UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Cottaging and related support services Plotnikoff, James Peter 1970

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1970_A8 P46.pdf [ 4.22MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0104148.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104148-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104148-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104148-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104148-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104148-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104148-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0104148-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0104148.ris

Full Text

COTTAGING AND RELATED SUPPORT SERVICES by JAMES PETER PLOTNIKOFF B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1968 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the School of Community and Regional Planning We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1970 In presenting t h i s thesis in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t fr e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of th i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. School of Community and Regional Planning The University of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date i i ABSTRACT The increasingly popular recreational a c t i v i t y of cottaging has a marked spatial impact. In the past, planners have foregone the op-portunity to guide and d i r e c t cottage development, other than by tr a d i t i o n a l zoning and subdivision techniques. The provision of public sercices or u t i l i t i e s i s a v a l i d method of development control which has been largely overlooked. This inves-t i g a t i o n of cottaging i n the Squamish-Lillooet Regional D i s t r i c t ex-amines the potential of this technique, concentrating on those s t r a -tegic public services which can be provided by the government to individual l o t s (road, water, sewer and e l e c t r i c i t y ) . The study was based on 117 questionnaire returns. I t was found that the majority of cottagers in the study area have low levels of the public services under discussion. However, many cottagers i n d i -cated d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with existing low service l e v e l s . When these individuals were included with those who had high levels of services, t h i s combined sub-sample constituted a majority of the population. The discrepancy between existing and preferred levels of ser-vices for many cottagers i s a function of several factors. For example, infrequent use of the cottage apparently results in a trade-of f between the desire for the convenience offered by high levels of services and a variety of other f a c t o r s , including the economics of providing the services, and certain aspects of the cottager's l i f e s t y l e . i i i A trend indicating that more frequent use of the cottage is accompanied by higher service preferences, supports this conclusion. The study reveals that cottages offer relaxation, isolation, and peace and quiet, and that the cottage is used as a base for out-door recreational activity. Most cottagers in the Squamish-Lillooet Regional Dist r i c t feel that their cottage area is currently at an optimum density and want neither higher levels of services nor more people. Planners can now u t i l i z e these findings to determine the levels of services that should be offered, weighing the cottagers' preferences against considerations of environmental quality and den-si t y . In addition, i t is suggested that the provision of either high or low levels of services will attract different kinds of people, thus segregating the cottage population. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION—PERSPECTIVES ON THE COTTAGE PHENOMENON . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . 1 Reasons for Growth and Present Popularity of Cottaging 4 Need for the Study of Cottaging i n Its Modern Form . . 6 Purpose of This Study 8 I I . ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY 16 Scope of the Study 16 Hypothesis . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 18 Data Base 19 The Questionnaire 22 I I I . ANALYSIS OF DATA 25 Levels of Services 25 Physical Characteristics of Cottages 33 Ownership Patterns and Permanency of Residence . . . . 37 A c t i v i t y Patterns 39 Socio-economic, Characteristics of the Cottager . . . . 46 Attitudes toward Density and Environmental Quality . . 51 IV. CONCLUSION 59 Discussion of Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . 59 V Chapter Page Public Policy Decisions 62 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . 66 APPENDIX 69 I. MAPS 69 1. Study Area 69 2. Gates Lake 70 3. P a v i l i o n Lake 70 4. Levette Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 5. Kwotlenemo Lake 71 6. Tyaughton Lake 71 7. Marshall Lake 72 8. Bu t t e r f l y Lake - Lewis Lake 72 9. Anderson Lake 72 10. Gun Lake 73 I I . QUESTIONNAIRE . 74 A. Cover l e t t e r 74 B. Follow-up l e t t e r 75 C. Questionnaire 76 I I I . RESPONSES TO FIRST AND SECOND MAILINGS 77 A. Income by Respondents 77 vi Chapter Page B. Occupation by Respondents . . . . . . . . . 77 C. S a t i s f a c t i o n with Sewage System by Respondents . . 78 D. Residence by Respondents 78 E. Value of Cottage by Respondent . . . . . . . . 79 IV. LEVELS OF SERVICES . , 80 A. Cottager S a t i s f a c t i o n with Existing Services . . . 80 B. Relationship of E l e c t r i c a l System to Water Supply and Sewage Disposal System 82 C. Relationship of Water System to Sewage Disposal System 83 D. S a t i s f a c t i o n with Services and Cottager's Desires to Improve them 84 V. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF COTTAGES . 85 A. Physical Characteristics by Services to Cottage . . 85 VI. ACTIVITY PATTERNS . . . . . . 87 A. Trips to Cottage by S a t i s f a c t i o n with Services . . 87 B. Trips to Cottage by Place of Residence . . . . . 88 C. Trips to Cottage by Month 89 D. Frequency of P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Selected A c t i v i t i e s . 90 VII. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 91 A. Services by Age, Income, and Occupation . . . . . 91 vii LIST OF TABLES Tab!e Page 1. Quality of Worst Section of Road Travelled to get to Cottage 27 2. Source of Electricity 27 3. Source and Means of Water Supply 28 4. Means of Sewage Disposal . . . . . . 28 5. Priorities of Improvements to Cottage Area . . . . . . . 32 6. Age of Cottage 34 7. Market Value of Cottage - 34 8. Size of Cottage 36 9. Size of Lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 36 10. Length of Ownership of Cottage . . . . 38 11. Location of Cottager's Permanent Residence 38 12. Vehicle Trips to Cottage per Month 42 13. Percentage of Weekend Trips to Cottage . 42 14. Duration of Visits to Cottage 43 15. Cottagers Vacationing at Cottage . . . 43 16. Hours Spent in Locations at Cottage Area 45 17. Reasons for Going to the Cottage 45 18. Services by Cottagers who "Rough it" 47 19. Age of Cottage Owners 49 20. Number of Offspring in Cottage Family 49 v i i i Table Page 21. Income of Cottage Owner . . . . . . . 50 22. Occupation of Cottage Owner . . . . . . . . . . . 50 23. Education of Cottage Owner . 52 24. Perceived Density of Cottage Area 52 25. Cottager's Perception of Threat to Environmental Quality . 54 26. Attractiveness of Selected Features of Cottage Area . . . 55 27. Selected Comments of Cottagers 56 28. Service Preferences and Existing Services . . . . . . . 60 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS For t h e i r assistance i n the preparation of thi s t h e s i s , gratitude i s expressed to Dr. W. E. Rees for his unhesitating support and c r i t i c a l evaluation, to Dr. H. P. Oberlander for his guid-ance and i n s i g h t , and to the Directors of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional D i s t r i c t for t h e i r co-operation. Above a l l , gratitude i s due the cottagers of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional Dis-t r i c t whose prompt and encouraging responses made the study so much more relevant. COTTAGING AND RELATED SUPPORT SERVICES CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION - PERSPECTIVES ON THE COTTAGE PHENOMENON Background Cottaging as a recreational a c t i v i t y i s a popular phenomenon of contemporary society. In .general terms, cottaging i s the use of a second or vacation home for recreational purposes. Although not everyone i s fortunate enough to be a cottage owner most people have had at least some nominal exposure to cottaging. A wide variety of socio-economic factors have contributed to the r i s e in cottaging and the more a l e r t real estate promoters have exploited the concept through the effectiveness of the advertising agency, thereby making i t even more acceptable and popular. A recent a r t i c l e in the New York Times (August 24, 1969) serves to i l l u s t r a t e the demand for cottage lots in the Gulf Islands of B r i t i s h Columbia. The author of the a r t i c l e , in discussing the need for p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the cot-tage experience, writes. Whether the buyer i s a r e t i r e d Vancouver bus driver seeking a modest cottage or a wealthy C a l i f o r n i a businessman or movie star seeking an immodest one, what brings them to the Gulf Islands are the t h i c k l y forested h i l l s , the promise—but no ironclad guarantee—of year-round g o l f , the s a i l i n g , the f i s h -ing, the privacy, and the quiet. Indeed, i t i s not uncommon to f i n d f u l l page advertisements in the newspapers depicting the secluded hide-away where one can re-t i r e on the weekends to contemplate the t r a n q u i l l i t y of nature and 2 the verdure of his surroundings. Everyone i s offered his own private version of "Walden Pond". Even household items, such as the common "J-cl o t h " are advertised not merely for "wiping up i n the kitchen, cleaning bathrooms, washing dishes" or other associated domestic uses, but also f o r "use at the cottage". Despite current i n t e r e s t i n cottaging, the concept i s by no means a product of the affluent societies of the 20th century. Rather, the use of the second home for recreational purposes has a long h i s -tory dating back to the days of the ancient Romans when summer v i l l a s and summer estates were a popular recreational pursuit for the wealthy or the n o b i l i t y . In the t r a n s i t i o n from those times to the present, the physical structure i t s e l f has changed, perhaps the reasons f o r second home ownership have changed, and most ce r t a i n l y the people using the second home have changed. I t i s this l a t t e r point which i s important i n understanding the causes for the recent upsurge in the number of cottages. Wolfe (1961) estimated that i n 1941 there were 61,072 summer cottages in Canada. Of th i s t o t a l , 28,159 were i n Ontario. Swain (1964), using an identic a l d e f i n i t i o n of cottages calculated that i n 1963 there were 119,000 cottages in Ontario alone, a 420 per cent i n -crease. The growth rate for the 5 year period between 1958 and 1963 was i n the order of 26 per cent. Since no comparable figures e x i s t f o r Canada i n 1964, we can only assume that i f there was a 420 per cent increase in Ontario a s i m i l a r increase occurred i n a l l of Canada. Therefore, there would 3 be approximately 260,000 cottages i n Canada i n 1964. There i s no way of establishing how many cottages e x i s t at present but i t i s certain that they continue to increase, and probably at a faster rate than previously. A crude estimate of approximately 4-7 per cent increase per year would bring the current t o t a l to 300,000-400,000 cottages i n Canada in 1970--certainly not an overwhelming figure but extremely important when one considers the tremendous demand of cottagers for a limited and increasingly valuable land resource i n the form of recrea-tional waterfront. Aside from the exhaustion of land, there i s yet another spatial impact of cottaging. Estimating the average occupancy of 4.4 persons per cottage (Northern New England Vacation Home Study, 1966, p. 4) t h i s would mean approximately 1.3 to 1.7 m i l l i o n persons (8 per cent of the Canadian population) are involved i n the cottage phenomenon as participants. This s i g n i f i c a n t proportion of Canadians considerably magnifies the problems of land u t i l i z a t i o n brought on by t h i s recreational pursuit, since the design standards f o r such things as transportation, water and sewer, and other services must be suf-f i c i e n t to accommodate 8 per cent of the population. ° In B r i t i s h Columbia, the response to the pressure for Crown land f o r cottage development has been the absolute prohibition of sale of Crown land fronting on lakes (B. C. Land Act - 1968). Leaseholds are the only form of alienation and even these are r e s t r i c t e d to 100 feet of waterfront. Hov/ever, the land development companies have taken up the challenge and through a combination of purchase of private waterfront and lease of adjacent lands are subdividing and s e l l i n g 4 cottage l o t s . Block Brothers' "108 Mile Ranch", Capilano Highlands' "Emerald Estates", and "Alpine Meadows", and numerous other s i m i l a r recreational developments throughout B r i t i s h Columbia have contributed to keeping the cottage a real and viable form of recreational use. Reasons for the Growth and Present Popularity of Cottaging In the former days, only noblemen, ro y a l t y , or the very r i c h could afford to have and make use of the second home. Even as late as the end of the 19th century, second home ownership i n Canada was re s t r i c t e d to s o c i a l i t e s and the privileged classes (Wolfe, 1962). At present, the cottage i s s t i l l the domain of the r e l a t i v e l y a f fluent. A cottage study of New England (Northern New England Vacation Home Study, 1966, p. 4) makes the claim that, "Almost 50 per cent of the 492 occupants . . . had incomes exceeding $10,000 per year". However, the important point i s that r i s i n g incomes and increasing affluence mean more people have the opportunity of partak-ing in this formerly exclusive a c t i v i t y . Coupled with r i s i n g incomes i s the concommitant breakdown of class structures. I t i s now not uncommon to see middle and lower class people such as blue c o l l a r workers and labourers lounging on the veranda, or basking i n the sunshine on the beach with the i r modest summer cottage nestled i n the background. On