, . . . a. .... 333. . .. . to... ... 4 ..... a , , . .r. . . U . : . , ., .23... .,. .. . ., .. (r... . it it‘ll“ . , . u. "..wxwummwfi...¢drmwwwfifin$mwfiwn§ .... fia§.n....n . .zmmFi . .9... x .99 «$9.39, .. N... . , n... . ...: .H... ... .ziflufi, .xufi.x§u.hkhhbr . ... .. .9.umm.wwww§.uw% ..H......umm....9 ...: . . 9.93%.. .313... m Hume. . ...... .... ... .. . 9..., ,. . , ,. .. Pinon?! 2499......0. 1.. ... . 3.9.9.925. , . : .. . 91...". amw..mqu.mem.v ....W. .m. Ham.” .... sufiikmmw 9 .9 ......9... L ...... ....m. 9w... ....w... . ., .... . ......Mnms .9333. .. .... urmummw. 3.9.9.5 . _ «...... .9 u. t .\ . . . . fl . ,. i, . “m”. u . :11} .9 . ‘go t3. ... J... 2,. ....d m... .. . I... 9 1 .... xx: ,.. xx... , a...“ 3 ... .96.... .19... ....13. .. V . .... 5.. ,. .... t: I .... t . ..v I ..w. . ... . 4‘. _ 9.? .. 2...... . )2. ...... . 1...... 0 l 2 . Qfiuwafivfflmum .mv moan. .19!- !x Q 99$ t o... 1.10% L. m... , .11.»... h. ismmfinxnon. . .35. hula... .00.? in... x......v::.r.ro...umw.wmyfl&vw0 .. {0‘ 3H. .. ¢ .... st .. $1.. 1 , .v r$vrtf LL97 ..th v x! b"! a. \v ... o“. l. a: . ...... 4f. . n. «:33 ... n ...: .. ..IK. I .. s .93 ’ 2‘. ... . Is. . h. Vt . . v 5 .MO.L.C1AQ.»..>1}7.H~Y§ an?“ , . S .. . ...RWUM. ...... .. warnwomtl 1. \V. . 1. Iiwxflllsku v 39??? 3.... hp ,2. . . aloa “a 2“)““uu-Ikflc‘u \J .. 3 i {U ‘t‘i 4— .. #9... .... 9. ..rz. I"... .G.’ . .... . x t .2... IBMMV.§.. 7...? has. 9.9mm.” .... .. 9 7 ..v a... . . a ) x . . . z ..l . I) , . 99...... 9993999 .9... .9 . 99.9.39. .99, 99.9.9... .9. .9. 9 .99... . 43m... . ...9 . 29...... .. 1... v3 .. vikfiwré 9 .. . 9.. . 99.....99999999: .9. 99.999 . . ‘ " v | '. " . — .1. 1 w m s: z \. ‘ , .... 1.12.; x c a c c ... w .. . 28:1... .4 .. ... a . d... .. . w . .. ...: .. 2. 59...... 4... .5... x ..w fit. . $3.49... .mawnmwkq ¥..c.1m.........m.£av.p..a Ffikflkfi .... 9.. 1......wwasxfl 8:9. .. ....fihmrxhfik, 9.99%“... 9.9.5.9;m9m..< .. w.%.m..99 om“: fig $599.32... .... .. f . 1 .. . v .... o ...l .. .. .. t . . .. .. . 9.4.4,. , ...... . . . .. a951, 3.1.9.. 9. .... 11.1.; rtt: ”N”! t... It w v 7 k .1 c .... . _ )1... 3..“ ... (it I»... )9. a... .mu .3.\ a. . r t) 7.. .... . a .... a A ... ... . . . 1.2... , .....X. 3.... a ‘ .mig....m ham.” ”.93....m989n9u9w... ... Mann¢n.h .... $.24... .. . 9. x%..~.%4 has... . . , . ...“? ”mu..zt.._......u,.fi..wmm.mm,r.um33 Wu. .3322... . .. rtrxvx t v in." ...". 0 ..v . 1!! v , .. . . ... .3... ....S .. . . n.\.au..$t.r...:.. ....su. ...C. 3.. .. v... 3 I in!” t. 1! A. .0 .9)...“ b, a c. «an... XE . .4. x. .... .C :4 .. . ..v. vfliyflefimyhmzv r. . 9‘34»? H... 1 . $00 2 1 I. “...“. 2%.... A. . ...“:qu . daft“... memfiifi ... ,, ....mhcdfirybmsiwumfi. ...... «...... "g . ...“.49 .393... 998....wwmuwawugu. .. ., av .....m”, . am... 9 . . . .... it!1..r..31... .... ..v {.1 t } .26. , . 3:91.». . $.23... .17. 131.1,} it... 1.33313 v~31¢tn 7|! .. I . VI; , x : 191.35}. . 9)... \3. . I}... 3).. 1...“ .«fi. 3%. .7) . $53L+XX . . .5.1!..Iiv520\31.sl.01l|..t~x 511.331.! «1.3.3.9311..th '1 . 1 burn: 31$. 3 .353... (is; .... 3 35.99.}...zsilyx .53 2.30”) s. . ... ...... 11111.1 ...... £1§fihr§é§li$ .. .. ....on ...... .... .. dung. . .riugi»: .... $599.9...5. ...... Ln. _ ... .quS .9312...) ......933... 913...... ... +2.13% gt 2.1.1 . . .... 0 v9.7: .- 319.1{L33lr’lv g ‘vfilx'ivetélvs. . .3. . .. )xl . 3.x. “KG; IQ . Sufi... 1.314. 7.5.... . ...): an...) 3.. x , 3).... ...: . . . L .. ...asrTf. . .. . ....v... .vft.nwhlz...h%!.€1..i [Ii‘tfilxtggtynh‘flrg 9 s .... .9 £.Z:....N. was 3 .. “ ,\...2.n.h911.xn.x..ufifi.. .hg3199311flv L .. 95‘ . 9.0.1 .33.... its...» - Ifd..qrrv.n.h.r3xfl.vikvfi.\$vv¢l?¥t:.~r§fiq. {IL-1...: « V . fin-Intlo‘t .553, “garb! it.» 3.|r.\\n.:1 €93...) . 3.1.11. _ . . $.13! L. . if: .A I! . I! 1|- ’|| 9 n . flu ..V I". . ~ ~ .3 . 9 I .. qr. ... l. --r.!.w--fly.finrfl$sr+hvfl12 varbwia..§ut._mv tr 7.. 5.0. J: O... ) 1.1.3... Z. .2. . 3 , 2...... .. (W936. Nun... 3%}Q»fldrilx .. . . . .. . .. . 19%. ...... . , .. 3.4.11.9. .. . . ... a .53 1.3.. 9.. , . , . . . . . Cl. ‘11. . SI. H, But i... .53....‘2 Wis): \(WA. .3“. . . I... .7... . . . .. ......8.. . , b.2313: . z .9...aszs...a.&1 2.99.93.99.21... 3:, 9 . 1 .... . .9 .. . . . 9 .. . .. r . ‘12... 7.. . .hv. )3 53?). f vfirfli4333h‘h\ 97.1.. {T 14 .19. . . , . .5... .1315... I? )2! 5 .....v . . . .. . 3 1931!?! 53.... 33.12... 1.53”)». at .51 «1‘51; fr. \2 \‘31333 ...)va 33.5... .51. 1-) .. ’25). ~ 7.. 1.2... 131k?» Eu 1.. #335... I '9 rt}. ... . .. £011 6.. . .. if .. . £1... 11%.... . .. . . in... 12)}... 1:0 . . . . a. .91.; .. .... u ......l... . ..... . .... ..fin , a... i... . ......Ifll. .. . 9.3!}: .15.»... “A3131! 9’13? 21 . a‘ “111‘ 1.1.7.. , , .. In}. .. ... In»?! hlsgufiwdwk. .. , ......I‘. “Np. .11.: . , n. ”4.1.9.733 . .133 $.13... . .1311993792fiuiigiifiiiv; 1.31.32... .1 AL... . .‘v. . . . . 4. .§.s...rui..fic . ..v: ”xi, .. ...... figabfxizaifixg .. .3! ......J. . . ...... 9 v “3.1:": ”flit... , 3...... ..s szgfixxuufla? ...xvh.‘ .331... ...... 9:53.)... . . . . 99.51%... . 1:7... 53 . V 3 3, \. In“: \- au. méhnlil. . 3:5 Klan~fl§9§ .... \\ . . .1... ’1 irrflPEMMxh «mwmwnww..m f . . lift. 3...; 11.99.!le 31.30.. g: .. .. 81533....“ 1...... .. .- hr. Mu. 19. 1.991....1... .. . a) . . .5 55s“. ”Nu... . I 91.1. , .l . to}: faith 1..., .. yr... 9.. 39.19.75. . . ,. . , . i: 3.)) 2.3.11.3}. ...-.553; ‘ .5. HI}... 11: . din-1.... . 6...... .1 . ... ll... (.1... ..Jr .59.. ....u .x . u. , v . . v , . . w . . : 3:92.... . ll... .. z . . . ...... . 3?“)3. . .1109.) . Ls.” .. ... . . . . , . . I.i!1.1\\.. Sad-... \‘5499‘ . ...)... I \ I .4 , {A 1 ‘33..) ...-.1 1.1.3.3.. . . Llhezl..uswzaail......xln .....liizuufifiuv an»... it it.) hue: ls! 34.31.94“. 9 ..‘I! . . , . Hacks)! .111 , 36‘. . \. auw . . hate... .... sign... 13.1% neat-...... . .... ...... .9 . ...... ....fiflatii . 3§5%?§.t.fi. 52%.... ...... 9 ...... ”unflfifi‘i 9.1%, . ..Y‘éwl. . . 9H“... .vvtsxltv". 531$. 1A 1'19. , ....Vl ll. . . . ("5.11 in“)... T7... . .390..le . fir ...??le . .3} H II .... . ...... .., .LC «17).» 1‘. 1.1 , 9.15.7. 1.9913341... . Hun? .. .fi..1)1.%v.§k..fir.vfifl I... 1....LuflufiunuNY 1.9“...) “gun”. .... . . ...: .l. . (...HPILFWHHJNLLY . . 4+1- “A...” . L mg... 2.71.135. .7111 . $32.? m s #7:... ‘1 39.113.21.11... 1...... (LAM: 3.931;“. .751}! . ... 3%”?ng .1...» alklx . 9 ... ii; .... 5.. .....hxxi .71-... . ..Prrt 9’99 1 2 M. {£9 4.999933% . ...z. I..\ .. , . .... - v \a‘.\k“l.v$. I . . ......quknfl . . . . Untfifi‘ll ......K \l .I. ... . v,» ..\\u ....r. :.\.l?.$.r\k 9.54.... .K...n..itiwflwu~t$kir “......ahk. . 1.. I [lir'lr . .. LIBRA R Y Michigan State (11“,: qu-Y a. ., III III III III III IIIIII III II IIIII III IIIII IIII IIII IIII III I This is to certify that the thesis entitled RECLAMATION OF LAND FROM COAL MINING FOR RECREATION: A CASE STUDY presented by Jacalyn Rose Bernard has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M.S. degree in Park and Recreation Resources )w/Vfi or professor/ Date February 21, 1979 0-7639 owl-03 930-9 ....9: RECLAMATION OF LAND FROM COAL MINING FOR RECREATION: A CASE STUDY By Jacalyn Rose Bernard AN ABSTRACT OF 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 1979 (i, I cat- 233:; ABSTRACT RECLAMATION OF LAND FROM COAL MINING FOR RECREATION: A CASE STUDY By Jacalyn Rose Bernard Reclamation of abandoned coal mines is mandated by the 1977 Sur— face Mining Control and Reclamation Act. According to the law, each par— cel of abandoned land to be reclaimed must have a use determined at least in part by nearby communities. This study investigates preferences for use of a reclafined area based on a sample survey of residents of a small city in central Illinois. The hypotheses were: that residents desire recreational use of the reclaimed area, view the reclamation favorably, and can express the value of reclamation in evaluative and monetary terms. Respondents desired recreation on the site, for example, for picnics or for outdoor games and sports. Favorability toward the reclamation was high. Very favorable respondents and those with children were most likely to state monetary values for reclamation, however, it appears that statement of value is most related to preferences for use of the site in recreation. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Acknowledgements are due to several people and organizations for their help in the preparation of this study. My adviser, Daniel Stynes, provided much friendly advice and counsel throughout this endeavor. Both Stephen Golant and George Tolley of the University of Chicago must be credited with clarifying my Views of the project in terms of environmen— tal psychology and resource economics. Many useful comments were received in day—to—day interactions with the staff of the Land Reclamation Group at Argonne National Labora— tory. Comments on the results of the project by John Dwyer of the North Central Forest Experiment Station in Chicago proved to be very helpful. While the field work was being done in the city of Staunton, Elton Schaeffer and his staff in the City Clerk's office were most accom— modating and kind. Thanks are also due to David Bernard for helping in many ways. Competent typing skills were contributed by Diane Duff. This study was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy through Argonne National Laboratory. