Riihimaki 1
CASINO IN THE VALLEY:
ECONOMISTS DREAM OR ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER?
Final Paper
Environmental Science and Policy Seminar
Professors Paulette Peckol & Greg White
By Krista Riihimaki
May 8, 2008
Riihimaki 2
CASINO IN THE VALLEY: ECONOMISTS DREAM OR ENVIRONMENTAL
DISASTER?
ABSTRACT
Since the early 1980’s Massachusetts has been considering and preparing for the
addition of several land based casino’s to bring in revenue for the state. In September of
2007 governor Deval Patrick proposed the addition of three land based casino licenses to
the Massachusetts legislature. Of special interest to those in the western region of the
state, one of the potential casinos would be built in Palmer, MA (Hampden County). The
side effects of casinos have been well documented in terms of economic, social and state
impacts, however very little discussion exists on the potential impact a casino would have
on the environment. This study aims to examine the property being looked at for casino
construction, highlight any possible negative environmental outcomes, and to assess
whether or not a casino in Palmer has the potential for sustainability. Through
examination of town documents and interviews with town planners and residents, the
study aims to find answers to the potential environmental impact of a casino. The
environmental impact of a casino must be taken into consideration in order to get a more
complete sense of the feasibility and appropriateness of casinos in Massachusetts.
INTRODUCTION
In September 2007, Massachusetts’s governor Deval Patrick put forth a proposal
for three land based casino licenses to be put up for auction, not limiting who is open to
Riihimaki 3
purchase them. Native American casino ownership has been the norm in surrounding
states such as Connecticut who hosts both Foxwood’s and Mohegan Sun.
Massachusetts is small in size as a state but is one of the most populous in the
country with an estimated 6,349,097 people living there. With mounting financial woes
facing the state, legislators are looking for an alternate cash flow source and for ways to
minimize any revenues lost to neighboring states. Casinos have been looked at as a way
to aide the Government’s budget deficits in many states across the nation and if
Massachuetts were to go forward it would be the fourth state to do so.
The issue of legalizing casino gambling has not been limited to Massachusetts. In
the current presidential race, both Senators Clinton and Obama have supported casino
gambling in their campaign platforms. Potential social damages aside, most of the
country is in favor of legalizing gambling as a way to keep in leaking revenues and to
attract those from other states as a way to make money. However there are some
fundamental issues associated with this, which are discussed in a number of research
articles (Connor 1993, Dahl 1995).
The one issue that has not been widely discussed in many papers or public forums
on whether or not to legalize casino gambling in Massachusetts is the potential for
environmental degradation directly on the land being developed as well as surrounding
communities.
Riihimaki 4
While casinos and gambling may not be the first thing that comes to mind when
thinking of Massachusetts, there is already a smattering of casino facilities throughout the
Fig. 1
Figure 1. Prospective regions for casino development in Massachusetts following
approval of Patrick’s proposal.
state. Most of the facilities are small and focus on dog and horse racing with slot
machines as an entertainment option. The vegas-style casinos in Massachusetts are
limited to boat cruises located on the eastern region of the state in towns such as Lynn
and Gloucester, but most of these are small in operation and are limited in terms of
entertainment offered.
In March 2008, Governor Patrick’s proposal was rejected and is now being sent
for revision. The proposal will likely be fine-tuned in the coming months and will be re-
Riihimaki 5
submitted some time in the next year. Though many may be opposed to casino
development in Massachusetts, there is still a large possibility for the bill to be passed as
many of the state’s regions where are casino would be built are in economic crises. The
three large-scale land based casino licenses are to be distributed in three regions of the
state: the Boston area, Southeastern Region, and the Western Region (Fig. 1).
In greater New England, the two largest casinos are Foxwood’s and Mohegan Sun
respectively located in Ledyard and Uncasville, Connecticut. Both of these casinos are
enormous, with Foxwood’s currently being the largest freestanding casino complex in the
world. Foxwood’s has approximately 40,000 visitors a day to its facility with 6,700 slot
machines, 24 restaurants, and vast entertainment and shopping venues. Mohegan Sun has
some similar attributes to Foxwood’s, though it is slightly smaller in scale.
