Wetland Prservation on Private Lands

1. Factors Influencing Valuation of
Wetland Preservation: A Preliminary
Analysis
Authors: Rick Welsh, Julie Heinl and
Micheale Webb of Syracuse University.
Others: David Chandler (SU) along with Tom Langen, Michael
Twiss, and Martin Heintzelman from Clarkson University

2. Acknowledgements
• Funding provide by the Graham Sustainability
Institute & the University of Michigan Water
Center.

3. Background
• Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP)
– Comprised of two programs:
1. Agricultural Land Easements
2. The Wetlands Reserve Program
• The goal of the Wetland Reserve Easements is to
provide financial and technical support to:
1. Improve water quality.
2. Reduce flooding.
3. Provide habitats for fish and wildlife.
4. Protect bio-diversity.
5. Provide opportunities for recreational, scientific, and
educational opportunities.

4. Research Purpose
• To measure the ecological, social, and
economic impacts of restored Public-Private
Partnerships (PPP) wetlands on private lands
within the Lake Ontario / St. Lawrence River
watershed in New York State.
• Specifically considering the North Country
counties of New York State.

6. Project Components
• Task 1: Assessment of Biodiversity Indicators of Restored
Wetland Quality. (Dr. Tom Langen, Clarkson University)
• Task 2: Assessment of Chemical and Microbial Indicators
of Wetland Quality. (Dr. Michael Twiss, Clarkson
University)
• Task 3: Hydraulics and Hydrology. (Dr. David Chandler,
Syracuse University)
• Task 4: Landowner Valuation of Wetland Restorations and
Conservation Easements. (Dr. Rick Welsh, Syracuse
University)
• Task 5: Assessment of the Impact of Wetland Restoration
& Conservation Easement Establishment on Property
Value. (Dr. Martin Heintzelman, Clarkson University)

7. Our Team’s Focus
1. Determining how landowners use their
enrolled land, their views on the importance
of such projects, role of socidemographic
variables and the conservation management
practices employed
2. Role of participation in wetland valuation
versus other variables.

8. Methodology
• Mail survey of 50 landowners who participate in PPP wetland
restoration projects and 127 owners of neighboring properties.
• Separate surveys with some overlapping questions.
– Landowners were identified with the help of USDA National Resource
Conservation Service (NRCS), US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), and
Ducks Unlimited (DU).
– Neighbors were identified via white pages and Google Maps.
5 Steps (Dilman):
• Introductory post card
• Survey sent via U.S.P.S.
• Reminder postcard
• Additional copy of the survey
• Phone call.

9. Methodology
• 35 of 50 (70%) PPP participants responded.
• 24 of 127 (19%) neighbors responded.
• Mean age was 63 for PPP participants and 57 for
neighbors.
• 28 Male and 7 Female PPP participants (80%
male).
• 13 Males and 9 Females and 2 missing (59% male
respondents).
• Both groups live an average of 11 months in the
North Country.

10. Likert Scales measuring value of
wetlands
PPP Participants
• Participation in this program protects
the local environment. PROTECT
• Participation in this program enhances
my property values. VALUES
• Participation in this program enhances
biodiversity. DIVERSITY
• Participation in this program enhances
the natural beauty of my property.
BEAUTY
• Participation in the program benefits
the quality of the water bodies on my
land. WATER
• The natural beauty of my neighbors’
land is enhanced through my
participation in this program. NBEAUTY
Neighbors
• Wetlands serve an important role in
protecting the local environment.
PROTECT
• Preserving wetlands in this area
enhances my property values. VALUES
• Preserving wetlands enhances
biodiversity. DIVERSITY
• Preserving wetlands in this area
enhances the natural beauty of my
property. BEAUTY
• Preserving wetlands in this area
benefits the quality of the water bodies
on my land. WATER
• Preserving wetlands in this area
enhance the natural beauty of all the
nearby properties. NBEAUTY

11. Analysis & Results
Scale was created using variables from the Combined
Participant/Neighbor Database. This scale was found to be
reliable.

12. Analysis & Results
• Natural log of values scale to more closely
approximate a normal distribution.
• OLS Regression Model:
– LN(Values) = f(participant versus neighbor,
removing wood, renting hunting rights, viewing
wildlife, member of an environmental or
conservation group, age,).

13. Analysis & Results
• Model was significant with
adequate fit.
• Renting hunting rights was
found to be significant and
negatively associated with
valuing wetland
preservation.
• Viewing wildlife on the
property as well as being a
member of an
environmental or
conservation group was
significant and positively
associated with valuing
wetland preservation.

14. Conclusions
• Valuing wetlands not a function of program
participation; rather a function of other variables
such as how land is used or being a member of an
environmental group.
• Implications for recruitment of landowners into
program.
• Future analysis will incorporate property values,
biodiversity and water quality variables.
• Interactions among different types of variables?