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 LITERATURE REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . 2.1 The Concept of Reclamation for Recreation . . . . 2.2 Reclamation in Illinois . . . 2.3 Valuation of Reclamation. . . 3 THE PROBLEM. . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 The Reclaimed Site. . . 3.2 The Staunton Population . . . 3.3 Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . 4 PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1 Sample Size . . . . . . . 4.2 Survey Administration . . . . 4.3 Response Rate . . . . . . 4 4 Data Analysis Techniques. 5 EMPIRICAL RESULTS OF THE SURVEY. . . 5 1 The Sample Population and Its 5 2 Preferences for Site Use. . . 5.3 Views of Reclamation. . . . . S 4 Valuation of Reclamation. 5 5 6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . 6 1 Summary of Results. . . . . . 6 2 Limitations of the Study. . . 6.3 Recommendations . . . . . . . 6 4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . c u o o n o o o o o n u o u o s s o u o o o o a o o a o o Representativeness. Recommendations for Use of the Site . . . . . . . P‘\JU1 16 16 20 22 27 27 29 34 35 36 36 43 49 60 61 61 64 66 68 71 84 85 Table 10 11 12 13 14 15 Acreage of Study Site. LIST OF TABLES 0 Response Rate for Staunton Sample Population . Respondents' by Respondent. Respondents' Ownership. Types of Recreation Respondents Engage in, Would Like in Staunton Reported Importance of Having Selected Types of Preferred Use of Reclaimed Land if Owned Preferred Use of Reclaimed Land in Public 0 o o o and Would Like on the Reclaimed Area. Recreation in or Near Staunton . Favorability Toward Reclamation. o v Favorability Index of Attitudes Toward Reclamation . Cross-Tabulation of Favorability Index with Preferences for Use in Private Ownership . Cross-Tabulation of Favorability Index with Preferences for Use in Public Ownership. Correlation Coefficients for Favorability Toward u Reclamation and Test Variables . Perceived Problems Associated with Land in Preferred Public Use . Willingness to Pay Related to Preferred Uses of Land in Public and Private Ownership . Benefits from Reclamation Expressed by Sampled Staunton Residents. Willingness to Pay by Selected Subgroups of Sample Population . o 0 72v 0 o v o o o Page 19 34 39 39 4O 42 44 45 47 47 48 49 52 53 56 Table Page 16 Nonparametric Correlation of Test Variables. . . . . . . . 57 17 Cross- Tabulation of Willingness to Pay by Preferred Uses of Land in Public Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . 59 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Location of Staunton I Reclamation Site in Illinois. . . . l7 2 Schematic View of the Reclaimed Area . . . . . . . . . . . l8 3 Aerial View of Project Area Before Reclamation, 1976 . . . 3O 4 Aerial View of Project Area During Reclamation, 1976 . . . 30 5 Parcel 1 of Project Site: Gob Pile Before Reclamation . . 31 6 Parcel 1 of Project Site: After Reclamation of Gob Pile . 31 7 Parcel 2 of Project Site: Before Reclamation. . . . . . . 32 8 Parcel 2 of Project Site: After Reclamation . . . . . . . 32 9 Parcel 3 of Project Site: Before Reclamation. . . . . . . 33 10 Parcel 3 of Project Site: After Reclamation . . . . . . . 33 v7: CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION A high priority in recreation research is the optimization of opportunities for enhancing recreation while minimizing the adverse effects of man's activities (U.S. Dept. of Interior 1974). As of 1977, there were approximately 1.1 million acres of land abandoned after coal mining out of 5.7 million acres disturbed by all types of mining in the United States (Holmberg in press). As used here, the term "abandoned mines" will refer to land affected by surface and underground coal mines which have been taken out of production. The recently enacted Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act1 includes the Abandoned Mine Reclamation program, through which abandoned coal mine lands across the nation will be returned to useful purpose. Previous to enactment of the federal law, state legislation was either absent or ineffective in requir- ing mining companies to reclaim abandoned sites. In Illinois, there are about 100,000 acres of abandoned mine land. No additional mine lands are expected to be classified as aban— doned because a state law, effective in 1962 for surface mines and 1972 for deep mines, requires mining companies to reclaim mined lands dis— turbed after those dates (Abandoned Mined Lands Reclamation Council 1978). Most of the abandoned lands are not affected by acid mine spoils, and, thus, are naturally revegetated and pose no major health or environmental problems from exposure and erosion of acid materials. lPublic Law 95-87, 91 Stat. Aug. 3, 1977. Title IV. 1 2 About half of the abandoned acreage is used for pasture or other agricultural use. Because abandoned mined lands provide a type of up— land topography not encountered in most of Illinois, about 30 per cent of the abandoned acreage is used for homes, sports clubs, state parks, wildlife areas, and numerous private and municipal recreation sites. However, about 23,000 acres of the abandoned lands, scattered throughout the state, are considered problem areas because acid conditions affect the site and surrounding land. At these 800 problem sites ranging in size from less than 1 to 437 acres, the value of surrounding property is often depressed, there are usually aesthetic impacts, and the land is simply not useful (Abandoned Mined Lands Reclamation Council 1978; Haynes and Klimstra 1975; Nawrot e£_aI. 1977). The federal law requires mining companies to pay a reclamation fee of 35¢ per ton of surface mine coal and 15¢ per ton of coal from underground mines to go into the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund. Through this fund, at least one-half of the revenues contributed from each state will be returned to the state for reclamation of abandoned mines. The total value of the revenue available to Illinois should be in the order of $7.5 million per year.2 Disbursement of the funds will begin after the state develops an approved reclamation program, desig— nating priorities and processes for determination of land uses on the sites in compliance with federal regulations. In about two years, Illinois will be ready to administer the program (pers. comm. Grossboll). 2Assuming average annual coal production in Illinois of 60 mil- lion tons; half being strip mined, half mined underground. Sources: Carter, R.P., LaFevers, J.R., Croke, E.J., Kennedy, A.S., and Zellmer, S.D. 1974. Surface Mined Land in the Midwest: A Regional Perspective fbr Reclamation Planning. Argonne National Laboratory. Argonne, Illinois. pp. 11—39. The priorities established by the 1977 Act are for protection of the public from adverse effects of mining, and, for the Abandoned Mine Program, restoration of land to serve public needs. As yet, there 'is no established process in Illinois for determining land uses on par- cels having a high priority for reclamation. In the past, reclamation efforts were undertaken by mining companies who determined desirable land uses employing in-house criteria; there was very little consulta- tion with nearby communities. According to the federal law, state decis— ions about land uses for these parcels must consider local government desires as well as regional and state development goals. At the same time, ecological and engineering data about the capability of each site to support desired public uses must be incorporated in each decision. There are few examples to follow for determining community desires for uses of reclaimed land and few cases of integrating these desires with specific limitations on uses imposed by reclamation of areas containing hazardous materials. The implicit assumption in passage of the federal law is that the costs of reclamation, passed on to society through increased energy prices, are at least equal to the benefits to be derived. As in all projects, however, it is desirable to have the maximum benefit for the minimum cost. Since most experience with reclamation is contained with— in mining companies, the states are not yet equipped to use cost— effective and efficient methods of reclamation on problem abandoned mines. Because cost effectiveness of abandoned mine reclamation must now be assessed in the public domain, it is important to consider and quantify in some way the value of reclamation to society. 