Surface Mining in Van Buren County, Iowa: History and Consequences
A thesis presented to
the faculty of
the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University
In partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
Master of Arts
Phillip J. Wilson
June 2012
© 2012 Phillip J. Wilson. All Rights Reserved.
2
This thesis titled
Surface Mining in Van Buren County, Iowa: History and Consequences
by
PHILLIP J. WILSON
has been approved for
the Department of Geography
and the College of Arts and Sciences by
Geoffrey L. Buckley
Associate Professor of Geography
Howard Dewald
Interim Dean, College of Arts and Sciences
3
ABSTRACT
WILSON, PHILLIP J., M.A., June 2012, Geography
Surface Mining in Van Buren County, Iowa: History and Consequences
Director of Thesis: Geoffrey L. Buckley
Surface mining of agricultural lands in Iowa began shortly after fundamental
changes in farm policies, which occurred under the New Deal. This research examines
how changes in farm policy and the volatile farm economy may have influenced farmers
in Van Buren County to surface mine their land. This research was conducted by
collecting archival data and conducting supplemental semi structured interviews.
Although a direct link could not be found between changes in farm policy and the surface
mining of agricultural lands, there does appear to be a correlation. The unpredictability
of the farm economy encouraged farmers to seek other sources of income from their
property. The consequences of these land use decisions are still visible on the landscape
today.
Keywords: Strip mining, coal, Van Buren County, farm policy, Agricultural Adjustment
Acts, Great Depression
Approved: _____________________________________________________________
Geoffrey L. Buckley
Associate Professor of Geography
4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First, I would like to thank my graduate advisor, Geoff Buckley for all of his help
and guidance throughout the research and writing process. Additionally, I would like to
thank Tim Anderson and Brad Jokisch for serving on my graduate committee and
providing me with great historical resources for my thesis.
Second, I would like to thank all of my coworkers at the Mines and Minerals
Bureau and the Van Buren County Soil and Water Conservation District. Without these
wonderful employment opportunities I would not have had such an interesting thesis
topic or the valuable work experience in abandoned mine land reclamation. Special
thanks to T.J. Mathis for giving me the opportunity to work in Van Buren County in the
summer of 2010. Additionally, I’d like to thank Todd Coffelt for bringing me into the
Mines and Minerals Bureau for the AMLIS Geodatabase project in the summer of 2011.
Both jobs were very helpful to my research and wonderful experiences.
Third, I would like to thank Mike Miller at the Keosauqua Public Library, Lisa
Plecker at the Van Buren County Auditor and Mary Howes at Iowa Geological Survey
for helping with the research process. Without your help I would not have been able to
gather such great information. I would also like to acknowledge Andy Reddick for
giving his input along the way and Cecil Thomas for sharing his experience working in
the coal mine.
Finally, I would like to thank all of my friends and family who supported me in
my graduate studies. Special thanks to my family for coming out and visiting me, all the
way in Ohio. I would like to thank Melissa Menerey and Marina Islas for being such
5
great roommates. Also thanks to Jenny Bruss, and my friends at University of Northern
Iowa for their support in preparing for graduate school. And finally thanks to all of my
friends from Ohio University, Meghan Rodier, Mia De Nardi, Michelle Kozlowski,
Melissa Menerey, Marina Islas, Alek Krautmann, David Adjuik and Kevin Blank. We
shared some long days in the office beside the coffee pot.