either side, however, are cottages belonging to doctors, lawyers, and other such professional and technical people, who s t i l l make up a large proportion of cottage 5 owners. Evidence to support the disintegration of social class struc-ture of cottaging i s found i n a recent study of cottages in Wisconsin (Fine and T u t t l e , 1966) which reveals that over 50 per cent of the seasonal home owners were of the non-professional, non-technical, and non-managerial classes. The continued growth of cottaging has been aided, l i k e many other phenomena, by changes i n technology. Pre-fabricated cottage u n i t s , "package" water and sewer systems, and other accessory equipment has had the double ef f e c t of reducing the cost of owning a cottage, and of permitting cottage owners to enjoy many of th e i r favoured urban amenities at t h e i r second home. This reduced cost and increased convenience coupled with increasing personal disposable incomes and increasing le i s u r e time, has made cottaging more a t t r a c t i v e and available as a recreational pursuit for many Canadians. In addi-t i o n , the increasing social and psychological pressures of our ever-expanding urban areas emphasize the need to enjoy certain experiences which are associated with the concept of cottage recreation. Some of these experiences include privacy and seclusion, change of pace, i s o l -a t i o n , and communion with nature. Aside from these values, however, one of the important motiva-tions f o r cottaging i s the notion of the cottage as a status symbol. Until as recently as the l a t t e r part of the 19th century the cottage was a luxury item, available only to the privileged classes (Wolfe, 1962) and overtones of th i s idea doubtless s t i l l remain. In Wolfe's words (1965, p. 7), "The a b i l i t y to own and maintain an inessential 6 house . . . i s an important index of having arrived". In other words, ownership of a cottage, long fashionable among the wealthy, has become possible for the masses. The concept of exclusive and unrestricted property ownership has contributed greatly to the elevation of the cottage to the realm of a social i n s t i t u t i o n . Need f o r the Study of Cottaging in i t s Modern Form In the past, very l i t t l e e f f o r t has been expended on the study of cottaging. Preoccupation with natural resource development and urbanization meant that the problems associated with cottage develop-ment were given very low p r i o r i t i e s . Much of the past work done on cottaging has been in the form of purely descriptive papers and university graduate and undergraduate theses. Therefore, the state of knowledge of cottaging i s i n i t s very early and formative stages. Only recently have governmental authorities commissioned studies on cottaging, and even these have been inadequate i n many ways. Graham (1967, p. 11), in describing three such studies, states that, The methodology and techniques that were applied i n the three studies have been r e l a t i v e l y simple inventories and some des-c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c a l analysis. This i s in no way a condemnation of the work; rather i t r e f l e c t s the monumental problem of obtain-ing the necessary basic data for any form of analysis, within normally acceptable l i m i t s of time and cost. In decrying the lack of research, Campbell (1967, p. 1) adds the f o l -lowing explanation: The reasons for t h i s observed paucity of research stem mainly from two factors. The f i r s t of these i s that cottaging i s unre-lated to any facet of governmental administration and consequent-l y research in this sphere i s seldom demanded for planning 7 purposes. Secondly i t i s both expensive and d i f f i c u l t to obtain data on this area of recreational a c t i v i t y . I t i s now becoming increasingly evident that cottaging has serious implications ranging from economic and land use concerns to . psychological, s o c i a l , and environmental q u a l i t y concerns. For example, by establishing cottages on a lake a r e l a t i v e l y small number of people can gain e f f e c t i v e control over the entire shoreline, thereby successfully i s o l a t i n g the public from what was formerly a p u b l i c l y owned recreational resource. This i s primarily a r e s u l t of the t r a d i -t i o n a l pattern of linea r subdivision of lake frontage, which in addi-tion to creating resource use c o n f l i c t s , poses a serious p o l l u t i o n problem and creates other potential hazards. The seasonality of cot-taging makes d i f f i c u l t the provision of r e t a i l services. Are such services even j u s t i f i e d by these "summer c i t i e s " ? What are the i m p l i -cations for adjacent land use? What do cottagers contribute to the local economy? Are they a tax burden? In short, there are many unresolved aspects of cottage develop-ment, crossing many academic or d i s c i p l i n a r y boundaries. The interests of economists i s revealed by the active p a r t i c i p a t i o n of Schools of Commerce and Business Research i n some of the recent studies. Re-searchers concerned with the p o l i t i c a l and administrative aspects are also becoming involved, as are those interested i n planning, land use, and resource development. To attempt to investigate the entire spectrum of problems assoc-iated with cottaging would require more time and energy than i s afforded the author. I t becomes necessary, therefore, to be selective and to 8 focus on a p a r t i c u l a r issue which may shed some l i g h t on the to t a l a c t i v i t y . Purpose of This Study As previously stated, the cottage i s an i n s t i t u t i o n which has t r a d i t i o n a l l y enjoyed freedom from any form of regulation or control (Campbell, 1967, p. 1). However, i n B r i t i s h Columbia there now exists a framework of governmental administration i n the form of the Regional D i s t r i c t (B. C. Municipal Act - 1969) which has the capacity and the ca p a b i l i t y to cope with the pr a c t i c a l problem of devising p o l i c i e s to govern cottage development. David (1969, p. 217) provides a concise rationale for government involvement in. cottages: The study has shown that large increases i n r i p a r i a n property value and property development occurred during the decade of the f i f t i e s . Substantial gains are accruing to the owners of water-front property. These r i s i n g values and increases in development are of importance to a number of interested parties. Increases in property values are of int e r e s t to the governmental units in which these more valuable properties are located. Rising prices mean an increasing tax base. Increases in the tax base which are not off s e t by increasing demands for public services are a net gain to the governmental unit. Increasing amounts of waterfront development mean business for the building trades and r e t a i l e r s , including gas st a t i o n s , grocery stores, sporting goods suppliers, and the l i k e . The increase i n property values has implications for the amenities of lakes. I t seems l i k e l y that, as cottages become more valuable, increasing demands w i l l be made to preserve or enhance the other attributes of the lakes. Shoreline zoning and better water qu a l i t y are l i k e l y to a t t r a c t attention. T r a d i t i o n a l l y , zoning and subdivision bylaws have been used as tools for enforcing policy in connection with any form of development including r e s i d e n t i a l development and subdivision. However, public investment in services and u t i l i t i e s i s increasingly becoming a more 9 ef f e c t i v e form of guiding and directing development. In t h i s regard, Harvey Banks (1967, p. 10 and 13) writes, We have not realized the extent to which f a c i l i t i e s control the pattern of growth i n C a l i f o r n i a , nor, i n most cases, have we attempted to plan such f a c i l i t i e s to guide that growth along de-s i r a b l e lines . . . Public f a c i l i t i e s can and must be used as a means of guiding the locations and patterns of population growth and related economic development. From the planning point of view, public services can be the key to any form of development--!'f they are provided, development w i l l i n e v i t ably take place, i f they are not, development i s very severely hindered. This i s not to say, however, that the non-provision of public services i s an absolute deterrent to development. Rather, i t i s a discretionary t o o l , which i f used i n i t s positive sense, can i n i t i a t e development. By way of c l a r i f i c a t i o n , the services under discussion would include the following s p e c i f i c items: 1) On l o t services (water, sewer, telephone, power, roads, radio and t e l e v i s i o n reception, curbs, gutters, street l i g h t i n g ) 2) Off l o t services ( r e t a i l and service establishments such as grocery stores, laundromats, gas s t a t i o n s , marinas, night clubs, dance h a l l s , pubs, golf courses) Moreover, the level of service for each of these items i s de-fined as a measure of the convenience with which they are u t i l i z e d . For example, water can be procured by a p a i l out of a stream or by a f l i c k of the wrist on the faucet in the kitchen, the former represent-ing a low level of that service and the l a t t e r a high l e v e l . 10 The dichotomy between on-lot and o f f - l o t services has been established as a means of functionally separating services. That i s to say, the on-lot services are such that the service must be provided or extended to each individual l o t . The service goes to the people, whereas in reference to the o f f - l o t services, the people must go to the service, therefore the services can be grouped and c e n t r a l l y located. By virtue of the fact that each of the services i n the former category must be di s t r i b u t e d to the individual l o t s , these services are therefore much more powerful as tools f o r guiding development. Furthermore, i t i s obvious that investment in the l a t t e r cate-gory of services l i e s largely in the domain of the private sector of the economy. Although the Regional D i s t r i c t can zone for these functions, i t has l i t t l e to do with t h e i r p r a c t i c a l i n i t i a t i o n . On the other hand, several of the items mentioned i n the f i r s t category f a l l almost ex-c l u s i v e l y in the public domain, and are operations which the Regional D i s t r i c t can legitimately undertake or co-ordinate. Moreover, of these public services, only a few can be considered to be s t r a t e g i c . In one manner or another, a l l services have some influence. However, there are certain c r i t i c a l or essential services that are v i r t u a l l y a pre-req u i s i t e to any form of development. This thesis has selected the following as key services: water, sewer, e l e c t r i c i t y , and roads. The choice of these services i s substantiated by research done in New Hampshire. Porter (1954), after demonstrating that physical aspects of shoreline are not important determinants of recreational p o t e n t i a l , states, 11 But far more important, once the general quality of the shoreline of a pa r t i c u l a r lake has been assessed, would be the relationship of the lake to main routes of vacation t r a v e l , the problem of e l e c t r i c i t y , and water supply, and the existence of roads around the lake. The fact that local government authorities have the power and j u r i s d i c t i o n to provide or co-ordinate these services, creates the opportunity of carrying out d i r e c t l y , policy formulations regarding i n -tensity and location of development. However, this presumes that at some stage policy decisions with respect to the provision of services have i n fact been made. This thesis assumes and supports the planning process of a n t i c i -pating and guiding private i n i t i a t i v e by means of public policy decis-ions. Proper planning i n the public policy f i e l d should assess the wishes of the people as an input to the decision making process. The i n i t i a l problem i s to determine these wishes and preferences. Follow-ing t h i s i s the very crucial question of what i s to be the poli c y - -accommodation of the people's wishes at the r i s k of s a c r i f i c i n g relevant values, or planning for optimum development having assessed the people's wishes in terms of the relevant economic and environmental constraints. In either case, an integral component of the policy i s the knowledge of what the people desire. I t i s in this area of the public policy decision making process that the results of this thesis can best be u t i l i z e d . The evolution of policy on the location of development areas has many facets. One of the inputs to the policy involves a decision on the services that are to be provided. In the context of th i s study, 12 th i s decision has two major components, one of which i s the opinion or attitude of the cottager himself. The other component i s the a b i l i t y of the governmental body to assess the r e l a t i v e merits of the cottager's desires i n the context of societal goals. In the l i g h t of established goals such as maintenance of environmental q u a l i t y , the governmental body, in i t s ultimate wisdom, must evaluate the requirements of the cottager to see i f his demands present any c o n f l i c t with the goals. I f the two are compatible, the question of the levels of services to be provided i s resolved. I f they are not, then other measures have to be taken to resolve the c o n f l i c t . This study provides an essential input on the attitude of the cottager towards services, demonstrates how i t i s determined, and suggests how i t may change over time. The following schema i l l u s t r a t e s the value of knowing the wishes of the people and shows how they can be related to planning and policy decisions. I t represents only the extreme cases of high and low den-s i t i e s and levels of services but i s nonetheless conceptually useful. DENSITY OF High IV . III COTTAGE AREA Low I II Low High LEVELS OF SERVICES DEMANDED Let us suppose that the government has firmly committed i t s e l f to the goal of maintaining environmental q u a l i t y . Let us further make 13 the assumption that low densities of development create no real threat to environmental quality but that high densities pose a substantial danger to the deterioration df the environment. The following would be the p o l i c i e s generated in each c e l l of the matrix, depending upon the densities in the p a r t i c u l a r location and upon the results of a f i e l d survey such as i s contained i n this study. -Section I Conditions - Low levels of services preferred with low density cottage areas. Policy - No c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t — d e c i s i o n would be to pro-vide services not i n excess of the desires of the cottager. Future development densities must be kept low in order not to jeopardize environmental q u a l i t y . Section II Conditions - High levels of services preferred with low density cottage areas. Policy - Some c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t — d e c i s i o n would be to provide high levels of services but at a user cost to the cottager since servicing at low densi-t i e s presents considerable unit costs. Section I I I Conditions - High levels of services preferred with high density cottage areas. Policy - No c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t — d e c i s i o n would be to accom-modate desires of cottager. 