4 Two reclamation demonstration projects in Illinois are being conducted by Argonne National Laboratory and supported by the State of Illinois and the United States Department of Energy. One is an aban— doned surface coal mine already contained within a state park in north central Illinois. The other is an abandoned underground mine refuse area in west central Illinois, where the proposed use is recreation for the residents of a nearby town. This study is concerned with the latter project near the small town of Staunton in Macoupin County, Illinois. Preliminary analysis led to a decision to reclaim the site for recreational use, although community desires for uses had not been formally assessed. This investigation explores the use of a sample survey as one method of achieving the follow- ing objectives: 1) determine preferences of nearby populations for use of a reclaimed site, assuming a priori that recreation is one of the preferred uses; and 2) determine how these populations value reclamation both in attitudinal and economic terms. CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Mbst mine reclamation research to date focuses on the rehabilita- tion of strip mines, mainly because of their obvious extensive land dis— turbance compared to underground mines. Abandoned surface mines are usu— ally characterized by steep sloped piles of overburden and tailings in association with mining cuts in-filled with water. Underground mines have slurry ponds, buildings, open mine shafts, and areas devoted to waste ("gob") piles from coal cleaning. In dealing with problems of rec- lamation from acid pollution and determining land uses for these areas, the two types of mines present similar problems. 2.1 The Concept of Reclamation for Recreation The first states to begin regulating coal mining operations were West Virginia in 1939, and Indiana in the early 1940's. It had become obvious that the practice of abandoning mines after resource depletion presented serious environmental and health problems. By 1976, 38 states had mining and reclamation laws, but there were varying levels of regu- lation, and most laws began by regulating only surface (or strip) coal mining, not deep coal mining and its associated impacts (U.S. Geological Survey 1976). As awareness of pollution and soil conservation increased, states began expanding control to other types of mining and reclamation and emphasized land use planning relationships to reclamation. Some laws were also oriented to encourage involvement of local governments in planning for uses of land reclaimed after mining. Until the 1950's reclamation research focused primarily on mitigating serious post-mine water quality and erosion problems from mines, mainly through revegetation of spoils. The ensuing change in reclamation philosophy, from abandonment to rehabilitation, may have been the result of technol— ogy, influence of successful demonstrations with some recovery of costs, and recognition of public relations benefits to be gained through recla- mation, in addition to greater state regulation of mining (LaFevers 1974). Mining companies have generally taken the initiative in reclama— tion for recreation on strip mines. Early demonstrations of recreational use of reclaimed land emphasized fish and game habitat development (Flowers 1955; Riley 1954), although the efforts by Halman Creek Coal Company in 1944 produced recreational lakes for swimming and a baseball field in addition to pheasant raising facilities (United Electric Coal Companies n.d.). It was not until the early 1960's that reclamation for recreation on coal strip lands was officially endorsed by the American Mining Congress (American Mining Congress 1961) in a wave of interest demonstrated by the U.S. Forest Service, university researchers, land- scape architects and others (U.S. Dept. of Agriculture 1962; Greiss and Deasy 1961; Bowden and Meier 1961). West German reclamation programs were subsequently studied by U.S. researchers because reclamation there is planned according to com— munity needs (Nephew 1972; Seeger 1976). Reports of the Aberfan disas- ter in Wales in 1966, where about 140 people were killed by a slide of colliery shale, resulted in reclamation programs for public needs in 7 Britain which also eventually became a source of interest to U.S. recla- mation researchers (Tandy 1974). By 1972, the U.S. Department of Interior had outlined a Surface Mined Lands for Recreation program whereby a land bank for organized recreational use of surface mined lands could be developed (U.S. Dept. of Interior 1973). As a result, seven demonstration projects were sup- ported by Land and water Conservation Funds through the Bureau of Out- door Recreation. Several states have since used Land and water Conserva- tion Funds to reclaim mined areas for recreation. Notable cases of planned recreational developments on surface mined lands are Moraine State Park, Pennsylvania (U.S. Dept. of Interior 1970) and Friendship Park in Jefferson County, Ohio (Maneval 1975). 2.2 Reclamation in Illinois Illinois' coal mining industry began in the early 1800's, with the first strip mine being operated near Danville in 1866. Regulation of coal mining followed the same path as many other states; bills were introduced for surface mining regulation as early as 1929, but were defeated until 1943 when a law was passed but later declared unconstitu- tional. In 1961, legislation for reclamation of operating surface mines was passed, amended in 1963 and 1968, and rewritten as the Surface Mined Land Conservation and Reclamation Act of 1971. It provided for industry responsibility for reclamation plans and involvement of the public in approving plans. It did not, however, provide for reclamation of aban- doned lands prior to the 1962 legislation. The 1975 Abandoned Mine Reclamation Act did provide for reclama- tion of surface and underground abandoned mine lands previous to the 1961 law. Abandoned land in this law referred to land not being mined, or used for commercial purpose, or on which taxes were in default (Bergstrom 1977). The state, through the Abandoned Mine Lands Reclama- tion Council, funds reclamation of abandoned lands under this Act. With the introduction of the Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, the funds available annually to the state for abandoned mine recla— mation increased dramatically. Early research on reclamation of mined land in Illinois concen- trated on seeking out plant species suitable for revegetating strip mine lands. The University of Chicago, University of Illinois, and Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station were involved in this type of research in the 1950's (Bergstrom 1977; pers. comm. Arthur). An alliance between the state, agencies such as the Wildlife Management Institute, and coal companies resulted in a project, started in 1953, to determine the poten- tial of strip mined lands for recreation (Klimstra, Vohs, and Cherry 1963). The first survey of recreational developments on strip mined areas in Illinois was made in 1960 by the Cooperative Wildlife Research Laboratory, Southern Illinois University. The same agency conducted a study in 1962 on potential recreational use of strip mine lands (Roseberry 1963; Roseberry and Klimstra 1964). Parcels of mined land were identified, ownership ascertained, and utilization noted. It was found that 47 recreational areas were located on 16,000 acres of stripped land. An additional unknown amount of stripped land was used for unor- ganized or unauthorized recreation. The possibility of using mined land for public recreation (state acquisition) was assessed in this survey using field survey criteria. Approximately 15,000 additional acres of land were rated excellent or very good for recreational use requiring little development. It appeared that recreation occurred wherever mines had water bodies with suitably inclined accesses to them and haulage Iroads left after mining ceased. In most such areas, natural revegeta— tion had taken place and thus those areas were simply adapted for recre- ational use, often with minimal reclamation. In 1971, the Cooperative Wildlife Research Laboratory surveyed all lands affected by surface mining for coal in Illinois (Haynes and Klimstra 1975) to add to the information obtained in the 1962 survey. Since 1971, the State Department of Mines and Minerals, Division of Land Reclamation, updates the records each year. The 1971 survey showed that 29,000 acres of strip mined lands were being used for recreation, which does not include recreational homes, educational use, forests, or areas where unauthorized recreational use occurs. Various