American Committee Senior Site 1.0 Welles Park 1.0 Waveland Bowl 1.0 Rainbow Roller Rink 1.0 Montrose Beach/Harbor 1.0 Belmont Harbor 1.0 Blarney Stone Bar 1.0 Truman College 1.0 Around/Throughout City 1.0 Lincoln Park .68 18th Street Beach .68 Field Museum .68 Irving Park Road .68 In the Street .34 Emmerson Park ' .34 Hamlin Park .34 Warren Park .34 November Park ' .34 Bel Bowl .34 Howard Bowl .34 Broadway Bowl .34 Oak Street Beach .34 Brookfield Zoo .34 My Place Bar .34 Navy Pier . .34 University of Illinois .34 Table El (Continued) Location Loyola University Rush Street Kwick Shop Other Places in Illinois Minnesota Iowa Indiana Michigan Near Kennedy Expressway LaBagh Forest Preserve Library St. Francis Church St. Idas Church Fox Lake Ohio 111 Z Regponse .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 100 .0 LITERATURE CITED LITERATURE CITED Ablon, J. 1965.. American Indian relocation: problems of dependency and management in the city. Phylon, 26(4):362-371. Ablon, J. 1972. Relocated American Indians in the San Francisco Bay area: social interaction and Indian identity. In Native Americans Today; Sociological Perspectives, H. M. Bahr et‘al. (eds). Harper Row, New York. Adair. J. and K.W. Deuschle. 1970. The People's Health: Anthropology and Medicine in a Navajo Community. Appleton Century-Crofts, New York. ‘ Barta, A.M. 1976. Selected recreational activity preferences of selected Native American high school students. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utah. Bellah, R.N. 1970. Religious systems. In People of Rimrock: A Study of Values in Five Cultures, E.Z. Vogt and E.M. Albert (eds). Atheneum, New York. Brown, J. 1982. Tougher, more united Indian community battles to hold gains. The Chicago Reporter, 11(2):1-6. Bultena, G. and D.R. Field. 1977. Social class correlates of national park visition. Unpublished manuscript. Burch, W.R. 1971. Daydreams and Nightmares: A Sociological Essay on the American Environment. Harper Row, New'York. Cahn, E.S. (ed). 1969. Our Brother's Keeper: The Indian in White America. Community Press, New York. Bureau of Census. 1980. Census of Population, Non-permanent residents by states and selected counties and incorporated places: 1980 supplementary report. U.S. GPO, washington, D.C. Cheek, N.H. and W.R. Burch. 1976. The Social Orggnization of Leisure in Human Society. Harper Row, New York. Chicago Dept. of Development and Planning. 1967. Comprehensive plan of Chicago, Vol. 1: Analysis of city systems; residential areas, recreation and park land, education, public safety, and health. Chicago, IL. Collier, J. 1947. The Indians of the Americas. W.W. Norton & Co., New York . 112 113 Culin, S. 1902. Games of the North American Indians. In The 24th Annual Report, U.S. Bureau of American Ethnology. U.S. GPO, Washington, D.C. Deloria, V. 1969. Custer Died For Your Sins. MacMillan Co., New York. Dinkel, P. 1972. Two neighborhood case studies in neighboring and open space. Unpublished paper, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. Driver, H.E. 1961. Indians of North America. Univ. of Chicago Press, IL. Eastman, C.A. 1971. Indian Boyhood. Dover Publishers, New York. Einhorn, A. 1973. The Indians of New York City. In American Indian Urbanization, J.O. Waddell and O.M. Watson (eds). Purdue Research Foundation, Purdue University. Erickson, E.H. 1950. Childhood and Society. W.W. Norton Co., New York. Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 1940. The Nuer. Claredon Press, Oxford, England. Fletcher, A.C. 1970. Indian Games and Dances with Native Songs. 'NMS Press, New York. Fletcher, A.C. and F. LaFlesche. 1911. The Omaha Tribe. In The 27th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology. GPO, Washington, D.C. . Forster, J. 1972. Land, social organization and change. In Social Behavior, Natural Resources, and the Environment, W.R. Bruch et al. (eds). Harper Row, New York. Garbarino, M.S. 1971. Life in the city: Chicago. In American Indian in Urban Society, J.O. Waddell and O.M. Watson (eds). Little, Brown, Co., Boston, MA. Garbarino, M.S. 1976. Native American Heritage. Brown, Little, Co., New‘York. Garbarino, M.S. 1973. The Chicago American Indian Center: two decades. In American Indian Urbanization, J.O. Waddell and O.M. Wetson (eds). Purdue Research Foundation, Purdue University. Graves, T. 1966. Values, expectations and relocation: Navajo migrant to Denver. Human Organization, 26(4):300-7. Halstenrud, R.S. 1980. Trends in participation sports during the decade of the 70's. In Proceedings 1980 National Outdoor Recreation Trends Symposium, Vol. 2; USDA General Technical Report NE-57, Northeast Experiment Station, Broomall, PA. 114 Haun, P. 1965. Recreation: A Medical Viewpoint. Bureau of Publications, Columbia University Teachers College, New York. Hester, R.T. 1975. Neighborhood Space. Powder, Hutchinson, and Ross, Inc., Stroudsburg, PA. Hodge, F.W. (ed). 