14 Section IV Conditions - Low levels of services preferred with densely populated cottage areas. Policy - Major c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t — d e c i s i o n would be to provide high levels of services in d i r e c t opposi-tion to the desires of the cottager. This decis-ion would be based on the avowed goals of the government and would be in the broad public i n t e r -est, i f not in the cottager's i n t e r e s t . I t i s an added benefit to the planning process to know in advance the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the cottagers who prefer either high or low levels of services. In designating areas for future cottage develop-ment, the government i s then aware of the classes of people i t must cater to. I f the inputs to t h i s kind of schema were known and used i n the past, many of the current problems r e l a t i n g to cottaging would be non-existent. For example, one of the dominant issues in Ontario i s lake p o l l u t i o n resulting from high densities of cottagers having low levels of services. I t i s obvious that i n this instance no e f f e c t i v e policy decisions were made at an early date, since the needed information on the cottager was not available. I f the Regional D i s t r i c t , or other public authority, f a i l s to determine or i s ignorant of the preferences of the cottager and decides the levels of services to be provided to a cottage area on other c r i t e r i a , the policy decision would not r e f l e c t optimum develop-ment considerations. 15 On the other hand, with knowledge of cottagers preferences for levels of services the Regional D i s t r i c t can devise p o l i c i e s to guide development to s p e c i f i c areas by respecting the cottager's preferences. I t seems axiomatic therefore, that i n attempting to formulate policy for development and provision of services, one of the f i r s t requirements of the governmental authority i s to ascertain precisely what services are or w i l l be demanded. In summary, i f the attitudes of the residents or cottagers are not known, some of the important planning decisions w i l l be made in a vacuum. The task of this thesis i s to provide some of the planning research that has been lacking. The s p e c i f i c topic to be dealt with, then, involves an analysis of the levels of services that are to be provided to areas where cottage lots predominate. CHAPTER II ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY Scope of the Study Thus f a r , the word "cottage" has been used loosely. In i t s broadest sense i t can be construed to mean a second home, a vacation house, a fish i n g or hunting cabin, a ski cabin, a beach cottage, etc. Moreover, each par t i c u l a r type of cottage w i l l require d i f f e r e n t levels of services. For example, a ski or winter cottage w i l l almost ce r t a i n -l y have a good heating system whereas a beach or summer cottage w i l l probably not. A hunting cabin w i l l have very primitive f a c i l i t i e s whereas a summer cottage may have more sophisticated services. Ideal-l y , an investigation of levels of services to cottage l o t s should consider a l l forms of cottage development i n a variety of areas. This investigation w i l l concentrate s o l e l y on summer cottages since they form the majority of cottage types. Furthermore, the study is r e s t r i c t e d s t r i c t l y to summer cottages fronting on freshwater lakes. Therefore, the following i s offered as a d e f i n i t i o n of "cottage": a building located on a body of fresh water, and li v e d i n and used p r i -marily i n the summer for recreational purposes. No d i s t i n c t i o n i s made as to s i z e , shape, construction, or cost of the building. A cottager, then, i s someone who uses such a cottage. . Because of the author's first-hand knowledge of the lakes and cottages in the region, the study has been limited to the portion of 17 the Squamish-Lillooet Regional D i s t r i c t shown on Map 1 (Appendix I) with the f u l l r e a l i z a t i o n that the results may not be applicable speci-f i c a l l y to other areas at other times. However, since the small lakes and mountainous t e r r a i n that are c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h i s region are also found throughout most of the p r i v i n c e , some of the general conclusions of t h i s study may therefore be relevant to s i m i l a r areas of B r i t i s h Columbia. Because the study was confined to a manageable area, i t was possible to obtain data from the entire universe of cottage owners i n the area. As previously indicated, the study w i l l concentrate on the levels of services that cottagers demand, "level of service" being defined as the degree of convenience that i s afforded by d i f f e r e n t kinds of water supply systems, sewage disposal systems, power systems, and road systems. The greater the convenience, the higher the level of service. I t should also be emphasized that the above services are analyzed one at a time, rather than i n combination. Hence the term "levels of services" refers to a l l services, each having been i n -vestigated separately. In addition, an attempt w i l l be made to relate services to the l i f e s t y l e and socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the cottager. The effects of physical or geographical features and ecological r e l a t i o n -ships on the f e a s i b i l i t y of providing services to s p e c i f i c areas have been largely ignored. Hypothesis A hypothesis i s a formal statement of a supposition or a star t i n g point for an investigation. I t sets the frame of reference and states the problem to be investigated. The hypothesis of th i s thesis can be stated as: Most cottagers prefer minimal levels of public services In addition, there i s a sub-hypothesis which attempts to explain or relate the low levels of services demanded to a particu-l a r l i f e s t y l e . The sub-hypothesis i s : Most cottagers prefer low levels of services because the  1ife s t y l e associated with the cottage i s b a s i c a l l y one of  an outdoor experience with a_ low int e n s i t y of cottage use To determine whether the cottage l i f e s t y l e i s based on an out-door experience requires data on the reasons for owning a cottage, the behaviour and personal a c t i v i t y patterns of the cottager, the number of times the cottage i s used and the number of hours spent i n the cottage. In addition, i t would be useful to obtain data on the days during which the cottage i s used, the socio-economic characteristics of the cottager and the physical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the cottage. Analysis derived from data of t h i s type considers only a s t a t i c s i t u a t i o n . I t may be revealing to introduce a time dimen-sion and examine changes in attitudes for d i f f e r e n t age groups. For example, changes over age and family composition may prove that youth i s a period during which people would prefer to "rough i t " . Rather than have running water, they would sooner fetch water from the stream and bathe i n the lake. However, when old age descends, fetching water becomes a chore, and bathing i n the lake i s no longer fun. Running water then becomes a necessity rather than a luxury. I t would also be appropriate to determine the length of time that i n t e r e s t i s retained i n a cottage and an estimate of the turnover rate of cottages. Closely related to t h i s i s the question of whether the cottage eventually becomes a permanent home, as t h i s dictates a very d e f i n i t e increase i n the level of service required. Much of the data collected i s of a nominal or an ordinal scale, thus complicating the computation of some of the more esoteric s t a t i s t i c a l tests of comparison. The Chi-square s t a t i s t i c has been used i n most cases to test for s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences i n the responses from sub-populations of cottagers. The advantage of t h i s test i s that i t can handle nominal, o r d i n a l , and even in t e r v a l data, with an acceptable degree of s e n s i t i v i t y . Data Base The p r i n c i p a l objective of the research, then, i s to deter-mine the levels of services that most cottagers are content with. In addition, some description of the cottage l i f e s t y l e i s necessary i n order to evaluate whether the cottager's preferences are r e a l i s t i c , f i r s t l y , i n terms of the experiences that the cottager undergoes, and secondly, i n terms of the actual use that i s made of the cottage. This analysis requires both a thorough knowledge of the cottager and an inventory of the e x i s t i n g services, so that one knows precisely what the cottager has been accustomed to. In reference to l i f e s t y l e , there are limited data available from other studies which could have been u t i l i z e d . In contrast, the inventory of the existing services and the preference of the cot-tager for these services i s an area where l i t t l e data i s yet a v a i l -able. This s i t u a t i o n , therefore, l e f t no alternative but to assemble o r i g i n a l data. Since the f i e l d investigation and personal interview methods of data c o l l e c t i o n are very time consuming, the mail ques-tionnaire technique was used. The response rate of most mail questionnaires i s a very low 10 to 20 per cent. Because of the limited universe i t was necessary to raise the response rate of the present survey so that the number of returns would be amenable to s t a t i s t i c a l l y relevant analysis. This was achieved through the co-operation of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional D i s t r i c t Board of Directors, who sanctioned the study and provided o f f i c i a l letterheads f o r the mailing of the questionnaire. The aura of officialdom surrounding the letterhead undoubtedly con-tributed to the high response rate. A cover l e t t e r (Appendix 11-A) describing the survey was mailed with the o r i g i n a l questionnaire. In addition, a follow-up l e t t e r (Appendix II-B) was sent two weeks after the o r i g i n a l mailing. The questionnaires used in the f i r s t mailing were i d e n t i f i a b l e from those i n the second. It was, therefore, possible to compare the d i s t r i b u t i o n of responses to key questions in the two sub-samples. The tables i n Appendix III show that for f i v e selected questions there were no s i g n i f i c a n t differences in the d i s t r i b u t i o n of responses between those who replied to the f i r s t mailing and those who replied to the second. The evidence suggests that sub-populations (such as high income groups) were not biasing the results by with-holding t h e i r responses. Since the composition of each of the two sub-samples was s i m i l a r , they were combined for purposes of analysis. The questionnaire (Appendix 11-C) was sent to a l l 340 property owners on the ten lakes shown on Map 1 (Appendix I ) , regardless of whether the property contained a cottage. This measure was necessary since, although locations of cottages were known (Maps 2-11, Appendix I) i t was d i f f i c u l t to determine the addresses of the cottage owners as opposed to simply property owners. Of the 340 property owners, 220 had cottages on the s i t e . A total of 178 ques-tionnaires were completed and returned. Fifteen others could not be delivered by the Post Office. Of the 178 completed returns, 61 were from people who had no cottage on the s i t e . The l e t t e r of introduction sent with the questionnaire requested a l l persons to answer the survey as best as possible, irrespective of the existence of a cottage on the l o t . However, over 50 per cent of the owners of vacant lots f a i l e d to answer the majority of more important questions. In f a c t , 13 of these 61 respondents did not f i l l in any data at a l l , but were kind enough to reply, indicating that they had either sold the l o t or very seldom made use of i t . F i f t y - f i v e per cent of a l l landowners and 53 per cent of a l l cottage owners responded to the survey—an exceptional ly high rate of response for a mail questionnaire. Subsequent analysis shall consider data from only the 117 cottage owners, since i t i s the cottager per se who constitutes the focus of the study. The Questionnaire The design of the questionnaire of necessity had to r e f l e c t the objective of the s t u d y — t o assess the levels of services required by cottagers. Perhaps the most expeditious way of achieving t h i s end i s to simply ask the very d i r e c t question of the cottager. In order to avoid the biases inherent in a technique of t h i s kind, the question had to be couched in such terms as to place the subject of services i n perspective. To i l l u s t r a t e s p e c i f i c a l l y , most people, cottagers or not, have some "pet peeve" when i t comes to the services that they enjoy, especially those that a public agency provides through tax revenue. Invariably, the taxes are too high and the services are not good enough. The road has too many potholes and the water supply i s not adequate. There i s a danger that the poor taxpayer, convinced he i s not getting his money's worth out of the government, may demand services that are out of l i n e with his needs. Just the p r i n c i p l e of getting something out of the government i s enough to stimulate some people to make excessive demands. To avoid this problem, the t a c t i c was to explain the general nature of the survey in the two covering l e t t e r s which the respondents hopefully read prior to tackling the