semi-private, pri— vate and employees clubs are located on mine areas, especially near the larger urban areas. There are also permit areas for fishing and youth camps on these lands. Public areas include the state facilities of Kickapoo and Pyramid State Parks, and the DuQuoin State Fairgrounds. Two new state park additions which include mined land are Goose Lake Prairie State Park and Banner Marsh State Park. About 7,000 acres of land in Illinois have been affected by underground mining, according to the survey completed in 1976 by Nawrot et a1. (1977) for the Illinois Institute for Environmental Quality. Twanty—six underground mine sites surveyed are used for recreation, which is about 1.5 per cent of the total number of sites. Considering that about 1,500 acres of underground mine sites and at least 2,000 acres of strip mine sites are near residential areas, there is some value 10 in considering the needs of communities in proposing land uses for these abandoned areas. Klimstra gt_a1. (1977) suggest that recreational use of abandoned mines is a consequence of available water, but this may not always be true. In the case of areas around underground mines, water impoundments associated with them are indeed sometimes used for recreation (Bergstrom 1977). However, there is also evidence that gob piles and steep mine spoils are used as backdrops for shooting practice, provide areas for hunting rodents and terrain for off-road vehicles. A number of abandoned strip mines are devoted to "Illinois Lands for Wildlife" and, as such, their recreational value may not strictly be dependent on available water. Abandoned mines in general may provide areas where the human need for cover, "away from the eyes of every household in the township" (Darling n.d.), judgement set aside, can be fulfilled. Lack of cover is known to impose social problems in some urban areas and may even be a problem in rural communities where there is little public land nearby for town residents to go for privacy in the outdoors. Research into the ef- fects of crowding suggests that the individual's (architectural) environ— ment can fail to provide areas for structuring territories, privacy, and a sense of control over one's environment (L00 1977). Certain abandoned mines near communities may fulfill these privacy functions, which by default often fall into the category of outdoor recreation. On a more practical level, the Illinois Abandoned Mine Land Recl- lamation Council has identified several areas for research concerning recreation on reclaimed lands. These are: water quality improvements for recreation, habitat development for fish and wildlife, and develop— ment of areas for off-road vehicles, shooting areas and shooting and archery ranges (Bergstrom 1977). 11 Management problems can occur once mined land is used for recrea— tion. Hallburg (1978) and Dickerson (pers. comm.) point out that there are often problems with providing access to water bodies, that there may be acid conditions in certain water bodies, erosion can cause road and hillside slippage because of unstable landforms, and there may be aes— thetic problems if vegetation does not establish itself well. Tandy (1974) in Great Britain points out that, to gain public respect, open spaces reclaimed from mining must appear to be well managed, and some effort must be expended to overcome public prejudice against reclaimed parks that are not as well manicured as municipal parks. The reasons for not managing these areas as intensively as municipal parks is often related to the fact that land uses in reclaimed areas "are limited by the physical properties and chemical characteristics of the refuse material” being reclaimed (Zellmer and Carter 1977, p. 6). Nonetheless the body of literature describing the popularity of parks on reclaimed mine areas to date indicates that people are willing to use these areas and that they do value them as public resources. 2.3 Valuation of Reclamation Randall gt_al, (1974) describe aesthetic damage as a discommod— ity, and improvement of aesthetic quality as a commodity. Maler (1974) supports this by stating that the quality of a piece of land, even if it is privately owned, is thought of as a public good having some value. Mining activity in the past had a spillover effect; that is, abandoned mine wastes adversely affected the collective value of the environment. Reclamation provides an improvement in the collective value of the envir— onment. Some means of quantifying the benefits of such improvements 12 would be useful in benefit cost analysis for efficient resource manage— ment. Traditionally, costing of changes in the environment has been carried out using measures of productivity, prOperty value, and health effects (Brookshire, Ives, and Schulze 1976). Various nonmonetary val— ues for the environment have been developed but are not easily adaptable to benefit cost analyses (Shafer, Hamilton, and Schmidt 1969; Canadian Dept. of Indian Affairs and Northern DevelOpment 1971a). Consideration of benefits of reclamation should include national economic benefits, and local benefits such as expenditures for local services associated with the project. Recreation research has provided the background for evaluation of national economic benefits because recreation has long been consid— ered a public or collective good the value of which is included in bene— fit cost analyses. The develOpment of national economic benefit mea- sures for recreation began with the introduction of travel cost models based on the costs that recreationists are willing to incur to travel to a recreation site as a proxy for willingness to pay for recreation (Clawson and Knetsch 1966). Willingness to pay measures using the travel-cost method are useful for recreation areas or resources where a significant variation in the amount of travel is involved to that desti— nation only. Over the years, SOphisticated models have been deve10ped, but the technique has limitations in some cases which led to the deve10p- ment of the survey method of directly asking consumers what their will- ingness to pay is. It is this method which has proved useful in evalua- tion of environmental changes. The underlying assumption of willingness to pay measures is apt- ly put in terms of recreation by Knetsch and Davis (1966, p. 452): 13 ". . . there is an individual and collective limit to how much we will give up to enjoy . . . any outdoor recreation facility or preserve any scenic resource." In effect, if a project is economically viable, consumers should be will- ing to pay an amount which will (theoretically) compensate those who have thereby lost the Opportunity to have the resource in question put to an alternative use. Dwyer gt_§1, (1977) point out that it is difficult to delineate full compensation; it is often a matter of judgement. Net wil- lingness to pay is operationally defined as the maximum amount consumers would be willing to pay to prevent their exclusion from a project or service. Direct willingness to pay values for recreation were first ob- tained in a survey conducted by Davis (1963). He showed that the survey populations' willingness to pay for recreation in Baxter State Park in Maine was a function of income, years of experience with the area, and length of visit. Average willingness to pay beyond what the visit pres- ently cost was $2.98 per day per individual interviewed. The range of values was between zero and $16.66. Some of the willingness to pay stud— ies which were subsequently carried out concerned the value of wildlife recreation (Horvath 1974), duck hunting (Hammack and Brown 1974), beach use (McConnell 1977) and recreational clamming (Smith, Conrad, and Storey 1978). A survey in the Four Corners area of the southwest conducted by Randall, Ives and Eastman (1974) elicited willingness to pay responses for changes in the aesthetic environment around a power plant. They found that higher income respondents using a park were willing to pay a greater amount then lower income respondents for the same hypothetical level of abatement. This corresponds with Davis' finding that willing- l4 ness to pay for recreation was related to income. Mean individual household willingness to pay for abatement was $50 per year for some- what reduced damage and $85 for more reduced damage. Interpretation of these results requires caution because there are many problems inherent in such studies in addition to the methodolog- ical problems involved in designing surveys. Fischer (1975) states that people might exaggerate their willingness to pay answers if they see any systematic relationship between their answers and what they might actu— ally have to pay. Individuals may understate their value if they believe payment will result, they may overstate their value if they believe pay- ment