1912. Handbook of the Indians north of Mexico. In Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 30. GPO, Washington, D.C. Hodge, W.R. 1971. Navajo urban migration: an analysis from the perspective of the family. In American Indian in Utban Society, J.O. Waddell and O.M. Watson (eds). Little, Brown, Co., Boston, MA. Jackson, M.R. and K.A. Griffiths. 1974. Summer camping with American Indian youth: report from camp NaNa - Mah. JOurnal of American Indian Education, 14(1):4-11. Jacobs, J. 1961. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House, New York. Knowlston, 0.8. 1972. Culture conflict and natural resources. In Social Behavior, Natural Resources, and the Environment, W.R. Burch et al. (eds). Harper Row, New'York. Krutz, G. 1973. Compartmentalization as a factor in urban adjustment: the Kiowa case. In American Indian Urbanization, J.O. Waddell and O.M. Watson (eds). Purdue Research Foundation, Purdue University. Lazewski, T. 1976. American Indian migrant spacial behavior as an indicator of adjustment in Chicago. U.S. Educational Resources Information Center, ERIC Document ED 124319. Lee, R.G. 1973. Social organization and spacial behavior in outdoor recreation. Ph.D. dissertation, university of California, Berkeley. Lee, R.G. 1972. The social definition of outdoor recreation places. In Social Behavior, Natural Resources, and‘the Environment, W.R. Burch et al. (eds). Harper Row, New York. Lerup, L. 1972. Environmental and behavioral congruence as a measure of goodness in public space: the case of Stockholm. Ekistics Lurie, N.O. 1978. Mountain Wolf Women, Sister of Crashing Thunder: An Autobiography of a Winnebago Indian. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Lurie, N.O. 1966. Women in early American Anthropology. In Pioneers of American Anthropology: The Use of BiOgraphy, J. Helm (ed). University of Washington Press, WA. 115 Lynch, K. 1960. The Image of the City. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Machlis, G.E. and D.R. Field. 1980. Foreign visitors and inter- pretation: a sociological look at the Japanese tourist. Cooperative Park Studies, University of Idaho, CX 9000-0-0003. MacLeod, W.C. 1936. Conservation among primitive hunting peoples. Scientific Monthly, 43(12):5. Malmberg, T. 1980. Human Territoraligy: Survey of Behavioral Territories in Man With Preliminary Analysis and Discussion of Meaning. Mouton Publishers, Great Britain. Margon, A. 1973. The Indian in Chicago: Some comparative perspectives on group adjustment. Paper presented at Illinois State Historical Society Meeting. Chicago, IL. Marsh, G.P. 1874. The Earth as Modified by Human Action: A New Edition of Man and Nature. Scribner, New York. Martin, C. 1978. Keepers of the Game: Indian-Animal Relationships and the Fur Trade. University of California Press, Berkeley. Maynard, E. 1974. The growing negative image of the anthropologist among Native Americans. Human Organization. 33:402-3. Meeker, J.W. 1972. Red, White, and Black in the national parks. Paper presented at Albright Training Academy, Grand Canyon, AZ. Menninger, K. 1942. Love Against Hate. Harcourt, Brace, and World, New'York. Morgan, L.H. 1851. League of the Iroqgois. Sage and Brothers, Rochester, New York. Neils, E.M. 1971. Reservation to city: Indian migration and federal relocation. M.S. Thesis, University of Chicago, Illinois. Neog, P., R. Woods, and A. Harkins, 1970. Chicago Indians: the effects of Urban migration. Training Center for Community Programs, University of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Officer, J.E. 1973. Federal policy and the urban Indians. In American Indian Urbanization, J.O. Waddell and O.M. Watson (eds). Purdue Research Foundation, Purdue university. Pancner, C.M. and M.R. McDonough. 