acutal questionnaire. The questionnaire was composed so the very simple, e a s i l y answered questions were pre-sented f i r s t in an attempt to lead the respondent and to jog his thinking processes. The context of the questionnaire was structured to investigate six d i s t i n c t subject areas. These topics as such were not delineated or i d e n t i f i a b l e to the respondents since i t was f e l t that this would introduce unnecessary bias. The s i x areas were: Level of services Physical Characteristics of the cottage Ownership patterns A c t i v i t y patterns of the cottager Socio-economic characteristics of cottagers Attitudes toward density and environmental quality This methodology served to de-emphasize the subject of services and place i t i n a broader context so that considerations of road, water, e l e c t r i c i t y , and sewer were given equal weighting with the other topics. Hopefully, the question on s a t i s f a c t i o n with services was neutral. I f t h i s were the case, then these unbiased responses could be used to determine i f the cottager can distinguish i n t e r -relationships between levels of services and factors such as environ-mental quality and density of cottage development. To provide data for the s p e c i f i c hypothesis, the respondent was asked to indicate his current level of services, four services, he was asked to with present conditions. This dent to make a value judgement extraneous considerations such degree. Following t h i s , for each of the indicate his level of s a t i s f a c t i o n t a c t i c i n ef f e c t forced the respon-on levels of services such that as taxes were removed to a large CHAPTER III ANALYSIS OF DATA Levels of Services The ensuing discussion on levels of services provides the data base which i s used either to substantiate or undermine the major hypothesis. Much of the data i s formulated from the responses to eight questions wherein the respondent was asked to i d e n t i f y the levels of services he currently enjoys and subsequently to indicate his s a t i s f a c t i o n with these services, thereby implying his preference f o r e i t h e r the exi s t i n g or higher levels of services. We assume that when a cottager indicates d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with a service he i s actually i n d i c a t i n g a preference f o r a higher and not a lower level of service. This assumption seems reasonable since there i s no real obstacle to prevent a cottager from removing his e l e c t r i c a l supply or cutting o f f his pumped water supply i f he desired lower levels of services. By contrast, i f he desires higher levels of services he would have to i n s t a l l a water pump or acquire a portable e l e c t r i c a l generating unit. The discrepancy between the desires and the actual services enjoyed by the cottager i s an indication of the extent to which the cottager i s w i l l i n g to s a c r i f i c e or trade-off the convenience of high levels of services with the cost involved or the use made of the cottage. The road, water, e l e c t r i c i t y , and sewage disposal f a c i l i t i e s that the cottagers presently u t i l i z e have been assessed (Tables 1-4). Appendix IV contains a b i v a r i a t e table (Table A) which shows the degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n of cottagers f o r each level of service. I t i s noteworthy that 77 respondents (66 per cent of t o t a l returns) have no e l e c t r i c a l services at a l l and must r e l y on propane Or open f i r e s for l i g h t and cooking. Yet 38 (50 per cent) of these people are completely s a t i s f i e d with t h i s s i t u a t i o n and presumably would not want i t altered. This i s contrasted with only 20 (26 per cent) who are not at a l l s a t i s f i e d with the absence of e l e c t r i c a l power and 7 (9 per cent) who f e e l the s i t u a t i o n could stand improve-ment. For 64 cottagers, the only means of water supply i s by hand from a w e l l , stream or lake. In t h i s case, only 26 (41 per cent) are s a t i s f i e d with t h i s condition. Twenty-nine (45 per cent) think that the service could stand improvement, perhaps by digging a well to obtain a water supply. Only 9 (14 per cent) are completely d i s -s a t i s f i e d with t h i s system, implying t h e i r need f o r a higher level of service. In the entire study area, only 32 cottagers have septic tanks on t h e i r l o t s , with the remaining cottagers using outdoor p r i v i e s or chemical t o i l e t s . For those 84 persons i n the l a t t e r category, approximately 32 (38 per cent) are s a t i s f i e d with the f a c i l i t y , 29 (34 per cent) think i t could stand improvement, and 23 (27 per cent) are not at a l l s a t i s f i e d with t h i s form of sewage disposal system. By way of comparison, i t i s estimated that i n the United States, TABLE 1 QUALITY OF WORST SECTION OF ROAD (OVER h MILE) TRAVELLED TO GET TO COTTAGE 4-Wheel Drive Dirt Road Poor 2-Wheel Drive Dirt Road Good 2-Wheel Drive D i r t Road Paved Road Total No. of Respondents (%) 13 (11) 47 (41) 52 (45) 3 (2) 115 TABLE 2 SOURCE OF ELECTRICITY None Portable B.C. Hydro Other Total Generating Unit No. of Respondents {%) 77 (66) 32 (27) 6 (5) 2 (2) 117 ro >-4 TABLE 3 SOURCE AND MEANS OF WATER SUPPLY By Hand By Hand By Hand Pump Pump Pump Other Total From From From From From From (Gravity Stream Well Lake Stream Well Lake Feed) No. of Respondents {%) 20 (17) 9 (8) 35 (30) 8 (7) 4 (3) 31 (26) 10 (9) 117 TABLE 4 MEANS OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL Outdoor Chemical Septic Total Privy T o i l e t Tank No. of Respondents (%) 77 (66) 7 (6) 32 (28) 116 ro co 29 88 per cent of vacation cottages have e l e c t r i c i t y and 50 per cent have running water and inside t o i l e t s (United States Bureau of the Census, 1969). S i m i l a r l y , i n a survey carried out in Wisconsin (Anderson, 1959) i t was found that out of 27 cottages surveyed, 26 (96 per cent) had e l e c t r i c i t y , 15 (56 per cent) had running water, and 12 (44 per cent) had an inside bathroom and t o i l e t f a c i l i t i e s . Thus i t i s evident that the cottagers i n the Squamish-Lillooet Regional D i s t r i c t have much lower levels of services than cottagers in other areas,since only 34 per cent have e l e c t r i c i t y , 47 per cent have running water, and 27 per cent have septic tanks. This points to the fact that the area under investigation may not have had the opportunity for the h i s t o r i c a l development process to evolve higher levels of services over the years. In addition, i t i s manifest that for each of water, sewage, and e l e c t r i c a l services, more people indicated complete s a t i s f a c t i o n with a minimal level of services than indicated tot a l d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n (Appendix IV, Table A). I t i s assumed that those who indicated services could stand improvement were generally s a t i s f i e d with the exi s t i n g ' l e v e l of service, but thought that minor improvements (excavating a w e l l , relocating a p i t p r i v y , obtaining a battery powered l i g h t source for emergencies, e t c . ) , would add to t h e i r con-tentment. I f th i s category of respondents i s grouped with the cot-tagers completely s a t i s f i e d with minimal services, the emphasis on s a t i s f a c t i o n with low levels of services i s even more pronounced. 30 The inter-relationships between e l e c t r i c a l services, water, and sewage f a c i l i t i e s are important factors to consider when assess-ing levels of services (Appendix IV, Tables B and C). Septic tanks require some form of plumbing, which i n turn suggests a pumped water supply. Pumped water supply, except for gravity feed, i n turn re-quires some mechanical device to do the pumping. The pump i t s e l f can operate either on gas or e l e c t r i c i t y . I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t that of the 77 cottages lacking e l e c t r i c i t y , only 20 (26 per cent) have a pumped water supply. By contrast, of the 40 cottages that have e l e c t r i c i t y , 33 (82 per cent) have a pumped water supply, which in a l l pr o b a b i l i t y i s operated by e l e c t r i c i t y . A s i m i l a r relationship holds between e l e c t r i c i t y and sewage disposal f a c i l i t i e s , because of the dependence of septic tanks on a pumped water supply, Appendix IV, Table C. This leads to the conclusion that e l e c t r i c i t y i s the one key service upon which pumped water and sewage f a c i l i t i e s depend. I f i t i s provided, there i s a high probab-i l i t y that the comforts of indoor plumbing w i l l soon follow. On the other hand, deliberately withholding t h i s service makes i t much more d i f f i c u l t , i n terms of a n c i l l a r y equipment, for the cottager to establish a pumped water or sewage f a c i l i t y . In the region, only 3 cottages are accessible by paved road and these are located at P a v i l i o n Lake. At the opposite end of the spectrum, Levette, B u t t e r f l y , and Lewis Lakes can be reached only with a four wheel drive vehicle and only in the best of conditions. The remaining lakes are serviced by d i r t roads which can be described 31 as ranging from poor to good. Of the 13 people using the four wheel drive road, 6 (46 per cent) were not at a l l s a t i s f i e d with i t and 4 (30 per cent) f e l t i t could stand improvement. Surprisingly enough, 3 (23 per cent) indicated complete s a t i s f a c t i o n with the four wheel drive road. One reason for t h i s i s the privacy that i s concommitant with i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y . Of the 47 cottagers having a poor two wheel drive d i r t road, only 10 (21 per cent) expressed complete d i s s a t i s -faction with the f a c i l i t y and 28 (60 per cent) thought improvements could be made, while 9 (19 per cent) were t o t a l l y s a t i s f i e d . Most people, regardless of the quality of the road they t r a v e l l e d , f e l t that some improvement could be made to the road f a c i l i t y . I t i s now evident that the majority of cottagers have minimal levels of services (Tables 1-4). Furthermore, of those who have minimal services, the category of cottagers completely s a t i s f i e d with the state of a f f a i r s was larger than the category that was com-plete l y d i s s a t i s f i e d (Appendix IV, Table A). This i s not to say, however, that most cottagers desire minimal levels of services. In fa c t , the number of cottagers that were d i s s a t i s f i e d with minimal levels of a given service plus those who had a high level of the same service exceeded the number of cottagers content with a low level of service (for road 72 to 44, for e l e c t r i c i t y 59 to 45, for water 60 to 55), the only exception being sewage disposal (54 to 61). This dichotomy between those cottagers who have few services and are happy with them, and those cottagers who possess or wish to possess higher levels of services i s s i g n i f i c a n t to the planning process as w i l l be i l l u s t r a t e d l a t e r . To place services into perspective, the cottagers were asked to rank several problems in the order of t h e i r p r i o r i t y for improvement or solution. Table 5 demonstrates that the cottagers main concern i s with e l e c t r i c i t y , lake contamination, and road access. TABLE 5 PRIORITIES OF IMPROVEMENTS TO COTTAGE AREA Problem No. of respondents who ranked 1 or 2 or 3 1) e l e c t r i c i t y 34 2) lake contamination 32 3) road access 30 4) garbage disposal 26 5) trespassing 24 6) water supply 16 7) insects 16 8) sewage disposal 16 9) conveniences (radio, T.V., telephone) 5 10) beach area 2 Many of the cottagers were consistent in t h e i r responses since of the 56 people s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r e l e c t r i c a l system (question 30) only two indicated that e l e c t r i c a l services had a high p r i o r i t y f o r improve-ment (question 22) whereas 14 of the 24 discontent with t h e i r level of service gave i t a high p r i o r i t y . The congruity also extended to the other services, as Appendix IV (Table D) i l l u s t r a t e s . I t i s i n t e r -esting i n Table 5 to note the discrepancy occurring between the high ranking for lake contamination and the low p r i o r i t y given to a sewage disposal system. I t appears that the cottager i s insensitive to the relationship between the two and cannot make the connection between inadequate sewage disposal f a c i l i t i e s and p o l l u t i o n of lakes. Physical Characteristics of the Cottage Cottaging as an important recreational a c t i v i t y has a r e l a t i v e -l y short history, i n the area. Only one t h i r d of the cottages have been i n existence more than 12 years (Table 6). This i s contrasted to the United States where two thirds of the cottages are more than 11 years old (United States Bureau of the Census - 1969). I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t that another one t h i r d of the cottages i n the Squamish-L i l l o o e t Regional D i s t r i c t are only 1 to 3 years o l d , indicating that cottaging i s an accelerating development phenomenon in the region. Over 50 per cent of the cottages are worth less than $4,000 and one t h i r d are worth $4,000 to $8,000 (Table 7). The low value of the cottages i s s i g n i f i c a n t i n that i t may have an influence on whether the cottager i s w i l l i n g to pay for the i n s t a l l a t i o n of service i n f r a -structure such as plumbing and wiring. Plumbing, septic tanks, and e l e c t r i c a l wiring must meet certain standards as set out by the Health, E l e c t r i c a l , and Building Inspectors. The standards require q u a l i t y materials and craftsmanship, thus r a i s i n g the costs. As a r e s u l t , the high i n s t a l l a t i o n costs may be out of proportion to the value of the cottage. However, a confusing factor i s that the addition of services to the cottage increases the market value considerably (Appendix V, TABLE 6 AGE OF COTTAGE 1-3 yrs . 4-6 yrs . 7-9 yrs. 10-12 y r s . 