COLUMBUS -- The proposed Little Darby National Wildlife Refuge in Madison and Union counties in central Ohio would have relatively little economic or fiscal impact on the region's total economy, according to a new study from Ohio State University.

Researchers in the Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics completed the study for Ohio State University Extension at the request of government and citizen groups in the Madison and Union county region affected by the proposed refuge. They reported their findings at a meeting on July 26 in Columbus.

In a nutshell:

· The refuge would create a small increase in jobs and income in the region.

· County government would face a small cut in revenue even after federal compensation.

· Schools would lose revenue and have to deal with management issues from declining enrollment and changed population patterns.

· Population growth is not likely to increase or decrease as a result of a refuge.

"We looked at several possible refuge sizes and calculated the effect they would have on the economy," said David Kraybill, associate professor of agricultural, environmental and development economics. "The tools we used don't consider environmental costs or social costs of building or not building the refuge, but they give citizens and government one more way of looking at the decisions they have to make."

The refuge proposal has raised quite a bit of discussion and controversy between government agencies, landowners and conservation groups. To provide some parameters for ongoing discussion, Kraybill and assistant professor Elena Irwin gathered data on economic activity and projected population growth in the area. Irwin used state-of-the-art statistical and computer tools to analyze potential population growth in the proposed refuge area. And Kraybill developed a computer model of the regional economy that projects the potential gains and losses to income and employment, local government, and schools.

They studied the impact on Madison and Union counties together. Then they considered the impact on a region that also included Delaware, Franklin, Pickaway, Fayette, Green, Clark, Champaign, Logan, Hardin, and Marion counties. In addition to direct spending, they calculated such things as lost tax bases, the devaluation of improved land if owners sell out and abandon buildings, and the effect of declining student enrollment in schools.

Just how much economic and fiscal impact the refuge actually has depends on how big it ends up being. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed a combination of purchasing land outright and buying the development rights for other farmland, up to a total of nearly 50,000 acres.

Economic impact is the income and employment change that would occur if the refuge were established. The researchers calculated changes based on reaching various percentages of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's favored target size of a 49,000-acre refuge.

Base findings were:

· In year 30 of a refuge, annual total personal income for the region would increase slightly over where it would be without a refuge - $83,000 to $326,605 a year in Madison and Union counties, depending on the amount of land in the refuge. That's less than one-half of 1 percent of total personal income in the counties in 1999. Income in the surrounding 10 counties would increase an even smaller percentage.

· Madison and Union counties would have two to eight jobs more from the refuge in year 30 than they would if there was no refuge by then. The exact number depends on acreage converted to refuge. In the larger 12-county region, two-to-seven jobs would be lost by year 30.

In the case of both employment and income, the changes are so small that they could possibly be attributed to the way the computer model rounds numbers. Kraybill and Irwin said this points to the relative insignificance of the impact of the refuge on the central Ohio economy.

"Basically what we have here is one land-based activity replacing another," Kraybill said. "And neither farming or the refuge activities that could replace it require large amounts of capital relative to the size of the region's overall economy."

Fiscal impact is the change that would occur in local government revenues and expenses.

The study showed:

· In year 30, county government revenues would decline from $24,421 to $87,205 a year, depending on the number of acres in the refuge. Those decreases come from collecting less property tax within the refuge area.

· Annual school district revenues would decline due to changes in both property taxes and foundation formula funds from the state of Ohio. In Madison County, district revenues would decrease by $16,215 to $54,562 in year 30, depending on the acreage purchased for refuge use.

"When you look at this in the context of Central Ohio's total economy, or even that of individual counties, the economic effect of this proposal is really quite small either way," Kraybill said. "That doesn't mean that there won't be some significant individual concerns, but that's not what we were calculating here. It will be up to the various government and citizen groups involved in the discussion to weigh the distributional concerns."

Kraybill and Irwin were asked to do this study because of their work in regional economies and the effect of changing land use. Kraybill's other research includes regional economics, modeling the regional effects of fiscal policies, the effectiveness of economic development policies, and the regional economic effects of environmental policies. He models the effects of proposed changes in fiscal or economic polices for communities and states nationwide. Irwin specializes in the causes and consequences of growth in local and regional economies, including changes in settlement patterns and the influence of government policies on residential location decisions. Her studies of the effects of urban expansion have concentrated on Ohio and Maryland. A team of experts from throughout Ohio State advised Kraybill and Irwin on technical issues outside their discipline.

As part of its land-grant university mission, Ohio State University Extension conducts educational programs in each Ohio county on issues related to agriculture, natural resources, community development, consumer concerns and youth development. Through these local programs, the College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences was asked to provide analysis and analytical tools that the members of the community could use to understand the potential economic and fiscal impact of Little Darby National Wildlife Refuge proposals and continue their public debate.

###

(LO)