is not linked to their answer, and if they believe that the govern— ment will pay for the program regardless of their response, they may state their value as zero. The variation of individual perceptions of the environment also contributes to bias in willingness to pay studies. People frequently have no comparative basis upon which to state payment because they have never had to pay for such goods. The amount of information the individ— ual has about the resource in question may change over time, and thus willingness to pay may change, rendering it an unreliable measure. Fischer also criticized the fact that many willingness to pay studies do not account for those who are directly involved in using the resource but who still have a demand for an improved environment, including fu— ture generations. This latter criticism, however, is a common problem with all current economic evaluation methodology. Nonetheless, it is generally agreed that willingness to pay measures can provide useful values for evaluating the efficiency of resource management, controlling as much as possible for its inadequacies. rflw- “my , 15 Several methods of benefit estimation have been used for recla- mation projects. One method assesses productivity levels achieved on reclaimed lands. Alternative types of production (e.g., agricultural, ~industria1, etc.) are compared and the most productive use chosen, or the resale value of alternative uses is chosen as a proxy for production value. The underlying assumptions in choosing this method are that the market value of land increases after reclamation, tax revenue (if pri— vately owned) increases for the region, and sometimes market and tax values of surrounding properties also increase as a result of reclama— tion (Guither 1974). Clapper and Wilkey (1978) estimated the effects of land values in the Macoupin County area chosen for this thesis study and found that the appraised market value of the reclaimed property had increased by $21,870 from 1976 before reclamation began to 1978 when it was near com- pletion. The appraised and assessed value of the properties in the sur— rounding areas also increased in that time period as a result of recla— mation. Leaming (1977) suggests that the conversion of derelict land must be paid for by the subsequent user of the land, either through pro— ductivity of the land, or if the public values reclamation, through taxes. The cost of reclamation will probably be passed on to the public in the form of increased energy costs. Indirectly then, the public will be paying for the reclamation, rendering cost-effectiveness of reclama— tion a desirable public goal. The cost of reclamation at the Macoupin County site was $658,000 for 34 acres reclaimed. It is clear that achieving the maximum benefit for reclamation expenditures is desirable to prevent misallocation of resources and undue costs passed on to custo— mers. CHAPTER 3. THE PROBLEM 3.1 The Reclaimed Site The Macoupin County reclamation site is located about 50 miles northeast of St. Louis, Missouri and two miles northwest of Interstate 55 near Staunton, Illinois (Figure 1). The 34-acre site consists of three parcels of land affected by activities associated with underground coal mining from 1904 to 1923 (Figure 2). It was the site of the Con- solidation Coal Company mine number 14, and it employed an average of 500 men in the mine, coal cleaning plants, and rail yards. Wastes from coal cleaning were piled on an area of about five acres and finally reached a height of about 80 feet (25 m.). To provide a water supply for the coal cleaning operation, the mining company cre- ated an impoundment which, when the mine was finally abandOned, filled with the acid drainage from the gob pile. This ll-acre slurry pond eventually breached the dam holding it in and contributed to the pollu— tion of Cahokia Creek, a tributary of the Illinois River. Because of the acidic nature of the gob pile and run-off from it, over two-thirds of the entire site was barren, despite the passage of 50 years. Also remaining on the site was a 175 foot (55 m.) high concrete smoke stack, and foundations of several buildings. The area had been used as a general dump for years. Some small game had used about 11 acres of the site; hunters had used the area for target practice, and there was evidence of off-road vehicle use of the 16 l7 CHKMBE’ /. I l'I-ss smmcnnoo /' “DEW“ I CEMETERY \ f\ _.1 “~-J 9" STAUN TON A RECLAIITION AREAS ucoum , COUNTY I LITCHFIELD ’ -u STAUNTON I SITE 0 ,/ ST. LOUIS <—'ou ‘smons 01m 0» Figure 1. Location of Staunton I reclamation site in Illinois. 18 DAM - 4 y‘\\\“\“ ‘4 “‘ A‘J S 4 '—'fi .../”g .J _' I I ..I _._-":_-=_ .. N _________ _. g a“ \" I _._ ._ , I _I -—~.., . .l _R . 6m BUNKER HILL ROAO I_ 2'" --- I" IIZ I O 200 400 ' ' FEET O 50 IOO I50 200 I METERS '7‘ #1 r- ...-— m I X \' '—®r_é===:20 ' II —---- PROPERTY LINE \\.\ . n. FARM BUILDINGS x-\ I ~51 . ** REAR%'A%E§'PUR \‘K\' 'I g POND ,J - ----- — WATERCOURSE --- CULVERT 1.520" CONTOUR LINE (elevations In feet) \\ \ E] DEMONSTRATION AREA K\~ -\ EROSION PLOT \, - (:D TREES (mixed hardwood) X \-\. \.\ I. FORMER AREA OF 603 PILE XQN -\ 2. DRAINAGE DITCH \\"\\.\ 3. FORMER SLURRY POND AREA XXI .Figure 2. Schematic view of the reclaimed area. Source: Argonne National Laboratory. 1978. Staunton I site reclamation demonstration project. land Reclamation Laboratory. Argonne, Illinois. m-u—n—mfluo...~ - . .- 19 site. Accounting for these uses, the acreage of the site before recla- mation is shown in Table 1. Four agencies were involved in choosing TABLE 1 ACREAGE OF STUDY SITE Use Area Gob pile 4.5 acres (1.8 ha.) Old cleaning plant and surrounding area 7.5 acres (3.0 ha.) Slurry pond 11.0 acres (4.5 ha.) Volunteer vegetation 11.0 acres (4.5 ha.) Total 34.0 acres (13.8 ha) this site for reclamation among 29 coal mine refuse sites in the area of Cahokia Creek. The creek was being considered for development as a multi-purpose water supply to nearby communities. The Department of Energy, the Illinois Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Council, and the Illinois Institute for Natural Resources jointly supported the site selection criteria and reclamation program developed by Argonne National Laboratory. The goals of the program were to: (1) reduce the quantity of pollutants entering the environment, (2) increase the economic poten- tial of the area, (3) improve the aesthetics of the locale, and (4) develop and demonstrate cost—effective reclamation techniques. The Staunton I site was chosen for reclamation because it obvi- ously contributed to poor water quality in Cahokia Creek. It is also adjacent to the town of Staunton (population 4,500) and a subdivision of Staunton named Parksville consisting of about 15 homes. Land values around the site were depressed and expansion plans for the town of 20 Staunton were limited with the site as it was. About 23 acres of the site needed reclamation in order to mitigate the adverse impacts. Before reclamation work began, consultation with officials of Staunton, the Macoupin County Board of Supervisors, and the West-Central Illinois Regional Planning Commission revealed that the preferred end- use after reclamation was industrial development. However, disturbances of vegetation on a newly reclaimed site could result in acidic erosion problems once again. Thus, another alternative, recreational use, was seen as having the least potential impact on the reclamation, while still fulfilling community needs. It was suggested by the city council of Staunton that the site be used as a combined recreational, wildlife, and environmental education area for the residents of Staunton. 