13 y r s . & over Total No. of Respondents [%) 37 (33) 20 (18) 12 (11) 8 (7) 36 (32) 113 TABLE 7 MARKET VALUE OF COTTAGE less than $4-8,000 over Total $4,000 $8,000 No. of Respondents {%) 62 (54) 39 (34) 14 (12) 115 CO -pa 35 Table A). Without additional information i t i s impossible to deter-mine which of the above factors the cottager considers to be oper-ative. Many of the cottages are small (Table 8) and are situated on large l o t s (Table 9), the majority of the l a t t e r being over three-quarters of an acre in s i z e . This large l o t size i s indica t i v e of a reasonably low cottage density. Since the lots are large, the danger of one cottager's septic tank polluting another's well or other source of water supply i s reduced somewhat. However, since a l l the l o t s are waterfront l o t s , there i s a danger of lake contamination from septic tank seepage. Bivariate tabulation of water, sewage, and e l e c t r i c a l services versus age of the cottage, s i z e of the cottage, and size of the l o t (Appendix V, Table A) indicates that there i s a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t relationship (Chi-square - .01 level) between size of the cottage and services. The larger the bu i l d i n g , the greater the prob a b i l i t y of i t having a septic tank, running water, and e l e c t r i -c i t y . On the other hand, the size of the l o t appears to have no bearing on whether the cottage has running water or a septic tank. Surpr i s i n g l y , there i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t evidence (Chi-square - .05 level) that cottages b u i l t over 12 years ago have r e l a t i v e l y higher levels of services than those recently constructed. This would indicate that the cottager who has j u s t completed building feels that high levels of services are not immediately required. Presumably, higher levels of services are i n s t a l l e d at a l a t e r date, TABLE 8 SIZE OF COTTAGE less than 400 - 601 - 801 - over 400 sq.ft 600 sq.ft. 800 sq. f t . 1 ,000 s q . f t . 1,000 sq.ft. Total No. of Respondents (%) 28 (24) 30 (26) 32 (28) 17 (15) 7 (6) 114 TABLE 9 SIZE OF LOT less than 1/4 acre to over 3/4 acre Total 1/4 acre 3/4 acre No. of Respondents (%) 13 (11) 30 (26) 72 (62) 115 CO CTl perhaps due to the disillusionment of the cottager after contending with low levels of services for some period of time. Ownership Patterns and Permanency of Residence Two-thirds of the cottagers i n the region have owned t h e i r cottages for less than 7 years, as Table 10 i l l u s t r a t e s . This s i t -uation i s not unexpected i n l i g h t of the fact that 57 (51 per cent) cottages have been b u i l t within the l a s t 6 years. In addition, of the 42 cottages 10 years of age or over, 26 (62 per cent) were occupied by t h e i r o r i g i n a l owners. The survey showed that 97 (83 per cent) of the cottagers have owned no other cottage p r i o r to obtaining the one they now occupy In addition, 77 (65 per cent) stated they were the f i r s t owners of the cottage they now possessed. These two s t a t i s t i c s , coupled with the fact that 10 of the 18 people who claimed they owned other cot-tages previously, also stated they owned the present cottage f o r 8 years or more suggests that the cottagers are content with t h e i r cottages and locations and have l i t t l e desire to move on to a better cottage area. This observation, however, may be peculiar to the region under study. The study area i s more isolated than many other cottage areas in the province, and i t i s possible that t h i s region caters to the f r o n t i e r fringe cottager. As the region becomes more urbanized, and as more services are made avai l a b l e , the seclusion of the present cottager w i l l be violated and he may leave i n disgust, moving with the TABLE 10 LENGTH OF OWNERSHIP OF COTTAGE 1 yr. 2-3 y r s . 4-5 yrs. 6-7 yrs . 8-9 y r s . 10-11 yrs . 12-13 y r s . 14 & Total over No. of Respondents (%) 10 (9) 26 (23) 23 (20) 18 (16) 12 (10) 8 (7) 7 (6) 11 (9) 115 TABLE 11 LOCATION OF COTTAGER'S PERMANENT RESIDENCE Pemberton L i l l o o e t Bralorne Squamish Greater Vancouver Area Other Total No. of Respondents (%) 2 (1) 5 (4) 10 (9) 6 (5) 81 (70) 12 (10) 116 co CO 39 cottage f r o n t i e r , and leaving the comfort cottager to inhabit his present domain. Int e r e s t i n g l y , 46 per cent of the people surveyed expressed a desire to l i v e permanently i n either t h e i r present or a s i m i l a r cottage when they r e t i r e . I f i n fact these cottagers f u l f i l l t h e i r wishes, the r e s u l t i n g impact on the level of services w i l l be very marked. For recreation and vacation purposes, the cottager may be w i l l i n g , may even prefer, to put up with few services. However, once the cottage becomes a permanent home, using an outdoor p r i v y , getting water by hand, using propane lamps, and driving over poor d i r t roads create intolerable conditions for year-round l i v i n g . More services must then be provided and what was formerly a p a r t i a l l y serviced recreational dwelling becomes a f u l l y serviced permanent dwelling unit. A c t i v i t y Patterns . The purpose of investigating a c t i v i t y patterns i s to examine how often and when the cottage i s used, and to obtain an insight into the cottager's l i f e s t y l e to determine i f i t i s based on an outdoor experience. One of the primary considerations i n an analysis of a c t i v i t y patterns i s the number of v i s i t s that are made to the cottage. I f the cottage i s used frequently there i s a need for higher levels of s e r v i c e — i f used only infrequently f u l l services are not j u s t i f i e d . There is a positive relationship between the number of t r i p s made to the cottage and the s a t i s f a c t i o n with low levels of services. 40 S p e c i f i c a l l y , cottagers who spend only one or two weekends a month at the cottage are more content to travel a poor d i r t road, to have no e l e c t r i c i t y , and to get water by hand from a stream or lake than the cottagers who make more than two t r i p s to the cottage per month (Appendix VI, Table A). The evidence suggests that cottagers making infrequent use of the cottage are w i l l i n g to forego many conveniences. The major factor involved i n the number of t r i p s made to the cottage i s the location of the permanent place of residence (Table 11). The Greater Vancouver area i s the home of 70 per cent of the cottagers. The large majority of cottages are located i n the northern portion of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional D i s t r i c t and Map 1 (Appendix I) i l l u s t r a t e s the distance relationships between these cottages and Vancouver. (Table 11, see page 38) The travel time from Vancouver to the closest cottage area, Levette Lake, i s approximately one and three-quarter hours. Travel time to the farthest cottage area, Gun Lake, i s seven to nine hours. Thus, a round t r i p to Gun Lake u t i l i z e s 16 hours of driving time, which e f f e c t i v e l y cuts one day off any v i s i t . This factor i s a special deterrent to weekend use of the cottage. Conversely, people residing within the Squamish-Lillooet Regional D i s t r i c t make r e l a t i v e l y more t r i p s to the cottage than do cottagers residing i n Vancouver or other external locations (Appendix VI, Table B). As might be expected, the largest number of t r i p s to the cot-tage are made during July and August (Appendix V, Table C; also Table 12). F i f t y - e i g h t per cent of cottagers make a high percentage (61 to to 100 per cent) of t h e i r v i s i t s on weekends and 85 per cent of the cottagers stay at the cottage f o r 2 to 3 days (Tables 13 and 14). This highly peaked weekend demand si t u a t i o n has implications for designing standards for a l l public services and i n p a r t i c u l a r for road f a c i l i t i e s . The Department of Highways i n Ontario thought t h i s l a t t e r problem to be so acute as to warrant the commission of several re-search projects to investigate i t (Wolfe, 1966, 1967). In terms of other services, a community sewer system or a community water system would have to be designed to handle a high summer weekend peak and would l i e i d l e midweek and during the winter. This would create high operational and repair costs, and would r e s u l t i n a generally inequitable economic s i t u a t i o n . The weekend peak i s somewhat of f s e t by the annual vacation period, which, according to Table 15 i s usually or always spent at the cottage for 67 per cent of cottagers. The increasing use of vacation periods for cottage recreation, and the increasing use of the 6 days on, 3 days o f f swing s h i f t pattern of workdays may eventually succeed i n s t a b i l i z i n g the peaked demand. Once the cottager arrives at his cottage destination he occupies himself by engaging i n numerous outdoor a c t i v i t i e s . In the study area, f i s h i n g , swimming, photography, walking for pleasure, t r a i l h i k i n g , and mountain climbing take precedence as the dominant a c t i v -i t i e s (Appendix VI, Table D). This evidence corroborates the claim that the cottage i s a base for outdoor a c t i v i t y . Table 16 supports th i s by i l l u s t r a t i n g that 57 per cent of the question respondents TABLE 12 VEHICLE TRIPS TO COTTAGE PER MONTH May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Rest of Yr. Vehicle Trips to cottage 182 209 280 272 214 161 172 TABLE 13 PERCENTAGE OF WEEKEND TRIPS TO COTTAGE FOR SUMMER 0-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 Total No. of Respondents (%) 24 (23) 4 (3) 16 (15) 27 (26) 34 (32) 105 l\3 TABLE 14 DURATION OF VISITS TO COTTAGE 1 day 2 days 3 days 4 days 5 days or Total over No. of Respondents 44 41 100 TABLE 15 COTTAGERS VACATIONING AT COTTAGE never sometimes usually always . Total No. of Respondents {%) 8 (7) 29 (27) 41 (37) 34 (32) 112 o o spent a maximum of 4 of their waking hours inside the cottage. Assum-ing a normal 8 hour period of sleep, this leaves 12 hours which are spent outside the confines of the cottage. Since half of a 24 hour day is spent in the outdoors, this reduces the need for conveniences such as electricity, running water, and indoor toilets. For 41 cottagers, 1 to 4 hours are spent on land located a distance of over one mile from the cottage. It is difficult to esti-mate the travel mode but i f i t is an automobile there are ramifica-tions for the local road system, which may need to be designed to a higher standard. However, this seems unlikely, since walking for pleasure rates high as an activity, thereby placing l i t t l e emphasis on the automobile. The reason for the cottager's participation in the cottage activity is a very important element in determining the cottage l i f e style. It appears that in this region, the cottage offers f i r s t and foremost a place to relax and to enjoy the isolation and peace and quiet. Judging from the activities engaged in and the hours spent outside the cottage, the relaxation and isolation is of an outdoor form. However, all the items listed in Table 17 have no direct bearing on levels of services with the exception of the "roughing i t " experience. That is to say, the cottager can enjoy isolation, privacy, etc., and s t i l l have a full complement of services, but he cannot "rough i t " i f he is surrounded by conveniences. The latter experience is important for 17 per cent of the total cottage 45 TABLE 16 HOURS SPENT IN LOCATIONS AT COTTAGE AREA Location 1-2 3-4 5-6 over 6 Total Respondents inside cottage 15 34 20 17 86 on l o t 19 25 12 19 75 on beach 36 31 9 5 81 on land within 1 mile radius 52 10 1 1 64 on land over 1 mile radius 27 14 2 0 43 TABLE 17 REASONS FOR GOING TO THE COTTAGE Reasons No. of respondents who ranked each reason (1 or 2) relaxation 48 i s o l a t i o n , peace and quiet 46 get away from i t a l l 27 partake of fresh a i r a c t i v i t i e s 22 sense of "roughing i t " 20 good for children 19 privacy 15 46 population and the provision of high levels of services would completely destroy t h i s concept and eliminate the very foundation of t h e i r cottage experience. I t would be useful at t h i s stage to assess the consistency i n attitude of respondents who valued a sense of "roughing i t " . When asked whether they thought the lack of a water supply system was an important problem, 83 per of the question respondents indicated i t was not. S i m i l a r l y , 87 per cent claimed that the absence of an indoor sewage disposal f a c i l i t y did not create an undue hardship, and 77 per cent f e l t lack of e l e c t r i c a l services were also not a major problem. In addition, 94 per cent thought conveniences such as telephones, radio, and t e l e v i s i o n were very low on the l i s t of p r i o r i t i e s . As additional evidence of t h e i r commitment to t h e i r r u s t i c way of l i f e , these cot-tagers have r e l a t i v e l y fewer services than the cottagers who do not consider the "roughing i t " experience to be important (Table 18). Therefore, the majority of those who claim they wish to "rough i t " a c t u ally do so, and any public policy decision to provide services which detract from this experience would be undesirable to th i s cottager. Socio-economic Characteristics of the Cottager The desires of the cottager, his a c t i v i t y patterns, and the kind of structure he occupies are now known. However, the socio-economic char a c t e r i s t i c s of the cottager have been ignored u n t i l now. TABLE 18 SERVICES BY COTTAGERS WHO "ROUGH IT" E l e c t r i c i ty o O o Water 4. o Sewage o cS1 No. of respond-ents rank-ing "rough-ing i t " as 1-2-3 25 6 4.2 20 11 1.8 27 4 6.7 No. of respond-ents rank-ing "rough-ing i t " as 4-5-6-7 21 15 1.3 16 19 .8 24 11 2.2 48 Forty-eight per cent of cottagers are 41 to 60 years old (Table 19), 53 per cent have 2 to 4 children (Table 20), 53 per cent earn $8,000 to $14,000 a year (Table 21), and 63 per cent work largely i n the white c o l l a r occupations (Table 22). The education they re-ceived ranges considerably, with 39 per cent having some university or trade training compared to 40 per cent who only had some high school (Table 23, page 52). The differences between cottagers of various age, income, and occupation groups i n terms of t h e i r corresponding levels of services have been investigated (Appendix VII, Table A). The Chi-square s t a t i s t i c has been applied to test these relationships. In most cases the differences have approached s t a t i s t i c a l significance at the .05 l e v e l . Nonetheless, some trends are evident and i t i s worthwhile to note them. Relatively more of the older cottagers enjoy e l e c t r i c i t y , pumped water and septic tank.' This confirms the suspicion mentioned previously that with increasing age, lack of indoor plumbing and e l e c t r i c i t y creates a hardship for the cottager. The cottagers earning over $14,000 a year tend to avoid e l e c t r i c i t y and pumped water more so than cottagers earning under $14,000. In reference to sewage disposal, the under $14,000 group has a higher proportion of septic tanks. I t i s also evident, although not as emphatically, that the higher occupation groups opt for gener-a l l y lower levels of e l e c t r i c a l , water, and sewage disposal systems. The " r e t i r e d " category of occupation have the highest levels of TABLE 19 AGE OF COTTAGE OWNERS 21-30 yrs . 