1982. An evaluation of the American Indian Center's recreational programming. Unpublished report, Michigan State University, Lansing, MI. 116 Peterson, G.L. 1977. Recreational preferences of urban teenagers: the influence of cultural and environmental attributes. ‘Children, Nature, and the Urban Environment: PrOceedings of a Symposium Fair. USDA, Forest Service General Technical Report NE-30, Northeast Forest Experiment Station, Upper Darby, PA. Poister, T.H. 1978. Public Program Analysis: Applied Research Methods. University Park Press, Baltimore, MD. Potts, M. 1980. Tribes mining independence. Chicago Tribune, February3, Sec. 5. Price, John A. 1972. The migration and adoption of American Indians to Los Angeles. In Native Americans Today: Sociological Perspectives, E.M. Bahr et al. (eds). Harper Row, New York. Riley, G.L. 1963. Adolf F. Bandelier as a Pueblo enthnologist. Kiva: A Journal of the Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society, 29(1):23-24. Russel, F. 1908. The Pima Indians. In The 26th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology. GPO, washington, D.C. Sandlin, S. 1977. Experimental program at mine could cut costs. [Farmington, New Mexico] Daily Times, 90(12):1, Aug. 15. Sando, J.S. and E.A. Scholer, 1976. Programming for Native Americans. Park and Recreation, March: 24-26, 53-55. Sommer, R. and B. Sommer, 1980. A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research: Tools and Techniques. Oxford Uhiv. Press, New York. Sorkin, A.L. 1969. Some aspects of American Indian Migration. Social Forces. 48(2):243-250. Sorkin, A.L. 1978. The Urban American Indian. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA . . Speck, F.G. 1951. Utilization of animals and plants by the Micmac Indians of New Brunswick. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 41(8):245-263. Spoehr, A. 1956. Cultural differences in the interpretation of natural resources. In Man's Role in Changing the Face of the Earth, W.L. Thomas, Jr. (ed). University of Chicago Press, IL. Stevenson, M.C. 1904. The Zuni Indians. In The 23rd Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology. GPO, Washington, D.C. Sturtevant, W.C. (ed). 1978. Handbook of NOrth American Indians, Vol. 15. Smithsonian Institution, washington, D.C. Suttles, c. 1968. The Social Order of the Slum. University of Chicago Press, IL. 117 Swanton, J.R. 1908.. Social condition, beliefs, and linguistic relation- ship of the Tlingit Indians. In The 26th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology. GPO, Washington, D.C. Synder, P.A. 1971. The social environment of the urban Indian. In American Indian in urban Society, J.O. Waddell and O.M. watson (eds). Little, Brown, Co., Boston, MA. Trimble, J.E. 1977. The sojourner in the American Indian community: methodological issues and concerns. Journal of Social Issues, 33(4):159-174. Udall, S. 1972. The Indians: first Americans, first ecologists. In Look to the Mountain Top, C. Jones (ed). H.M. Gousha Co., San Jose, CA. Underhill, R.M. 1953. Red Man's America. University of Chicago Press, IL. Van den Burghe, P.L. 1975. Man in Society: A Biosocial View. Elsevier Press, New York. Vecsey, C. and R.W. Venables. 1980. American Indian Environments: Ecological Issues in Native American History. Syracuse University Press, New York. washburn, W.E. 1971. Red Man's Land, White Man's Law: A Study of The Past and Present Status of the American Indian. Scribner and Sons, New York. Washburn, W.E. 1975. The Indian In America. Harper Row, Co., New York. Washburne, R.F. 1978. Black under-participation in wildland recrea- tion: alternative explorations. Leisure Sciences, 1(2):175- 189. Washburne, R.F. and P. Wall. 1980. Black-White ethnic differences in outdoor recreation. USDA Forest Service Research Paper INT- 249, Intermountain Forest and Range Exp. Station, Missoula, MT. Weiss, C.H. 1977. Survey research and minority communities. Journal of Social Issues, 33(4):20-35. Wendling, R.G. 1980. Black/White differences in outdoor recreation behavior; state-of—the-art suggestions for management and research. Paper presented at the Conference on Social Research in National Parks and Wildland Areas, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Gatlinburg, TN, March 21-22. Whalen, S. 1971. The Nez Perce's relationship to their land. The Indian Historian, 4(3):30~32. Wissler, C. 1922. The American Indian. Oxford, University Press, New'York. 118 Yancey, W.L. and J. Snell. 1971. Patterns of leisure in the inner city. urban and Regional Development Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.