3.2 The Staunton Population The Staunton reclamation demonstration area is approximately one-half mile northeast of the city of Staunton, which will be the recipient of the land when reclamation is complete. The Staunton sub- division of Parksville, located on the northwest end of the site, is composed of small farms used for soybean or corn production, with some livestock. To the west of the former gob pile is a city-owned sewage pond which is screened from the site by trees, and apparently is not a major nuisance in the area. Adjacent to the former pile on the east are approximately 50 acres of city-owned land now being used for row crops. Further sourth, on the outskirts of the town, a steel conduit manufacturer stores and distributes piping. According to the 1970 census, 27.9 per cent of Staunton house- holds were on social security, and of those over 25, 10.7 per cent were 21 educated beyond high school, while about 44 per cent had completed high school. The all-white pOpulation of Staunton gained most of its employ— ment in mining, manufacturing and transportation, the service industry Iand retail trade. Mean income for Illinois residents in 1977 was $12,900 annually. Estimates of mean income for the area in 1977 range from $10,600 for Macoupin County to $16,000 for production workers in central Illinois standard metropolitan statistical areas.3 Having no major industries of its own, the Staunton labor force gains most of its employment in industries in surrounding towns. Staunton's historical roots are in the mining industry. Many of its people worked in nearby coal mines or had relatives who worked in mines. The city is now a con- venience center and residential area for people who work or farm in the surrounding environs. According to Richard E. Nichols Associates (1978), Staunton is similar to many small towns in Macoupin County which offer residential amenities. There are at least 14 state-owned recreation areas with a 50—mile radius of Staunton, several located on the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers, and some near large reservoirs such as Rend Lake, Carlinville Lake, and Carlyle Lake.4 Staunton has two city parks, one is a several acre area on the north side of the city equipped with group picnic facilities and baseball fields. The other is a vestpocket park downtown on city hall prOperty which is used as a meeting place for 3From Illinois Bureau of Employment Security, average weekly earnings estimates for 1977 for Illinois and Macoupin County. Earnings for production workers in central Illinois are based on July-August, 1978 estimates. 4From Illinois Department of Conservation Maps. 1978. Recrea- tional Areas. Springfield, Illinois. 22 teenagers. Four tennis courts and a bowling alley are located in the city. A country club north of the city provides golf, and swimming facilities which have not been used recently because of maintenance and vandalism problems. There are several recreation clubs in the Staunton vicinity; the Staunton Country Club provides for fishing and boating, the Gun Club, and the Sportsman's Club. There are other organizations based in Staunton such as the 4-H Club, in addition to active church groups. Bicycling appears to be a popular activity among children and adults in Staunton. The community school is located on the northwest end of town and contains outdoor playing fields, a gymnasium, and equip— ment for students' recreation. By June, 1978, Staunton residents had been exposed to informa- tion about the reclamation project near their town through word-of—mouth, the minutes of town council meetings published in the weekly Staunton Star Times, one or two small articles on that topic in that paper, and articles in other local papers such as the Edwardsville Intelligencer and Alton Telegraph. 3.3 Hypotheses Since the town council had prOposed that the reclaimed site be used for recreation, environmental education and wildlife preservation, and town council decisions are reported in the local paper, it was expected that most Staunton residents were aware of this prOposed use but not aware of the physical limitations of the site. Whether or not peOple agreed with the prOposed use was uncertain. Their perception of the utility and need of such an area would be important in understand- ing their valuations of the site. A questionnaire was constructed which 23 oriented the respondent toward various aspects of the reclamation and willingness to pay for it, then focused on preferences for uses of the reclaimed land. The hypothesis and underlying assumptions to be treated were stated as follows: 1. Recreation is the most preferred use of the site. Informal interviews with city officials and Staunton residents had previously revealed that there was a lack of recreation facilities for people of all ages in the town, and an especially acute problem with lack of facilities for teenagers. Therefore, it was expected that respondents would desire recreational use of the site, especially those with children or who had raised children. 2. Reclamation is viewed favorably but physical limitations for use of reclaimed land are not generally known. The consensus among professionals familiar with the Staunton pro- ject was that the residents of Staunton generally viewed the project fav— orably. Measurement of attitudes toward this reclamation project might indicate how other communities would view reclamation and abatement of environmental damages assuming the general population holds homogeneous attitudes about the need for environmental protection. It might be expected that people view such events favorably when close to home but interest declines in similar benefits elsewhere, e.g., in the state. A change in perception toward living in the area near the reclaimed site would also indicate favorability toward the project, although those very satisfied with where they live might not change their opinion about 1iv~ ing anywhere else. Having lived near mine wastes such as the area reclaimed, it was supposed that most respondents would be familiar with some of the 24 characteristics of mine waste and intuitively know that environmental problems would exist in reclaiming the land for any use. 3. Reclamation is of some value to residents and this value can be stated in willingness to pay for the improvement. Review of research reported by Brookshire g£_§1, (1976), Randall g£_§l. (1974), Clarke (1971) and others (pers. comm. Blomquist; Tideman 1977) resulted in a decision to use direct, open-ended willingness to pay questions rather than demand-revealing process or an incremental bidding game approach. The reasons are that: 1) there are no indica— tions that demand-revealing questions (Clarke 1971) are easily under- stood in these types of interviews or have been clearly more successful in eliciting true willingness to pay values than the direct or incremen- tal approach, and 2) there is some uncertainty about introducing bias in incremental bidding games by naming the starting bid. The open-ended question allows for the opportunity for gaming strategy more so than the incremental approach (Bohm 1972; Dwyer gt_a13 1977), however, it was con— sidered that there was not enough information available on how much peOple value reclamation to justify any particular starting bid for the incremental approach. Respondents' incentives to understate willingness to pay to escape being charged are probably not great because the reclamation had already been carried out, although some might fear being charged for reclamation of other nearby sites. The "free rider" problem (Buchanan 1968) may arise because many respondents may believe that the govern- ment will pay for the reclamation regardless of their response, and thus state a zero willingness to pay. 0n the other hand, overstatement of value may be the result of this type of thinking, since the respondent may not believe the answer 25 would affect real charges. People may sense that there is little they can do or pay to improve the environment (Fischer 1975). Fischer also points out, on the basis of another study, that only a small minority will be concerned enough to exaggerate their true value, and may actual— ly understate because of sheer lack of knowledge. The type of problem expected to be encountered here is the "free rider"; the person who knows that payment will not result regardless of stated values. Because both potential users and nonusers were surveyed, the result may also provide a value for environmental improvement for those who will not use the site but value its existence for others. Other studies have used this method because, although nonusers may have low willingness to pay estimates, the value of the good in question does extend to all of society, not just users (Smith 1978; Hammack and Brown 1974). Hypothetical questions posed to respondents may cause unreliable estimates, although such questions were used by Davis (1963) and Hammack and Brown (1974) with results they found satisfactory. The hypothetical nature of the question in this survey was reduced as much as possible by focusing respondents' interest on the area of the site, the publicity about it, their evaluations of its importance to them and the community, their opinions about living in that area now, and who should have been responsible for the reclamation. Pictures of before and after reclama- tion reduced the opportunity for leaving the result of the reclamation to imagination based upon the reasoning that, where respondents can visualize being excluded (in this case, not having the land reclaimed) from the project, willingness to pay is more reliable (Knetsch and Davis 1966). ¥_ ____ 26 A relationship between income and years of residence in the town with willingness to pay is expected to hold. Education and occupation as indicators of income or status, may also be related to willingness to pay. In the same mode of thought, it is expected that the value of im- provements for the community would be recognized by those who are more involved in community organizations, that is, willingness to pay is positively related to memberships in organizations. The proposed use of the reclaimed area for recreation is probably well known, and there might be a relationship between the respondents' preferred use of the site for recreation and willingness to pay. CHAPTER 4. PROCEDURES It was decided that a survey of Staunton residents should be undertaken to investigate attitudes toward possible uses of the re- claimed land as well as evaluations of reclamation. The personal inter- view seemed to be the best method of eliciting responses to questions because other information bearing on the use of the site would intu— itively be received during the process of administering the question- naire. 