31-40 yrs. 41-50 yrs. 51-60 yrs. 61 and over Total No. of Respondents (%) 5 (4) 20 (17) 36 (31) 42 (36) 13 (11) 116 TABLE 20 NO. OF OFFSPRING (UNDER 21) IN COTTAGE FAMILY 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total No. of Respondents (%) 38 (32) 9 (8) 25 (21) 22 (19) 15 (13) 6 (5) 1 (1) 1 (1) 117 TABLE 21 INCOME OF COTTAGE OWNER under over $3,000 $3/7,999 $8/13,999 $14,000 Total No. of Respondents (%) 6 (5) 25 (22) 59 (53) 21 (19) 111 TABLE 22 OCCUPATION OF COTTAGE OWNER No. of Respondents (%) managerial professional & technical 44 (39) sales, c l e r i c a l service transportation primary craftsman labourer 27 (24) 27 (24) re t i r e d 15 (13) Total 113 cn o services for all occupational groups, thereby re-affirming that older cottagers have higher levels of services. If the services that the cottager possesses can be taken as any indication of his personal preferences, i t is clear that differ-ent kinds of people occupy different ends of the spectrum of levels of services. Extrapolating this evidence in terms of planning policy a decision to provide water supply, sewage disposal and electricity in one cottage area and not in another, could serve to effectively segregate cottagers by age, income and occupation. Attitudes Towards Density and Environmental Quality The previous section on levels of services speculated on the basis of limited evidence that cottagers could not relate lack of proper sewage disposal system to lake pollution. This section inves-tigates whether the inability to associate services with density and environmental quality exists generally. As was indicated previously, the lot sizes in the study area are very large, density being approximately one cottage per developed acre. Maps 2-10 (Appendix I) show the location of all the cottages and give a visual impression of the physical density. The perception of density, however, is equally relevant. Table 24 illustrates this factor for the sample respondents. For 100 people (88 per cent) the cottage area is currently at an optimum density. This response provides an insight into the cottager which has thus far been con-cealed. TABLE 23 EDUCATION OF COTTAGE OWNER some high school graduated high school trade training or some university graduated university post graduate Total No. of Respondents (%) 45 (40) 27 (24) 20 (18) 11 (10) 10 (9) 113 TABLE 24 PERCEIVED DENSITY OF COTTAGE AREA under-developed j u s t right over-developed Total No. of Respondents (%) 4 (30 100 (88) 10 (9) 114 r o I t appears that the cottager i s b a s i c a l l y s a t i s f i e d with his cottage experience and does not want any i n t r u s i o n . Therefore, he claims optimum development, which i n turn implies no further devel-opment. At his cottage area, the cottager has a recreational a c t i v i t y which he feels w i l l be impinged upon by the addition of more people. I f t h i s happens to be the case, i t further substantiates the claim that cottaging i s an a c t i v i t y i n which low density, freedom of movement, peace, quiet, and relaxation play an important r o l e . To the cottager more people and higher densities represent c o n f l i c t s with and encroachments upon these attributes of the cottage l i f e s t y l e . The perception of density as opposed to the physical density i s the c r i t i c a l factor since as Maps 2-10 (Appendix I) i l l u s t r a t e , the addition of more cottagers on any lake i n the area would not necessarily increase the number of cottagers per developed acre as there i s ample space for additional cottages to be located on any lake without p h y s i c a l l y crowding a neighbour. There w i l l , however, be an increase i n perceived density with the addition of more cottages on a lake. While many cottagers rank i s o l a t i o n , peace and quiet as the rationale behind the cottaging phenomenon, only a very few own a cottage for privacy (Table 17, page 45). The fact that most cottagers rank privacy low but yet do not want more people, suggests that the cottaging experience i s gregarious to a threshold l e v e l , whereupon more people detract from rather than add to the experience. This i s also implied by Table 16, page 45) which shows that 62 people spend 1 to 4 hours outside the cottage on land within a mile radius. Some of t h i s time i s consumed by fi s h i n g and other a c t i v i t i e s , but presum-ably some of i t i s also spent at the neighbours' where a cool gin and tonic on a hot summer day i s often the stimulus to much social a c t i v i t y and discussion. In general, the sample respondents did not feel environmental quality was severely threatened, as Table 25 indicates. TABLE 25 COTTAGER"S PERCEPTION OF THREAT TO ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (QUESTION 42) severely threatened moderately threatened not threatened at a l l Total Quality of Water 15 59 27 101 Quality of A i r 3 10 73 86 Quality of View and Aesthetics 1 17 70 88 Emphasis has been placed on quality of water which 15 people feel i s being severely threatened. When these 15 responded to question 22, 4 gave a high rank (1-2-3) to improvement of water supply and sewage disposal problems and 10 l i s t e d lake contamination as being one of the three grave problems facing the cottager. Some discrepancy i s evident but not to an extent which upsets the v a l i d i t y of responses. In addition to ranking threats to environmental q u a l i t y , the cottager was asked to rate the environmental cha r a c t e r i s t i c s of his 55 cottage area. Mountains, bodies of water, and the scenic view are the most a t t r a c t i v e features of cottage areas i n the Squamish-Lillooet Regional D i s t r i c t (Table 26). TABLE 26 ATTRACTIVENESS OF SELECTED FEATURES OF COTTAGE AREA Feature Number of Respondents Att r a c t i v e Ordinary Not too At t r a c t i v e woodlands 81 20 3 scenic view 88 8 5 rock outcrops 41 23 17 mountains 94 10 1 bodies of water 91 14 3 It i s s i g n i f i c a n t that the bodies of water, which are one of the highly rated features of the cottage areas, are also considered most threat-ened. Thus, contamination of lakes i s a top p r i o r i t y problem. As mentioned previously, one of our concerns i s to investigate whether the cottager can relate levels of services to density of dev-elopment, and to the cottage l i f e s t y l e . The following l i s t of "additional" comments abstracted from the questionnaire returns strongly suggest that some cottagers are very aware of the interdepen-dences. 56 TABLE 27 SELECTED COMMENTS OF COTTAGERS Sanitary i n s t a l l a t i o n s should be watched. Use of detergents should be discouraged near the lake and people should be educated and encouraged to keep lakes, streams or any other water clean from garbage p o l l u t i o n , broken b o t t l e s , t i n cans, etc. Better highway systems are badly needed (cottager from Gun Lake who l i v e s i n West Vancouver). My main concern i s to prevent p o l l u t i o n and overcrowding. Therefore, most of the so-called "improvements" to the road, power supply, water supply, would add more people and p o l l u t i o n . I f road i s improved, more people would come to the lake and spoil i t and pollute i t more—and taxes would go up. The only real improvement we would l i k e to see i s the road completed between Pemberton and Goldbridge. This i s f i r s t and foremost with B.C. Hydro hookup secondary. Present road access through L i l l o o e t and 70 miles of gravel road i s a strong deterrent to more use of the cabin. Completion of road through Pemberton would reduce travel time and allow normal two day weekend use. Due to low flow through lake, use of detergents and motor-boats—water qua l i t y i s being threatened. Algae st a r t i n g to build up. Fire hazard poses a threat, as area heavily wooded. Future development would possibly threaten aesthetics. I am well s a t i s f i e d with what we have, but would l i k e some of the con-veniences that e l e c t r i c i t y offers and a telephone. We are looking forward to a road being b u i l t that we can take through Pemberton and up through the Hurley Pass. A good road we don't want. We j u s t want to be able to get there. A good road would open the area up too much. We do not want th i s property to be developed any more than i t i s r i g h t now—there are j u s t enough people, more would over-crowd . Our main concern i s to see the day that we could avoid the long and heavy t r a f f i c t r i p up through the canyon and be able to go through from Squamish. Plus a s t r i c t check to see a beautiful area i s not polluted. The road should be finished from Squamish. The B.C. Hydro 57 could extend its service around the lake as i t is less than 2 miles to the l a s t connection. Threatening--overpopulated. Cutting of trees and clearing of land. Pollution of water--by careless campers. As the lake water is the only source of drinking water, this is the most important problem on this lake as i t is now pollution free and we must keep i t that way. The cottage actually belongs to myself and two brothers and my sister. The cottage was built by our parents and has great emotional value to us that far outweighs its actual cash value. This type of value is not mentioned in any way in this questionnaire but is a value that should be considered in relation to summer cottages. We would like to keep our wilderness for ourselves but know c i v i l i z a -tion w i l l move in on better roads some day. Please do something about throw away bottles and high residue detergents. An alternate route or present road in need of immediate repair or no vehicles will be able to climb mountain road. Too many campers and no sewage disposal f a c i l i t i e s , bush land around camping areas highly polluted, lake also used by many for this purpose. Please leave this lovely lake and the surrounding wilderness unsullied. Too many hunters and water skiiers will ruin the aesthetic qualities that we enjoy. I am concerned with the effects of pollution from sewage. Any dis-charge from Birken to D'Arcy would end up in Anderson Lake. As the flow in Gates creek is quite small i t would be quite easy to ruin the whole lake i f raw or semi-treated sewage were to be discharged into i t . There are too many leased properties on this lake, although i t is nice now with just a few built on, i f there were a majority built on, i t would be very crowded. The lake is only h mile across. At present, this lake is only barely accessible—mechanical upkeep and repairs to 4-wheel drive are considerable. But we like i t s inaccessibility be-cause i t ensures privacy. Lack of instructions to some young people regarding the balance of nature and appreciation of irreplaceable aspects in the environment. We would like np_ power, for e l e c t r i c i t y brings too many "comfort campers" and water pollution. Our lot is across the lake—I feel this is to our advantage. 58 Too many conven iences de fea t s the purpose o f owning summer c o t t a g e , i . e . , f o r weekend t r i p s . The t a b l e f u r t h e r con f i rms the n o t i o n t h a t , f o r some c o t t a g e r s a t l e a s t , the co t t age a c t i v i t y o r expe r i ence i s ve ry p r e c i o u s and would be dam-aged by h i ghe r p e r c e i v e d d e n s i t i e s . I t i s noteworthy t h a t some o f the comments unequ ivocab ly s t a t e a d i r e c t o p p o s i t i o n to an i n c r e a s e i n p u b l i c s e r v i c e s . The p r o v i s i o n of t hese s e r v i c e s , t h e n , runs the r i s k o f d e t r a c t i n g from the q u a l i t y of the co t t age r e c r e a t i o n a c t i v i t y and i n r e a l i t y may f o r c e t h i s one group o f c o t t a g e r s to move. However, beh ind the s t a l w a r t f r o n t i e r c o t t a g e r s tands a meeker comfor t c o t t a g e r who can contend w i t h the conven ience o f e l e c t r i c i t y and i ndoo r p l umb ing , and who w i l l f i l l i n the ranks i n the event h i s f o re runne r i s d r i v e n o u t . CHAPTER IV CONCLUSION Discussion of Hypothesis The survey requested the cottager to choose the levels of ser-vices that he currently enjoys from a range of possible levels of services. Subsequently, he was asked to indicate his preferences for services by s i g n i f y i n g whether he was s a t i s f i e d or d i s s a t i s f i e d with what he had. To summarize some of the findings, those people completely s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r e x i s t i n g levels of services outweighed (except in the case of roads) those who were completely d i s s a t i s f i e d (Appendix IV, Table A). This indicates that the cottager i s generally content with the services he presently enjoys. However, for any given service (except sewage disposal), those content with a low level of service are fewer i n number than the total of those having high levels of services plus those d i s s a t i s f i e d with low levels (Table 28). Hence we can conclude that the resulting d i s t r i b u t i o n of cottager's prefer-ences for levels of services i s s l i g h t l y skewed in the d i r e c t i o n of high levels of services. I f we interpret the major hypothesis to mean that given a choice and unlimited resources, most cottagers would elect to i n s t a l l minimal services, then the hypothesis i s disproved. The majority of respondents either have or would prefer to have high levels of TABLE 28 SERVICE PREFERENCES AND EXISTING SERVICES Road E l e c t r i c i t y Water Sewage Disposal Existing Levels of high 56 40 53 32 Services low 60 77 64 84 Preferences for Levels high* 72 59 60 54 of Services low** 44 45 55 61 Those respondents who are completely s a t i s f i e d with a high level of service plus those who think a high level of service could stand improvement, plus those who are t o t a l l y d i s s a t i s f i e d with a high level of service, plus those who are t o t a l l y d i s s a t i s f i e d with a low level of service. Those respondents who are completely s a t i s f i e d with a low level of service plus those who think the low level could stand minor improvements. 