6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... 3
Acknowledgments............................................................................................................... 4
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... 8
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... 9
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methods ............................................................................... 10
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 10
Data and Methods ......................................................................................................... 14
Research Questions ................................................................................................... 14
Methods..................................................................................................................... 15
Organization.................................................................................................................. 17
Chapter 2: History and Background ................................................................................ 19
History and Background ............................................................................................... 19
Early History of Van Buren County ......................................................................... 19
Agricultural Establishment ....................................................................................... 20
Golden Age of American Agricultural was Short Lived .......................................... 22
Herbert Hoover and the Farm Economy ................................................................... 24
The Great Depression and the Farm Economy ......................................................... 25
The Agricultural Adjustment Acts ............................................................................ 28
Iowa Coal .................................................................................................................. 30
Surface Mining.......................................................................................................... 31
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 36
Chapter 3: The Great Depression in Van Buren County ................................................. 38
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 38
The Onset of the Depression ..................................................................................... 38
A New Deal for Farmers ........................................................................................... 41
Land Use Requirements ............................................................................................ 45
Alternative Land Uses ............................................................................................... 46
Other New Deal Policies in the County .................................................................... 47
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 48
Chapter 4: The Development of Surface Mining in Van Buren County ......................... 50
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 50
Early Surface Mines .................................................................................................. 50
Hamlin Brothers Coal Company ............................................................................... 55
Later Surface Mines .................................................................................................. 58
Benefits of Surface Mining ....................................................................................... 59
Consequences of Surface Mining ............................................................................. 59
Regulation of Surface Mining ................................................................................... 60
Abandoned Mine Site Pollution ................................................................................ 61
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 65
Chapter 5: Discussion ...................................................................................................... 67
7
References Cited ............................................................................................................... 73
Appendix A: Surveyed Abandoned Mine Site.................................................................. 78
8
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: Early Surface Mine Operators ..........................................................................57
Table 2: Abandon Mine Site Soil Samples .....................................................................63
Table 3: Abandon Mine Site Water Samples ..................................................................64
9
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1: Van Buren County Iowa ..................................................................................13
Figure 2: Mine Sites in Van Buren County ....................................................................14
Figure 3: Average Price per Bushel of Corn Sold in Iowa .............................................26
Figure 4: Average Price per Bushel of Hogs Sold in Iowa .............................................26
Figure 5: Prices Received and Prices Paid by Farmers...................................................28
Figure 6: Early Example of a Stripping Shovel ..............................................................33
Figure 7: The Surface Mining of Agricultural Land .......................................................35
Figure 8: The Acidity of Surface Mined Land by State..................................................35
Figure 9: An Abandoned Surface Mine in Van Buren County .......................................36
Figure 10: The Production and Prices of Manufactured and Agricultural Goods ..........42
Figure 11: A Public Land Sale Advertisement ...............................................................43
Figure 12: The State Mine Report of 1938 ....................................................................54
Figure 13: A Walking Dragline Operating Image ..........................................................57
Figure 14: Hamlin Brothers Coal Company Advertisements .........................................58
Figure 15: A Stream Polluted from Acid Mine Drainage ...............................................65
Figure 16: Land Use Conflicts Between Agriculture and Surface Mining .....................72
10
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND METHODS
Introduction
Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries the United States relied heavily on coal to
fuel its factories and supply its transportation network. In many Midwestern states
mining and agriculture occurred in close proximity. As labor costs increased the mining
industry mechanized and surface mining, which required fewer workers, emerged as an
increasingly popular option for coal operators. In some locations, surface mining
competed directly with agriculture. In general, agricultural land that underwent surface
mining was irreversibly damaged as fertile topsoil was inverted and buried under piles of
rock and subsoil. After land was surface-mined it could no longer serve any agricultural
purpose.
The state of the agricultural economy in the Midwest during the 1920s and 1930s
was a disaster as demand for commodity crops, which peaked during World War I,
declined drastically after the war and remained low through the Great Depression (Fish,
1991). Mechanization and improved agricultural practices, which increased farm
productivity and crop yields, only drove prices down further. As the stock market
collapsed in 1929 and the credit markets tightened, many farmers began defaulting on
their loans, and with commodity prices remaining low, debts incurred during times of
high prices simply could not be afforded. As a result many farmers were forced into
foreclosure, turning the land back to the bank (Dieterich, 1940; Lutterell, 1989; Phillips,
2007).
11
Throughout the 1920s as the farm markets rose and fell the federal government
offered little effective support to failing farmers. Eventually, with the passage of the
Agricultural Adjustment Acts (AAA) in 1933, commodity price supports were
reestablished at a level which arguably could support rural farmers. Under these policies
the federal government guaranteed minimum crop prices as long as farmers cut
production to bring supply back in line with demand and regulate market values.