Locally in the Hampshire-Hampden County regions, Mohegan Sun is looking to
expand its operations by building a mini-casino as a destination resort. The location being
surveyed for development is in Palmer, MA (Hampden County). Towns in surrounding
areas throughout the region have mixed feelings about this casino, however in Palmer
especially the Casino is still an attractive prospect.
Palmer is located near the Pioneer valley, which is home to four colleges and one
major university, as well as thousands of local residents. The reaction to the casino has
been mixed, with many opposing it but also many supporting it due to the prospect of
new jobs and a potential boost to a depressed economy. The land being looked at to build
the casino on is not owned by Native Americans, and the question on many people’s
minds is whether the developers will make an effort to keep the facility sustainable and
environmentally-friendly to the greatest extent possible.
Riihimaki 6
Sustainable casino development sounds too good to be true to most, however it
has been done before. The Native American population of Pequot’s in Connecticut, who
built the largest single-standing casino resort in the United States (Foxwoods), have
higher standards for sustainability at their resort than is required by the state of
Connecticut (Dahl 1995).
Native Americans who historically show responsible stewardship of the land run
most of the casinos in the New England area. Foxwoods, the casino run by the Pequot’s
in New London, CT, has been an excellent model for those who aim to run a more
environmentally friendly facility. The Pequot’s have pursued a proactive rather than a
reactive policy in response to environmental issues (d’Hauteserre 2001). They are
members of the National Tribal Environmental Council, and have complied with the
National Environmental Protection Act of 1972, and have filed environmental impact
assessments in 1985 and in 1991.
Examples of the Pequot’s sustainable development relative to the environment
include the fact that the quality of water pumped from the aquifer of the reservation to
their hotel exceeds state standards (Dahl 1995). They use a membrane filtration system to
purify the water. They have built a sewage treatment plant which discharges effluent
cleaner than required by state parameters. They use natural gas boilers to minimize the
quantity of air pollutants emitted. Their management of parking lot storm waters includes
the use of calcium manganese acetate for deicing because it is more environmentally
friendly than salt, albeit more expensive (d’Hauteserre 2001). They are using plants to
retrieve heavy and toxic elements from wetlands on the reservation. They have no
underground storage of petrochemicals on the reservation to avoid any leaching into
Riihimaki 7
groundwater. Vehicle fuel to power their public works trucks is stored in a containment
structure above ground. Examination of Foxwood’s casino shows that environmentally
conscious decisions can be made, and it is obvious that more can be done to reduce the
impact further.
The specific issue investigated in this study is what is being done in the planning
process that would ensure maximum sustainability for a casino in Palmer, MA. The study
also looks at the impact such a facility would have on the natural environment and what
might be done to minimize negative outcomes. Social and economic issues aside, the
main question I am asking is, would the environmental cost of such an endeavor
outweigh the economic benefits? In answering these questions I hope to provide a new
vantage point for those residents of Massachusetts who are still on the fence of whether
or not a casino would be a good addition to the state.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Examination of the literature available on the impacts of gambling facilities on
natural resources was done prior to the start of the study. Throughout research,
newspaper coverage of the casino bill and the focus of specific interest groups were
followed to gauge the importance of several factors in the planning process. Maps of the
Town of Palmer were examined, and interviews were conducted with several of the Town
of Palmer Planning Commissioners.
A simplified environmental impact assessment was completed based on the
information gathered from the town planners. Information on possible wildlife corridors,
vernal pools, and natural heritage sites in the surrounding area were gathered.
Riihimaki 8
Interviews with local residents living on the border of the property being looked
at to build a casino on were conducted. Photographs of the area as well as observations of
existing structures and development of the land were done.
From the information gathered several maps were compiled several maps
depicting the most important areas surrounding the casino development. Using
GoogleMaps© an aerial image with the property boundaries was created to show the scale
of the land being looked at to build upon.
RESULTS
The casino proposed to be built on the land in Palmer, MA is for a one-billion
dollar resort as an addition to the Mohegan Sun gambling facility located in Uncasville,
Connecticut. Northeast Realty group owns the land, located across from the Mass
Turnpike (I-90) exit #8. The land is commercially zoned and is bordered on the western
side by town municipal buildings and strip malls, and on the eastern side by the
Breckenridge residential area (Fig. 2 & 3). The lots that they are planning to use are three
commercial lots as well as one residential lot. The casino would not be built high up like
the Mohegan Sun in CT, but would be a few stories high and would span 150 acres (for
photographs of the residential area and surrounding landscapes, see appendix A-D).