61 services (Table 28). On the other hand, i f the levels of services actually u t i l i z e d by most cottagers i s a r e f l e c t i o n of t h e i r prefer-ences after economic and other considerations have been taken into account, then the hypothesis i s v e r i f i e d . Most cottagers actually have low levels of services (Table 28). While the quality of the road system i s beyond the j u r i s d i c t i o n of the cottager, the remaining services can be altered or improved at the sole d i s c r e t i o n of the individual cottager. For example, i f the cottager i s not happy using an outdoor p r i v y , he can i n s t a l l a septic tank, or i f he i s not content with a lack of e l e c t r i c i t y , he can i n s t a l l a portable generating unit. Yet the present study revealed that most cottagers have low levels of services but would prefer higher l e v e l s . This suggests that some form of trade-off i s occurring between the desire for the convenience offered by high levels of services and the actual need for these services, which i s p a r t i a l l y a function of the time spent at the cottage. The cottager evidently feels unwilling to pay the economic costs of r a i s i n g his levels of services for the r e l a t i v e l y short period spent at the second home each year. This conclusion results from an assessment of the cottage l i f e s t y l e , which was found to be characterized by infrequent t r i p s to the cottage, mostly on weekends, with a large proportion of the time spent outdoors. In addition there i s a trend indicating that the more t r i p s made to the cottage, the higher the desire, and presumably the w i l l i n g -ness to pay, for better services. In view of the foregoing discussion, the sub-hypothesis i s v e r i f i e d , since most cottagers have low levels of services because the l i f e s t y l e associated with the cottage i s b a s i c a l l y one of an outdoor experience with a low intensity of use. Public Policy Decisions In the past, governmental authorities have seen l i t t l e need to provide services to cottage areas, with the r e s u l t that the cottager was l e f t to fare largely for himself. Wasteful methods of subdivision of valuable waterfront property and the emerging problems of lake p o l l u t i o n are the consequences of t h i s action. I t i s now evident that governmental authorities must intervene in the process of cottage development. They must decide, in the public i n t e r e s t , what services are to be provided to d i f f e r e n t areas. This study indicates that there i s a range of cottagers with varying preferences for d i f f e r e n t levels of services. I t further reveals that the majority of cottagers, regardless of t h e i r reason for p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the cottage a c t i v i t y , t h e i r l i f e s t y l e , or the services they prefer, expressed a desire to prevent overcrowding of t h e i r cottage area, thereby maintaining a low density. As evidenced by t h e i r comments, some of these cottagers would openly r e s i s t high levels of services since this would a t t r a c t more people and threaten the enjoyment of t h e i r recreational a c t i v i t y . In terms of the strategy outlined in Chapter I, the present s i t u a t i o n would appear to be described by Sections I and II of the matrix. That i s , 96 per cent of a l l cottagers desire to maintain low density. On the other hand, some cottagers prefer higher levels of services and some prefer lower levels of services. The public author-i t y , i n the form of the Regional D i s t r i c t , can now use this knowledge to formulate and enact p o l i c y . S p e c i f i c a l l y , two policy options can be pursued. One policy would be to provide low levels of services to some areas, thereby att r a c t i n g the " f r o n t i e r " cottager. This individual i s l i a b l e to be young, earning a good income, and working in a white c o l l a r occupation The other policy would be to provide high levels of services to p a r t i c u l a r areas, thereby encouraging the "comfort" cottager. However, there are certain "costs" associated with higher levels of services that must be borne by the cottager. One of these i s the "economic cost" and the other i s the "density cost". The cottager must choose which of the two i s more valuable. I f he i s unwilling to bear the economic costs then he must be prepared to accept higher densities which are necessary to of f s e t the monetary expenses incurred by the provision of higher levels of services. In addition, the area having higher levels of services w i l l l i k e l y at some time become a more stable and permanent community, since the 54 per cent of the cottaging population who wishes to r e t i r e i n a summer cottage w i l l need the convenience that the services o f f e r . By using public services, i t i s therefore possible to segregate the cottage population on several soc i a l and economic l e v e l s . This thesis has given an insight into the preferences of the cottager and has shown how the planning process can be used to achieve an optimum between services and density. However, th i s i s only a small part of a much larger task of s t r i v i n g and planning for the optimum i n the t o t a l recreational a c t i v i t y of cottaging, considering other relevant factors. For example, economic and ecological issues warrant some inves-t i g a t i o n i f the problem of public services i s to be equitably resolved. This study has suggested that certain i n t r i n s i c values associated with cottaging are eroded by increased densities of cottage development. Yet there are some economic constraints associated with the provision of services, which may be relaxed only by increasing densities of cottage development. Therefore, the question to be resolved, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n l i g h t of the foregoing discussion on the density-service matrix, involves establishing precisely what levels of services can be economically provided at the "desirable" density of development. This would include consideration of temporary water systems and new forms of package sewage treatment plants which can service small communities. An assess-ment should subsequently be made of the optimum trade-offs possible with respect to density and i n t r i n s i c values. In summary, the c o n f l i c t to be resolved i s that between increasing density to reduce the cost of high levels of services and destroying the values (actual or per-ceived) of a cottage area. Furthermore, even i f the public i s w i l l i n g to disregard economic constraints with respect to density, there are ecological constraints which need to be examined. I t i s well and good that some cottagers want no services and want to "rough i t " but i f there are too many cottagers with inadequate sewage f a c i l i t i e s around an eco l o g i c a l l y delicate lake, disaster i s imminent i f some form of intervention i s not pursued. Therefore, ecological as well as economic trade-offs between services, density and the cottage experience are important. These, then, are areas where more research and investigation i s required. Hopefully, by continued i n t e r e s t , careful scrutiny, and perceptive inquiry, an optimum can be achieved which considers a l l these relevant factors. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, Raymond L. "Problems of Private Land Use for Recreation i n Wisconsin". Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Agriculture, University of Wisconsin, 1959. Baker, W. M. Tourist and Outdoor Recreation Patterns and Prospects i n  the Qu'Appelle Valley and on Lost Mountain Lake. Saskatchewan Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Forestry, ARDA project 8131, 1965. Banks, Harvey 0. "Public F a c i l i t i e s versus Environment". C a l i f o r n i a  One State Conference, San Francisco, October, 1967. Boggs, G. D., and R. McDaniel. Characteristics of Commercial Resorts  and Recreational Travel Patterns i n Southern Ontario, Department of Highways, Report RR 133, Ontario, 1968. Bourke, K. "Lake Simcoe, Explanation and Pattern of Recreational Use". Unpublished B.A. Thesis, Department of Geography, University of Toronto, 1963. Bowman, Joan. "The Recreational and Related Problems of the Winnipeg Beach, Sandy Hook Section of the Lake Winnipeg Shoreline". M.A. Thesis, Department of Geography, University of Manitoba, 1966. Brown, J. E. "Regional D i s t r i c t s i n B r i t i s h Columbia". Municipal  Finance, November, 1968. Campbell, C. K. An Analysis of Shoreland Use and Capability for Cottaging in the Georgia Lowland of B r i t i s h Columbia, ARDA Project 16014, 1967. Crevo, C. C. "Characteristics of Summer Weekend Recreational Travel". Highway Research Record, No. 44, 1963. David, E. J. L. "The Exploding Demand for Recreational Property". Land  Economics, Vol. 45, No. 2, May, 1969. Fine, I. V. and E. E. Werner. "Private Cottages i n Wisconsin". Wiscon- sin Vacation--Recreation Papers, Vol. 4. Madison Wisconsin: Univer-s i t y of Wisconsin, School of Commerce, A p r i l , 1960. 67 Fine, I. V., and R. Tut t l e . Private Seasonal Housing in Wisconsin. Department of Resource Development, State of Wisconsin, 1966. Graham, W. W. Cottage Development i n Rural Areas. ARDA Project 15039, 1967. Graves, C l i f f o r d W. "Implications for Bay Planning". Public F a c i l i t i e s  and U t i l i t i e s In and Around San Francisco Bay. San Francisco Bay Conservation and" Development Commission, June, 1967. Lewis, P. H. Landscape Analysis 1: Lake Superior South Shore Area. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Resource Development, 1963. McClellan, K., and E. A. Medrich. "Outdoor Recreation: Economic Con-sideration f o r Optimal Site Selection and Development". Land  Economics, Vol. 45, No. 2, May, 1969. Ontario A g r i c u l t u r a l College. Some Economic Aspects of Recreation Re- source Uses - Background Studies for Resource Development in the Tweed Forest D i s t r i c t , Ontario, Study #5. Guelph: Department of Agriculture Economics, 1961. Park Planning Branch. A Summary of Cottagers in Duck Mountain Provincial Park. Regina: Saskatchewan Department of Natural Resources, 1969. Porter, P. W. "Recreation on the Shoreline of Lake Sunapee, New Hampshire". Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department of Geography, Syracuse University, 1954. Province of B r i t i s h Columbia. Land Act. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r , 1968. • Municipal Act. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r , 1969. St e e l , E. W. Water Supply and Sewerage. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960. Swain, H. S. "Recent Changes in the Di s t r i b u t i o n of Summer Cottages i n Ontario". Unpublished B.A. Thesis, Geography Department, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1964. Taylor, G. D. "Research in Outdoor Recreation in Private Land". Park  News, Vol. 3, 1965. University of Wisconsin. Cabin Resort Income in Northern Wisconsin. College of Agriculture, B u l l e t i n 576, 1965. United States Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Northern New England  Vacation Home Study 1966, 3 vols. Washington: Department of the In t e r i o r , 1967. 68 United States Bureau of the Census. "Second Homes in the U.S.A." Current Housing Reports, Series H-121, #16, 1969. Van S i c k l e , M. "The F i l l i n g in of Lakeshores with Cottages - Lake Muskoka". Unpublished B.A. Thesis, Department of Geography, Univer-s i t y of Toronto, 1967. i Wolfe, R. I. "About Cottages and Cottagers". Landscape, Vol. 15, No. 1, Autumn, 1965. . "The Geography of Outdoor Recreation: A Dynamic Approach". Geographical Perspectives: Some Northwest Viewpoints. Edited by G. S. Tompkins. Vancouver: Tantalus Research, B r i t i s h Columbia Geographical Series #8, 1967. . "Ontario Summer Resorts i n the Nineteenth Century"; Ontario History, Vol. 54, No. 3, 1962. . Parameters of Recreational Travel in Ontario: A Progress Report. Department of Highways, Report RB 111, Ontario, 1966. _. "Perspective on Outdoor Recreation, A Bibliographic Survey". Geographic Review, Vol. 54, No. 2, A p r i l , 1964. . "Recreational Land Use in Ontario". Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Geography, University of Toronto, 1956. . "Summer Cottagers i n Ontario". Economic Geography, Vol. 27, No. 1, 1951. . A Theory of Recreational Highway T r a f f i c . Department of Highways, Report RR 128, Ontario, 1967. . A Use C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Parks by Analysis of Extremes: Final Report of a Recreational Travel Study. Department of Highways, Report RR 134, Ontario, 1969. . "Wasaga Beach: The Divorce from the Geographic Environment". Canadian Geographer, No. 2, 1952. APPENDICES MAPS 6 9 70 71 72 73 76 SQUAMISH-LILLOOET REGIONAL DISTRICT SUMMER COTTAGE SURVEY-1970 P l e a s e r e a d t h e q u e s t i o n c a r e f u l l y b e f o r e a n s w e r i n g . W h e r e t h e w o r d s " c o t t a g e a r e a " a r e u s e d , t h e y r e f e r n o t t o y o u r s p e c i f i c l o t b u t t o t h e g e n e r a l a r e a i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f y o u r c o t t a g e , i n c l u d i n g o t h e r l o t s a r o u n d t h e l a k e . Is there a cottage occupying your lot? yes no 2. Are you the first owner of this cottage? yes no 3. Have you owned another cottage prior to obtaining this one? yes no 4. How long have you owned your present cottage? -1 yr 8-9 yrs -2-3 yrs 10-11 yrs -4-5 yrs 12-13 yrs -6-7 yrs 14 & over How old is the cottage? -1-3 yrs 10-1 2 yrs -4-6 yrs 13 yrs & over . 7-9 yrs Where is your permanent place of residence? . Pemberton . Lillooet - Bralorne _ Squamish - Greater Van. Area - Other (specify) What is the approximate size of your cottage? _ less than 400 sq. ft. - 400-600 sq. ft. - 601-800 sq. ft. -801-1000 sq. ft. - 1001-1200 sq. ft. -1201-1400 sq. ft. -1401 & over sq. ft. How many people can you comfortably sleep in /our cottage? 2-3 10-11 — 4-5 12-13 — 6-7 14.15 — 8-9 16 & over 9. From the time you bought or completed building the cottage to the present time, which of the following improvements have you made in terms of services or utilities? (Check more than one if necessary.) improved the road access slightly improved the road access considerably improved water supply by digging a well improved water supply by pumping water to the cottage added running water or plumbing to the cottage installed a septic tank hooked up to a community water supply hooked up to a community sewer added a portable power generating unit hooked up to B.C. Hydro installed telephone no improvements made other (specify) 10. Within the next three years, which of the following improvements do you plan to make? (Check more than one if necessary.) improve road access slightly improve road access considerably improve water supply by digging a well improve water supply by pumping water to the cottage add running water or plumbing to the cottage install a septic tank hook up to a community water supply hook up to a community sewer add a portable power generating unit hook up to B.C. Hydro install telephone make no improvements other (specify) 11- In your estimation, what is the current market value of your cottage, excluding the lot. less than $4000 $4000-8000 $8000-12000 $12001-16000 $16001 & over 12. What is the approximate size of your cottage lot? less than 5000 sq. ft. 5000 sq. ft.