Participation in this program was optional but most farmers were forced to accept acreage
reductions to increase farm incomes. Other farm policies encouraged the retirement of
marginal lands.
Iowa fared no better than other rural states during the Great Depression and many
years of agricultural poverty. At the time, Iowa was a rural state with an economy
dominated by agriculture. After surviving the post WWI farm crisis this sector of the
economy was devastated by the Great Depression – a low point in the history of
American agriculture when many farmers saw their incomes cut by 60% (Saloutus, 1955;
USDA, 1984). In places like Van Buren County, in southeastern Iowa, where the land is
hilly and in many places not ideal for agriculture, the Great Depression was particularly
devastating, as many of these counties had not been able to take full advantage of the
prosperous golden years prior to WWI.
One geologic and economic advantage for the region – and all of the Des Moines
River Valley – was the presence of coal. The history of coal mining in Van Buren
County dates back to 1840 when the county was first settled (State Historical Society of
Iowa, 1947; Schwieder, 1983) (Figure 1). From the 1920s through the 1940s, when farm
12
prices were low, farmers had few economic options and with required reductions the
proportion of un-cropped land was likely high. One option available to farmers in search
of additional income during the economic crisis was surface mining for coal. Beginning
in the 1930s surface mining was practiced extensively on farmland in Van Buren County
(See Figure 2). Leasing mineral rights to a coal operator may have been a profitable
endeavor for farmers who had land available for mining (Drake et al., 1981). The main
drawback to mining was that all future agricultural potential would be lost because
surface mining destroyed the soil. The need to increase income in the short term while
maintaining agricultural productivity in the long term forced many farmers to make
difficult decisions. Although the overall economic picture for the Midwest is welldocumented, it is unclear how agricultural policies at the federal level influenced the
decisions farmers made in areas like Van Buren County where coal deposits were located
close to the surface. This research will explore the reasons why some farmers chose to
surface mine for coal on agricultural land in Van Buren County and how this legacy
manifests itself today in Van Buren County. I argue that some farmers chose to surface
mine on their land to increase income during the volatile agricultural economy of the
1920s – 1940s. Further I will show how federal policies had the unintended consequence
of making farmland available for surface mining by requiring it be taken out of
agricultural production.
13
Figure 1: Van Buren County Iowa (ESRI, 2005)
14
Figure 2: Mine Sites in Van Buren County.
Data and Methods
Research Questions
Four research questions guide this research. First, what economic factors led to
the development of surface mining in Van Buren County? The focus of this question is
on the incentives farmers had to surface mine their land or lease mineral rights to their
land. Second, how did government farm policies influence farmers’ decisions to surface
mine? This question seeks to determine what unintentional consequences may have
resulted from the new production control policies and if they increased the surface
15
mining of agricultural land. A third, did the overall economic uncertainty of the period
encourage farmers to secure other sources of income such as surfaced-mined coal? And
finally, how do these past land use decisions affect the environment today?
Van Buren County was selected as a study area for several reasons. First, I
documented and inventoried abandoned surface mine sites for the Office of Surface
Mining and Mines and Minerals Bureau (MMB) (See Appendix A). This experience
afforded me access to landownership records, landowner contacts, historical documents
as well as GIS data and soil and water sample results from the mines sites I documented
in 2010. Second, because Van Buren County was one of the first counties to be settled in
Iowa the Genealogical Society maintains extensive family records and other documents
on the county dating back to its 1840s settlement. Third, surface mining of coal appears
to have been initiated in the county at a time of turmoil in the agricultural economy, the
1930s, and to have ended by the 1960s. This short time period makes Van Buren County
unique in comparison to other counties in Iowa which were actively mined for many
more years.
