Print

Van Dis, Katrina

Community Development and Applied Economics

2006

MS

This study examined the factors involved in the opposition and support of a proposed 684 cow dairy facility in the Town of Charlotte, Vermont. Both nationally and locally, there is much controversy on the acceptance of large scale livestock operations at the rural/urban fringe. In the past few decades, the livestock industry has changed in response to economies of scale and technological advances. As the industry structure and size changes, so does the concentration of associated negative externalities including nutrient and waste management issues, nuisance claims, and water, air and soil degradation. However, the bucolic nature of livestock farming is considered a positive externality, or pull factor, for residents interested in moving to sub-urban areas. As a response to the changes in the industry, land use, and shifting demographics, increased interactions between farming and non-farming neighbors have ensued. This study was conducted in Vermont through the use of a newspaper survey distributed to town residents. The survey achieved a 20.3% return. Of the 294 responses, 44.3% opposed the proposed dairy facility, 30.6% were in favor, 17.9% needed more information, and 7.2% had no opinion or did not know about it. Univariate analysis indicated that there were no significant statistical differences in the demographics: age, education, gender, type of residence (owned or rented), number of months lived in Charlotte, and property size. The initial analysis indicated the appropriate use of a binary logit regression for further analysis.
This study found that the number of years a person lived in Charlotte, Vermont and the proximity to the proposed dairy facility would have an influence on a respondent's choice to support or not support the proposed dairy facility. Counter to our hypothesis and some of the previous studies, we did not find any other demographic factors to be influential. In accordance with our other hypotheses, water quality, economics and animal welfare concerns determined a respondent's choice to either support or not support the proposed facility. The results of this study provide guidelines for understanding conflict and potentially structuring land use policies. Though there was no specific demographic profile of residents, a key finding of this study was that the respondents were concerned with livestock practices regardless of their age, education and gender. The study also clarified that despite vocal opposition to the proposed facility, there was a large and primarily silent group that did support the facility. The implications of this study suggest that further research on this subject would be beneficial for other communities, especially in regards to educational implementation, increased communication and land use choices and policies.