4.1 Sample Size The expected users of the reclaimed site, since the site is pub- licly owned, are local residents in Staunton and Parksville. Parksville residents are part of the Staunton population with respect to decisions about city matters; their role in the process of reclamation had been important because they were most impacted by the reclamation, in terms of land value, aesthetics, and potential uses of the site. For these reasons, as many Parksville residents as possible were interviewed, and their response was considered as having weight on the Staunton popula- tion's response. A sample of the 1800 households in Staunton was drawn by sys— tematically drawing addresses from a list of water customers in the 27 28 city.5 The list consisted of addresses of all homes, businesses and organizations which were connected to the city water system. Members of the Staunton city clerk's office helped identify businesses and some vacant houses to be excluded from counting and apartment units to be included in the count. Every eighth residence on the list ordered by streets was selected. Subsequent reconnaisance of the addresses chosen showed no obvious systematic bias introduced by the method of drawing the sample. The number eight was chosen because it provided over 200 addresses, the maximum number expected to be completed within the time and cost constraints of the project. Because the questionnaire measured a number of variables for which variances were unknown, and validity questions appeared to be more serious than questions of statistical reliability in the survey, a rough estimate of sample size was made based on similar studies (Manning 1975; Smith gt_§l, 1978) and statistical considerations. The estimated samp— ling error from the mean of a binomially distributed variable at the 95 per cent confidence interval for a sample size of 200 can be eXpected to be at the most 7.1 per cent for p = .5 distribution, and at the least 4.2 per cent for p = .9 or .1 (Babbie 1973). Since only 110 interviews were completed in Staunton, the sampling error may be plus or minus 10 per cent for p = .5 or 6 per cent for p = .9 or .1 away from the mean of the binomially distributed variables. This assumes no bias from 5The list of water customers contained 1785 entries, with an estimated exclusion of 15 households not hooked up to the city water system. An additional 20 households (est.) were not included as sepa- rate entries in the list because they are apartment units under one listing per building. The number of businesses included in the list is about 50, with some businesses being part of a dwelling. Addresses selected which were later found to be vacant numbered 25. Thus, the maximum possible number of households in Staunton is taken as 1800, although the actual number is probably about 1750. 29 nonresponse or nonavailability of respondents, and does not inform us of the possible sampling error for other variables for which variances were unknown. While every effort was made to generate a representative sample of the Staunton pOpulation of sufficient size to reliably estimate population parameters, the failure to achieve 200 completed interviews within the survey time constraints is not viewed as too serious. Undue emphasis on sampling error might occlude the importance of investigating nonsampling errors introduced through question design and interviewer effects (Webb g£_al. 1966). Evidence about the validity of the research presuppositions should also affect confidence in the reliability of the statistical results (Selltiz et a1. 1976). 4.2 Survey Administration Letters describing the survey and asking for participation were printed on Argonne National Laboratory letterhead, each signed by the Program Director, and sent out to addressees in Staunton. An article was published in the local newspaper describing the survey, and officials of Staunton provided a letter of introduction to show to potential respon— dents (Appendix A). In anticipation of interviewing some people who were unaware of the reclamation project, care had been taken not to reveal the specific subject of the interview in the letters and newspaper articles. A small number (N = 10) of interviews were obtained on July 6 and 7 as a pretest; after several minor changes interviewing was carried out in two time periods separated by one month. Appendix B contains a copy of the questionnaire and the information presented to respondents on cards. Figures 3 through 10 are the before and after reclamation photo- graphs of the site shown to each respondent. The schedule of interviewing 30 Figure 3. Aerial view of project area before reclamation, 1976. Figure 4. Aerial view of project area during reclamation, 1976. 31 Figure 5. Parcel 1 of project site: gob pile before reclamation. Figure 6. Parcel 1 of project site: after reclamation of gob pile. 32 Figure 7. Parcel 2 of project site: before reclamation. Figure 8. Parcel 2 of project site: after reclamation. Figure 9. Parcel 3 of project site: before reclamation. Figure 10. Parcel 3 of project site: after reclamation. 34 ran approximately 9 A.M. to 9 P.M. from July 12 to July 20 and August 21 to August 23, 1978. 4.3 Response Rate Out of the 136 homes in Staunton actually responding in the time available, 110 questionnaires were completed, yielding a response rate of 80.8 per cent. An additional 26 peOple refused to take part in the survey, giving various reasons such as old age and sickness. A break- down of the Staunton response is shown in Table 2. TABLE 2 RESPONSE RATE FOR STAUNTON SAMPLE POPULATION Sample drawna 267 Vacant 42 b No Answer 47 Not Located 42 Refusals 26 Completed Interviews 110 Total Number Contacted 136 Response Rate = 110 = 80.8 per cent 3 H a O 0 Replacement samples were drawn upon receiv1ng returned mail by choosing either an odd or even numbered house (based on a coin toss) nearest to the house being replaced. bUp to three callbacks per house. 35 Parksville residents were not mailed letters because of their familiarity with the reclamation and past cooperation with persons reclaiming the site. In Parksville, nine households adjacent to the mine area were interviewed (zero refusals). Those responses were added to the Staunton response for tabulations, except for willingness to pay amounts, bringing the number of completed questionnaires to 119. 4.4 Data Analysis Techniqpes The information obtained in the survey was coded for statistical manipulations using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) on an IBM-370 Mbdel 195 computer at Argonne National Laboratory. Recod— ing of variables was done for certain analyses. Some hand tabulations were also carried out for open—ended questions. The data analysis con— sisted of frequency counts, cross-tabulations, nonparametric correla- tions, and metric correlations on willingness to pay. In most cases where SPSS programming was used, Kendall's tau 8 is used to provide correlation coefficients. Kendall's tau is tradi- tionally used when data are in ordinal form and large numbers of cases are to be compared (Nie et a1. 