Riihimaki 9
Fig. 2
Figure 2. Map of commercial (blue) and residential (red) zones owned by Northeast Realty Group
that are being looked at as potential casino development areas.
The mini casino would include a hotel with 750 to 1,500 rooms, a restaurant and
food court, retail shops, an entertainment venue with 5,000 to 10,000 seats, and a
Riihimaki 10
convention event space of about 80,000 square feet. Additional infrastructure needed
would include parking facilities for 10,000 cars, the majority of which are planned to be
housed under the casino in parking garages, as well as a service station, a warehouse, and
recreational facilities such as a spa, golf course, and water park. The facility would also
host a type of Native American cultural attraction.
Fig. 3
Figure 3. Map of property lines and zones for prospective casino development. Yellow indicates the
Mass Turnpike (I-90) and the blue and red zones indicate land owned by Northeast Realty Group
for prospective casino development.
Riihimaki 11
Fig. 4
Figure 3. Map of protected land’s surrounding prospective casino development plots, indicated by the
black rectangular box.
The land Mohegan Sun plans to build the casino on is comprised primarily of
upland forest set on massive quantities of granite and basalt rock. There are no known
vernal pools in the area and wildlife has not been witnessed in the surrounding areas “in
years” (Berthiaume 2008). The land is not located near any Natural Heritage Sites and the
closest river is located on Thorndike street (approximately 1.5 miles away). The
Riihimaki 12
surrounding protected lands are comprised of forestry, agriculture and horticulture, and
the Town of Palmer land (Fig. 4).
The casino developers have not specifically stated where they will be deriving
their water from but as there is no known aquifer directly under the land to be developed,
Town of Palmer planners (Leduc 2008) say they will likely tap into the town’s existing
water structures. The same can be said about the sewage for the facility, as the land is
comprised primarily of granite and basalt rock. Light pollution from the casino is hard to
gauge at this point without any blueprint map of what the casino will look like, however
it will likely affect the rural areas that right now have the Mass Pike as the largest
contributor of emitted light. Increases in the amount of traffic will be substantial however
the Mass Pike exit empties directly across from the property, so it is unlikely that any
additional road structures will be built. Currently there are no known environmental
impact assessments done on how the casino would affect the land.
DISCUSSION
By most estimates, a 1 billion dollar casino spanning 150 acres of land can hardly
be considered “mini”. Although the land the Mohegan Sun casino wants to develop has
already been commercially zoned, there will have to be significant development to prime
this land to be ready for such a monstrous facility. Residents living on the eastern
property boundaries will likely have a significant decrease in property values, and
potentially will wind up moving or selling their land to the casino once they realize how
much of an impact this would have on the land.
Riihimaki 13
The potential environmental impact of a hotel with 700 to 1,500 rooms would
have a huge impact in addition to the casino, with enormous amounts of water being used
daily. It seems irresponsible if the casino did not create it’s own initiatives to diminish the
impact it would have on the town’s water supply. If the casino chooses to use another
reservoir to meet the needs of its guests, the ponds and lakes in neighboring towns would
now be put at risk. The carbon footprint of a hotel alone is astronomical, with the usage
of air conditioning, daily washing of sheets and towels, and water usage. This should
definitely be another aspect taken into consideration by the residents of Massachusetts in
whether or not they want such potential degradation to their natural resources.
If the hotel and casino (including its facilities and services) were not enough, the
addition of a golf course and water park would also have huge impacts on the water
supply. These attractions involve the usage of many chemicals including nitrates and
phosphates for the golf course and chlorine or bromine for the pool, which would have
significant effects if drainages emptied into local watersheds. Since the land to be
developed is upland forest, there would be a huge impact on groundwater supplies further
along the watershed.
The casino’s location does not appear as of now to affect wildlife, but if the
extended effects of having a large scale facility are not taken into consideration via an
environmental impact assessment, damages might be greater than anticipated. Blasting of
the rock to create foundation and for leveling of the land may scare off local bird species
that might not be considered all that important, however the larger consequences right
now are still unknown. Thus the importance of an unbiased environmental impact
Riihimaki 14
assessment is paramount. Studies in other states for this goal are often funded by the
casino, which may result in heavily biased assessments.