-7500 sq. ft. 7501-10000 10001-14000 ('/« acre) 14001^8000 C/2 acre) 28001 -40000 (% acre) 40001-50000 (1 acre) over 1 acre 13. Approximately how many trips to the cottage do you make during the following months? Please write number beside month. May June July August September October Rest of Year 14. For the entire summer, what percentage of your trips are weekend visits? 0-20% 61 -80% 21-40% 81-100% 41-60% 15. Do you spend your annual holiday period at the cottage? never sometimes usually always 16. Other than the annual holiday or vacation period, what is the approximate duration of each visit to the cottage? 1 day 2 days 3 days 4 days 5 days or over 17. How many overnight guests would you have at the cottage per month of heaviest usage? less than 3 3-5 12-14 6-8. 15 & over 9-11 18. What is the average length of stay of overnight guests? 1 day 4 days 2 days 5 days & over 3 days 19. How many day guests would you have at the cottage per month of heaviest usage? less than 3 9-11 3-5 12-14 6-8 1J& over 20. Rate each of the following qualities of your cottage area. Check the appropriate rating by using the following scale: 1 - very attractive 2 - attractive 3 - ordinary 4 - not too attractive 5 - very poor woodlands scenic view rock outcrops mountains bodies of water 21. Why do you go to your cottage area? Rank each of the following in order of their importance - 1,2,3, etc. good for children isolation, peace & quiet privacy sense of roughing it & communication with nature relaxation get away from it all partake in fresh air activities 22. If the following items or lack of them are problems in your cottage area which would you like to see improved first? Please rank in order of importance..1,2,3, etc. If the item does not represent a problem leave it blank. tresspassing & vandalism garbage disposal site insects beach area water supply & water system sewage disposal system electrical services conveniences (radio, TV, Tel.) road access lake contamination 23. Throughout the course of the summer, approximately how many times would you engage in the following outdoor recreational activities while at your cottage? pickniking nature study water skiing skin & scuba diving canoeing fishing trail hiking mountain climbing photography swimming . sail ing camping walking for pleasure horseback riding other (specify) 24. Please indicate the average time spent per day for adults (excluding sleeping) in the following locations: (Indicate number of hours.) inside cottage on lot around cottage (excluding beach) on beach/in or on water on land/within 1 mile radius on land/over 1 mile radius 25. Please indicate the average time spent per day for children (excluding sleeping) in the following locations: (Indicate number of hours.) inside cottage on lot around cottage (excluding beach) on beach/in or on water on land/within 1 mile radius on land/over 1 mile radius 26. In terms of road transportation check one of the following which best represents the worst section of road (over mile in length) that it is necessary to travel in order to get to your cottage. 4 wheel drive dirt road poor 2 wheel drive dirt road of 1 lane good 2 wheel drive dirt road of 1 or 2 lanes poorly paved 2 wheel drive road good paved road other (specify) 27. Is the worst section of road within 10 miles of your cottage? yes no 28. To what extent are you satisfied with the road as indicated in question 26? completely satisfied could stand improvement not satisfied at all 29. Check one of the following which best describes your present electrical system? none own portable generating unit communal power generating unit power provided by B.C. Hydro other (specify) 30. To what extent are you satisfied with the electrical system as described above? completely satisfied could stand improvement not satisfied at all 31. Check one of the following which best describes your present water supply system. by hand from a stream by hand from own well by hand from a lake pump from stream to cottage pump from own well to cottage pump from lake to cottage community supply system using mains and a common source other (specify) 32. To what extent are you satisfied with the water supply system as described above? completely satisfied could stand improvement not satisfied at all 33. Check one of the following which best describes your present sewage disposal system? outdoor privy chemical toilet septic tank corrmunal sewage system other (specify) 34. To what extent are you satisfied with the sewage disposal system as described above? completely satisfied could stand improvement not satisfied at all 35. What is your age? 15-20 41-50 21-30 51-60 31-40 61 & over 36. What is the number of children in your family and what are their ages? number age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 37. What is your annual income? under S3000 $3000-5999 $6000-7999 $8000-9999 $10000-11999 $12000-13999 $14000-15999 $16000-17999 $18000-20999 $21000-24999 $25000 & over 41. In your opinion is your cottage area under-developed (too few people) just right overdeveloped (too crowded) 42. To what extent do you think the followint attributes of environment are being threatened in you cottage area? Please use the following scale: 1 - severely threatened 2 - moderately threatened 3 - not threatened at all quality of water quality of air quality of view & aesthetics PLEASE MAKE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS IN THE SPACE BELOW What is your occupation? managerial professional & technical clerical sales service & recreation transport & communications primary craftsman labourer retired other (specify) 39. Check the highest level of education that you achieved. elementary school some high school —graduated high school some university or trade training at college graduated university post graduate 40. When you retire do you hope to live permanently in this or another similar cottage? ^ e s Thank you very much for completing the questionnaire. o APPENDIX I I I RESPONSES TO FIRST AND SECOND MAILINGS 1st Mailing Respondents 2nd Mailing Total 1st Mailing Respondents 2nd Mailing Total TABLE A INCOME BY RESPONDENTS Less than $8,000 $8,000-13,999 $14,000 and over Total 32 62 22 116 7 17 7 31 39 79 29 147 Chi-square = .27 TABLE B OCCUPATION BY RESPONDENTS professional and managerial c l e r i c a l sales, service transportation other Total 46 29 49 119 13 7 12 32 59 36 56 151 Chi-square = .09 TABLE C SATISFACTION WITH SEWAGE SYSTEM BY RESPONDENTS Respondents Respondents completely s a t i s f i e d could stand improvement not at a l l s a t i s f i e d Total 1st Mailing 52 38 26 116 2nd Mailing 13 11 8 32 Total 65 49 34 148 Chi-square = .20 TABLE D RESIDENCE BY RESPONDENTS Residence within Regional D i s t r i c t outside Regional D i s t r i c t Total 1st Mailing 25 103 128 2nd Mailing 6 26 32 Total 31 129 160 Chi-square = .01 CO 1st Mailing Respondents 2nd Mailing Total TABLE E VALUE OF COTTAGE BY RESPONDENTS Value less than $4,000- over Total $4,000 8,000 $8,000 61 40 15 116 14 14 3 31 75 54 18 147 Chi-dquare = 1.3 APPENDIX IV LEVELS OF SERVICES TABLE A ROAD SYSTEM SERVICES COTTAGER SATISFACTION WITH EXISTING SERVICES Satisfaction completely s a t i s f i e d could stand improvement not s a t i s f i e d at a l l r a t i o s a t i s f i e d to non-satisfied Total 4 wheel drive road 3 4 6 .5 13 poor d i r t road 9 28 10 .9 47 good d i r t road 9 37 6. 1.5 52 paved road 1 3 0 4. Total 22 72 22 1.0 116 Chi-: iquare = 6.23 no e l e c t r i c i t y 38 7 20 1.9 65 e l e c t r i c i t y 18 17 4 4.5 39 Total 56 24 24 2.3 104 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM Chi-square = 16.51* * = s i g n i f i c a n t at .01 level TABLE A (continued) Satisfaction completely s a t i s f i e d could stand improvement not s a t i s f i e d at a l l r a t i o s a t i s f i e d to non-satisfied Total WATER by hand 26 29 9 2.9 64 SYSTEM pumped or gravity feed 22 27 2 11.0 51 Total 48 56 11 4.4 115 Chi-: iquare = 3.43 SEWAGE DISPOSAL outdoor privy or chemical t o i l e t 32 29 23 1.4 84 SYSTEM septic tank 21 10 0 31 Total 53 39 23 2.3 115 Chi-square = 12.84* * = s i g n i f i c a n t at .01 level TABLE B RELATIONSHIP OF ELECTRICAL SYSTEM TO WATER SUPPLY AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM E l e c t r i c a l System e l e c t r i c i t y no e l e c t r i c i t y Total WATER by hand 7 57 64 SYSTEM pumped or gravity feed 33 20 53 Total 40 77 117 Chi-: iquare = 31.70* SEWAGE DISPOSAL outdoor privy or chemical t o i l e t 18 66 84 SYSTEM septic tank 22 10 32 Total 40 76 116 Chi-square = 20.92* * s i g n i f i c a n t at .01 level TABLE C RELATIONSHIP OF WATER SYSTEM TO SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM WATER SYSTEM Sewage System outdoor privy or chemical t o i l e t septic tank Total by hand 59 4 53 pumped 25 28 53 Total 84 32 116 Chi-square = 28.84 ( s i g n i f i c a n t at .01 level) CO TABLE D SATISFACTION WITH SERVICES AND COTTAGERS' DESIRES TO IMPROVE THEM Satisfaction (questions 28, 30, 32, 34) completely could stand not s a t i s f i e d s a t i s f i e d improvement at a l l road 3 12 15 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS GIVING HIGH PRIORITY (1-2-3) TO IMPROVE- e l e c t r i c i t y 2 n 14 MENT OF SERVICE (question 22) water 2 9 5 sewage disposal 1 7 7 . APPENDIX V PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF COTTAGES TABLE A PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS BY SERVICES TO COTTAGE Sewage F a c i l i t y septic outdoor privy tank or chemical t o i l e t Water Supply pumped by hand E l e c t r i c a l System e l e c t r i c i t y no e l e c t r i c i t y 1-3 yr s . AGE 4-6 yrs. COTTAGE 7-12 yrs. 13 yrs. & over Chi-square 4 32 7 13 7 13 14 22 10 27 9 11 11 9 23 13 10 27 3 17 9 11 16 20 8.07* 10.6* 6.88 less than S I Z E 400 sq. f t . OF 400-600 sq.ft. COTTAGE c n , o n n „ 601-800 sq. f t . over 800 sq.ft. 5 22 5 25 9 23 13 11 6 22 10 20 18 14 19 5 3 25 5 25 17 15 14 10 Chi-square 11.48** 20.68** 22.26** * s i g n i f i c a n t at .05 level ** s i g n i f i c a n t at .01 level TABLE A (continued) Sewage F a c i l i t y Water Supply E l e c t r i c a l System septic outdoor privy pumped by hand e l e c t r i c i t y no tank or chemical e l e c t r i c i t y t o i l e t less than SIZE 1/4 acre ^ 1/4-3/4 acre over 3/4 acre Chi-square 5 7 7 23 20 52 5 8 8 22 40 32 1.43 7.46 less than MARKET $4,000 VALUE (EX- J 4 8 0 0 Q CLUDING H-8,000 LOT) over $8,000 9 52 14 25 9 5 21 41 19 20 13 1 12 50 16 23 11 3 Chi-square 15.63** 16.6** 19.20** * s i g n i f i c a n t at .05 level ** s i g n i f i c a n t at .01 level APPENDIX VI ACTIVITY PATTERNS TABLE A TRIPS TO COTTAGE BY SATISFACTION WITH SERVICES (Trips for Month of July only) 1-2 Trips 3 Trips or Over completely not r a t i o of completely not r a t i o of s a t i s f i e d s a t i s f i e d s a t i s . t o s a t i s f i e d s a t i s f i e d s a t i s , to j at a l l non-satis at a l l non-satis. ROAD Poor 13 11 1.2 2 4 .5 Good 1 2 .5 1 4 .25 WATER By hand 15 5 3.0 7 4 1.7 Pumped 9 0 9/0 11 2 5.5 SEWAGE Outdoor privy 13 15 .8 11 6 1.8 Septic tank 10 0 10/0 9 0 9/0 ELECTRICITY No e l e c t r i c i t 19 9 2.1 10 9 1.1 E l e c t r i c i t y 10 3 3.3 7 1 7.0 NOTE - Chi-square s t a t i s t i c has not been used since many expected c e l l frequencies are less than 5. However, the r a t i o of s a t i s f a c t i o n to non-satisfaction f o r cottages getting water by hand i s larger for those making 1 or 2 t r i p s than for those making more than 2 t r i p s . A similar trend holds for poor roads and no e l e c t r i c i t y but not for the outdoor sewage f a c i l i t y . TABLE B TRIPS TO COTTAGE BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE (Trips for July only) Vancouver and other external locations Within Squamish-L i l l o o e t Regional D i s t r i c t Total Over 3 t r i p s 27 14 41 1-2 Trips 57 2 59 Total 84 16 100 Chi-square = 16.81 ( s i g n i f i c a n t at .01 level) 8 9 T A B L E C T R I P S TO C O T T A G E BY MONTH N o . o f T r i p s M o n t h 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 & o v e r T O T A L v e h i c l e t r i p s M a y 4 8 2 6 2 7 0 1 6 182 J u n e 31 2 8 13 7 0 1 6 2 0 9 J u l y 2 8 3 2 10 19 0 2 10 2 8 0 A u g u s t 31 3 0 10 17 0 1 1 1 2 7 2 S e p t e m b e r 3 5 3 2 7 8 0 1 8 2 1 4 O c t o b e r 4 3 21 6 4 0 0 6 161 R e s t o f Y e a r 17 10 6 7 1 7 6 172 90 TABLE D FREQUENCY OF PARTICIPATION IN SELECTED ACTIVITIES Frequency of P a r t i c i p a t i o n 1-6 Times 7-12 13-18 19-24 25 & over F i s h i n g 16 31 8 16 21 Swimmi ng 12 19 2 15 26 Photography 17 18 3 4 4 Tra i1 Hi k ing 33 16 2 3 3 Walking f o r P l easure 14 18 3 5 16 Nature Study 15 4 1 2 6 ACTIVITIES Water Ski ing 14 8 1 2 4 ENGAGED P i c k n i c k i n g 31 7 2 0 0 IN Canoeing 4 1 1 3 6 Mountain C1imbing 31 1 0 0 5 Sa i 1 i ng 3 1 0 3 2 Scuba D i v i n g 4 3 0 0 1 Horseback R i d i n g 13 2 0 0 3 Camp i ng 6 0 0 0 0 Other 3 2 0 0 4 APPENDIX VII SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS TABLE A SERVICES BY AGE, INCOME, AND OCCUPATION Se r v i c e s E l e c t r i c a l System Water System Sewaae Svstem no e l e c -t r i c i t y e l e c -t r i c i t y r a t i o by Hand pumped r a t i o outdoor p r i v y or chemica1 t o i 1 et sept i c tank r a t i o A G E 21-40 41-50 51-60 over 60 Chl-sauare 21 23 25 7 5.27 4 13 17 6 5.2 1.7 1.5 1.2 18 19 22 4 6.15 7 17 20 9 2.6 1.1 1.1 .44 23 26 26 8 7.19 • 2 10 15 5 1 1.5 2.6 1.7 1.6 1 N C 0 Under $8,000 $8,000 - $14,000 Over $14,000 20 36 18 II 23 3 1.8 1 .6 6.0 20 27 '5 II 32 6 1.8 .8 2.5 22 44 15 8 15 6 2.7 2.9 2.5 M E Chi-square 4.34 5.45 .08 0 C C U P A T I Managerial and P r o f e s s i o n a l C l e r i c a l , Sales S e r v i c e , T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Primary, Craftsman, Labourer Ret i red 33 19 19 8 1 1 8 8 7 3.0 2.4 2.4 I.I 29 14 17 7 15 13 10 8 1.9 1.1 1.7 .9 36 22 20 7 8 5 6 8 4.5 4.4 3.3 .9 0 N Chi-square 2.21 2.14 7.15 Note: Chi-square s t a t i s t i c i s i n s i g n i f i c a n t at .05 level i n a l l cases but trends are nonetheless d i s c e r n i b l e by observing the r a t i o s . 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0104148/manifest

Comment

Related Items