1975). The coefficient obtained from Kendall's tau is negative if x increases as y decreases, and positive if x and y decrease or increase together. A significance level of .05 was chosen for statistical tests because of the small sample size, and the assumption that the Type II error (accepting Ho when it is false) is more serious than the Type I error (rejecting Ho when it is true). CHAPTER 5. EMPIRICAL RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 5.1 The Sample Population and Its Representativeness The average age of the sample population of 119 is 45 years, ranging from 17 to 96 years, with 39.5 per cent rearing children below 18 at home, and 43.6 per cent having launched children out of the home. Mbst respondents' friends and family live in the Staunton area. Mbst sampled residents had been in high school (60.5 per cent) compared to 43.5 per cent in the 1970 census, while 22.6 per cent had had some col- lege education, which level had been 10.7 per cent in 1970. Females make up 63.9 per cent of the sample population, although an effort was made to interview evenings and weekends to obtain male head of house- hold reSponses. The mean income level of the sample is between $12,900 and $17,900 annually. This range is considerably higher than the mean 1977 income for Macoupin County residents, but in line with statewide 1977 average incomes and 1978 production workers earnings for central Illi- nois (see Section 3.2). Production workers made up only 5 per cent of the respondents, although when employment of spouses of housewife respondents (N = 29 or 24 per cent) was considered, production workers made up a total of 21 per cent of the sample households. About 28 per cent of the sample were retired citizens, which is comparable to the 1970 census levels for this population. An additional 23 per cent of the sample were service workers, 13 per cent were professionals or 36 37 tradespeople, and 7 per cent were in wholesale or retail trade. Census data for 1970 are not directly comparable to these employment figures, and although the relative proportion of retired persons in the sample is the same as the census proportion, information about net migration flows of the Staunton population since 1970 is unavailable to update the census. Examination of the location of those who completed questionnaires reveals a relatively even distribution across residential areas. Some segregation of income groups into general areas exists, such as lower income people in the southeast end of town, higher income in the north- west section. Relatively speaking though, the differences in housing were not great among neighborhoods, and differences in income were not as great as is found in larger centers of population. The slow growth of Staunton since 1970 and the nature of small town life in an all-white midwestern community implies a certain homogeneity, both in living condi- tions and probable outlooks, which the sample population is assumed to represent. 5.2 Preferences for Site Use Two questions were phrased to determine people's preferences for site use (Appendix B, Questions 17, 18). For each question, a card list- ing a number of uses for the site was handed to the respondent who was asked which choice would be preferred for privately owned land, such as housing, commercial, private (fee) recreation, etc., and the same done for the public uses such as a community facility, education resource area, recreation area, etc. Ambiguities in the categories offered caused some problems of interpretation on the part of the respondent. Where possible, each of 38 the categories was defined for each respondent to consider, for example, educational use meant classroom use of the area, nature preserve meant a wildlife preservation area. Responses to choices of land use for private and public owner- ship of the reclaimed site are shown in Tables 3 and 4. Favored land uses in private ownership are private (fee) recreation, city housing, and returning the land to premine use. The large response to recreation seems unusual when a respondent as the hypothetical landowner could con- sider more traditionally profitable uses of private land. The influence of publicity about proposed uses of the site is assumed to be operating in this reSponse category. In public use, the overwhelming first choice is recreation, with educational use and a nature preserve close second choices. Respondents with children at home or who had raised children mostly preferred recreational use over other uses of the site, however, those with no children also preferred recreational use of the site. There was, in general, recognition of the desirability of having more recreation facilities for children near the town, as expressed in respondents' frequent statements that the type of recreation needed was "something for the kids". Some questions were asked to determine what kinds of recreation, if any, respondents would most like to see on the site, and for compari— son, what kinds of recreation respondents actually participate in for a few hours of leisure time (Appendix B, Questions 22, 23, 24). There is a difference between what respondents want on the mine area and in Staunton, and what they actually do for recreation as shown in Table 5. Obviously this may be because of lack of opportunity to 39 TABLE 3 RESPONDENTS' PREFERRED USE OF RECLAIMED LAND IF OWNED BY RESPONDENT First Choice Second Choice Land Use (Per cent)a What it was before mining (timber and pasture) 16.8 11.8 Agriculture (rowcrops, pasture) 9.2 14.3 City housing 21.8 10.1 Acreages 5.0 3.4 Leave as is now 6.7 10.9 Private recreation 23.5 18.5 Private commercial development 8.4 8.4 Other 8.4 9.2 Missing 0 13.4 N = 119 aTotals may not add up to 100 per cent due to rounding error. TABLE 4 RESPONDENTS' PREFERRED USE OF RECLAIMED LAND IN PUBLIC OWNERSHIP First Choice Second Choice Land Use (Per cent)a What it was before mining (timber and pasture) 3.4 3.4 Community facility (church, hall) 5.9 16.0 Nature preserve 13.4 19.3 Park or recreation area 64.7 10.1 Fairgrounds 0.8 3.4 Leave as is now 5.0 8.4 Educational use 5.0 21.0 Other 1.7 6.7 Missing 0 11.8 N = 119 aTotals may not add up to 100 per cent due to rounding error. 40 .moao:o oco cmfiu opoE o>mw nouwo mucoocoamou owomoon 0.00H cu a: mom uoc oo mHmuou owwucouuwmm m.mq Aucwo nomv mou< Ode: no oqu oaooz ucsm Amunumc .oaozofin .mmuomv mHHmHH «.ma m.oH Aaousao .mcowuoom .mHm>Haumo .mBOfimv muno>o moanoosom Ammo“ .Hmucoo huflEDEEoo .moumo .moaoflum uwmfi> .uso Umwmw .QOSmV o>flmmmm uoomcH AmOOSmomuos .waowlflcwe .muosoum .Hamp .chGOuv museum one moEmw uooouao a a 0.0H o.HN Aucoo Hmmv Aucmo Hmmv coucnmum CH zuw>fluu< :H oxHA masoz wcwumawofiuumm moc0flucmz Aoumxmuoaaou .Haop .ooammv w>Huom HoomaH onmH m um mcflon .Hamm .umon .Emao .Efiswv mummnluohmz chfifiumnCUm muooouso wcwon .hmsum onnumc .ucon Eoounmse .mpoooudo xmaou .aEmo .w.ov uooouso o>wmmmm oasouw%maa .moum UHCUHQ .xumm mo: uo: manoam aofiumamaoom o.ooa H.n I m.N q.w H.0H m.mH o.wm voafiwaoon on oaoosm mHonHHHH aw moafim Honuo o.ooa e.m I m.H e.w o.m m.OH H.wo moEHmHoou on omam oaaonm coucnmum _ “mos moafim Hosuo Hmuoy hawnouum oouwmmflo umnsmaom wHouusmz umnsoEom oouw< hawnouum uaoaouMum oouwmmfia mouwmmwn m oouw¢ oouw< o.ooa I I w.o m.m H.0H N.oN o.mo ocoo mmz coaumsmaoou umfiu ooow kHkuocou Hmuoy pom pom pom Hmuuooz @000 @000 oooo unoEwumum hhm> um£3oaom umssoEom huw> 903 as A; m.~ «.3 a 9: 9: man. 38 W was cowumamaoou umnu 1 ucmuuoafifi kHHwaomuom Hmuoe ucmuuomawcp uamuuomeficb uamuuomeCD Hmuuooz MoonwuuomsH acouuoaaH ucmuuanH uaoaoumum %Ho> um£3oEom _ mauuwu mo huo> Andou Homv ZOHH¢Euomosm aufiafiomm oaflfioum kuflaflnmuo>mm m< o>moq Hflwm Iouoom so xumm ousumz mafiasfiaou Amunwmcommom mo undo Homv om: mama mHmmmmzzo UHAmDm 2H Mm: mom mmozmmmmmmm :HHB NmozH WHHAHmmm oum>wum oum>flum m< o>moq %ufl0 oaHEowm Amucmmcoamom mo ammo Homv omD mung mHmmmmzzo MH<>Hmm ZH Mm: mom mmozmmmmmmm mHHB xmazH WHHquua ~.s m.o o.m an: amaouoesoo choauoonou m.mH «.ma m.m~ coaumanuum q.m o.H o.m :oz wum>wum mH m< m>w0A 2 5 302 ma w.o o.m s.o mm o>moq m.0 0 w.0 monsouwuuwm N; a; 9m $332 Ném 98 ES 32 . caduceuuox no Jump a: am a: 33.6: as to «.3 253E zuao ouaumz o.s m.~ ~.o «can ~.s A.H m.m suafiauma IH=OHuw< zua==EEoo m.HH m.m w.o~ mangoum ~.H w.o q.m um: ocaamum who: Sumo: AmHH n 20 OHQEMm om: who: cane: Awaa n 20 om: wcfiuumwmum om: kuuowoum >HHMdomuom unnoE< am hum uo ucou hum nephewwum >HHmaomuom uczoE< cm oamfiwm we ma mou< vmuwum cu mafiaafiz ma mou< ooumum ham 0» wcaaaas ucou pom 0:3 ucoo pom undo Hum 053 ucou Mom ucoo mom nfismuoczo wum>wum mHmmmmz3o MH<>Hmm 02¢ UHAmDm zH azam my Am~o.v Aaa~.v Amum.v As-.0 Aaoo.v RNNm.0 Aaoo.0 Aomo.0 Hesa.o memo.o mono.o- memo.o «Nom.OI smqo.o okam.o onH.oI owe Aweo.0 Amam.0 Amma.v Aaam.v Aoom.0 AmH~.v Amoo.0 magnmuopaux Nasa.o ammo.on moHH.o mms¢.o- saoo.o memo.o coco.o coaumuasnwuo Amma.0 Amom.0 Aoaa.v Aaoo.0 Aoam.0 Aoma.0 Sudan oaoo.o- aaso.ou m-o.o- mmoN.o mmao.o Hmaa.o 3ma>uuuaH Asas.c AamN.v Assm.v Aenw.0 Aeao.0 cascade ameo.o ammo.o awso.o smao.o- soo~.o ca owcano Asoo.0 Amqa.v Amm~.0 Amem.0 HwN~.ou NCNH.o Hsmo.o Hmso.ou xmm Amma.v AH00.0 AH00.V :owumouoox Naoa.o HmMN.OI oasm.o you uama» Asmm.0 Aoe~.0 ammouuaH smso.o ooao.o suauaanam Aem~.0 mucoeamom ammo.ou no «new» oaaum who: Suuoz xoocH ow< mawcmuonsz mumo cowcfiao xom cowumwuuox mononucH wocooammm u¢506< c< afiaocoooouoom haamaomuom muaawom .cmwno 3ow>uoBcH :H wwcmno HOW uwmw> xufiuflaose mo manor mom on wmocwcfiaaa3 Iuo>mm .IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1: mgms. mmqm bmmh b0 ZOHBmoa Monuo Acowuoosmm %mm on mmoawafiaaflz sowumonoom no xumm suHHHomm %quDEEoo moaoouwufimm .oaflaoum .o>uowoum monumz mom: oouuomoum womb mounomonm umoz mom: oouuowoum unmoq haoumuoooz mHmmmmzzo OHAmDm ZH QZ