It is also said that if a casino is not built on the land owned by Northeast Realty
Group, there will be a shopping complex built on the property. While development of
any kind will have an impact on the land and ecosystem, the comparison between a
shopping plaza and a billion dollar casino is drastically different. Some of the residents
interviewed in this study suggest that they need the casino in the town because there are
not enough restaurants, entertainment, or jobs for them. I feel that the property if used for
a mall of some sort could still satisfy some of this need rather than building a large
casino. When taking into consideration the local economy and social consequences of a
casino, it seems that there would be no question as to which addition to the town would
have the most direct benefit, however the potential benefits are still not so clear.
While the residents of Palmer seem to want a casino developed there, the
neighboring communities do not. Other considerations include the possible impacts of a
casino on the colleges in the area as well as the people who are already having financial
difficulties. Plans for a casino are seen by most as a quick fix to the economy and budget
crises on capitol hill, however the impact will be far wider reaching than we currently
realize. Bringing a casino to the land in Palmer on such a massive scale, in comparison to
gambling boat cruises, has far reaching environmental, social, and economic
consequences.
CONCLUSION
Riihimaki 15
I recommend that the Massachusetts government hire its own state agencies to
conduct environmental impact assessments on the land to be used for the casino. It is
likely that the casino industry would have a biased assessment of the environmental
impact of the construction. The environmental impact assessment may show that a
casino would be a heavy detriment to the natural landscape and ecosystems in
surrounding areas, however it could also show that the addition of a casino would not be
completely terrible for the environment of Palmer, MA. If the casino insists on doing
their own assessment, this should be allowed and will perhaps serve as a learning process
to compare the conclusions reached by separate assessors.
An assessment should be done prior to the town approving the finalized plans for
the construction of the casino. Additionally, the casino should pay for any additional
infrastructure that may be needed to update the current facilities of the Town of Palmer.
Considering the toll that the casino would have on so many levels in the town, it is
paramount that all aspects of an environmental impact assessment be evaluated.
The bill proposing the casino will be going back for review and will certainly be
resubmitted in the near future, so this problem will not likely be going away soon. From
my research I think that the bill should also take into consideration who will be running
the casino. If Native Americans would not be running the casino, there should be explicit
guidelines and regulations on what is and is not appropriate for the construction of the
casino. Governor Patrick must take the environmental impact of a casino into
consideration in order to get a more complete sense of the viability and desirability of
casinos in Massachusetts if he wishes to move forward with this project.
Riihimaki 16
REFERENCES
Personal interview: Palmer Town Planner, Linda G. Leduc. Town Administrative
Building, April 23 2008.
Personal Interview: Palmer Breckenridge road resident, Miss Berthiaume, April 23 2008
Connor, M. 1993. Indian gaming: Prosperity, controversy. International Gaming and
Wagering Business. 14(1):1-45.
Dahl, D. 1995. The gamble that paid off. American Bar Association Journal (May):86-89.
d’Hauteserre, A.M. 2001. Representations of rurality: is Foxwoods Casino Resort
threatening the quality of life in southeastern Connecticut?
Palmer CasinoYES website: http://palmercasinoyes.com/pages/get_the_facts.cfm
Riihimaki 17
APPENDIX A
Appendix A. Park located in front of the land where casino would go, at the end of a residential street
in Palmer, MA. (Photo credit: Riihimaki 2008)
Riihimaki 18
APPENDIX B
Appendix B. Breckenridge road residential property located above the land owned by Northeast
Realty Group for potential casino construction. Small pond located in the middle of the pool is manmade used originally for draining the cow pasture. (Photo credit: Riihimaki 2008)
Riihimaki 19
APPENDIX C
Appendix C. River located next to Thorndike street, casino would be upland to the left of where this
photo was taken. (Photo credit: Riihimaki 2008)
Riihimaki 20
APPENDIX D
Appendix D. Breckenridge road residential street, casino would be building to the left behind the
property lines of the houses. (Photo credit: Riihimaki 2008)