Methods
To reconstruct the events of the past, contemporary newspapers, state mine
inspector reports, state records, publicly-filed contracts, and other archival data were
consulted. Newspaper data were collected for the period 1928 to 1945. Both the
Republican-Record and the Keosauqua Republican were examined because they provide
the best recorded history of the county on a weekly basis. The time period was selected
because reports indicate that surface mining began in 1932 or 1933. In addition to
16
newspapers, obituaries, documents, and census records were obtained from the Van
Buren County Genealogical Society. Digital records of all documented abandoned and
reclamation projects, as well as soil and water sample test results were obtained from the
(MMB) of Iowa in Des Moines. The MMB is responsible for the regulation of active
mining operations within the state of Iowa and reclamation of abandoned surface mine
sites. Their data, therefore, represent the best currently known information about each
site. The record of land ownership for all mine sites was determined at the Van Buren
County Assessor’s Office. The County Assessor is responsible for maintaining land
transaction records. Ownership records for all mine sites were documented to determine
who owned or leased the property at the time of mining. All available mineral leases
which were filed on the public record were obtained from the Van Buren County
Recorder. These leases contain lessee, lessor, royalty, and other contract details. Finally,
state mine inspector reports, which were completed on a biannual basis, were obtained
from the Iowa Geological Survey beginning with the year of the first active surface mine.
To supplement archival data semi-structured open-ended interviews were
conducted with four individuals who possess knowledge of the surface mining which
occurred in the county. Three interview participants are lifelong members of Van Buren
County and the fourth participant is a historian specializing on the county. One interview
participant worked on a surface mine site during World War II and had personal
knowledge of the landowner and mine operator. The combination of direct participation
in mining and knowledge of county history provides an informed perspective of mining
in the county.
17
Field data was collected June - September and December 2011. The archival data
were acquired from the Van Buren Genealogical Society in the Keosauqua Public Library
and the Van Buren County Court House. Interviews were conducted at the private
residences of the interview subjects in Van Buren County.
Data analysis began in June 2011. Document analysis was performed on the
newspapers selected from the microfilm. Newspaper articles were reviewed and
summarized in a Microsoft Word document. Content was divided between miningrelated news, agricultural and economic news, and political cartoons and advertisements.
Other documents from the archives were reviewed and organized into folders.
Interview transcription was completed using Digital Voice Editor Software.
Recorded interviews were transferred from the tape recorder to Digital Voice Editor
Software and transcribed into a Microsoft Word document. Transcribed interviews were
matched up with notes or documents referencing the same mine site locations and field
notes to add context to the conversation.
Organization
The thesis is divided into five chapters. In Chapter Two, I review the history of
the county, the agricultural economy, and the coal industry between 1910 and 1940.
More specifically, it includes a comprehensive history of Van Buren County beginning
with its settlement in 1833, the development of the agricultural establishment and
government price supports, the coal industry in the United States and Iowa, and the Great
Depression and its effect on Iowa’s farmers. Chapter Three focuses on the rural economy
during the Great Depression and the government policies implemented within the county
18
during these tough times. Chapter Four examines the history of surface mining in the
county and profiles the farmers who elected to have their land mined. In Chapter Five I
discuss the reasons why farmers chose to surface mine their land and how government
policies may have factored into the decision-making process. This chapter also provides
a brief summary of the thesis.
19
CHAPTER 2: HISTORY AND BACKGROUND
History and Background
Early History of Van Buren County
The first legal settlement in Iowa was established in 1833 following the short
Black Hawk War of 1832. Settled as part of the Wisconsin Territory before becoming
its own territory in 1838, Iowa was settled primarily for its agricultural lands which were
sold by the government for less than $1.25 per acre (Keosauqua Republican; Western
Historical Company, 1878). The land was quickly divided up and sold to settlers and in
1846 Iowa became a State. According to the federal census of 1850, the population of
Iowa was 192,214, with 12,270 living in Van Buren County (U.S. Bureau of the Census,
1850). Shortly thereafter railroads were introduced to the state In June of 1857 the
Keokuk, Ft. Des Moines and Minnesota Railway Company (K.D.M.) reached
Farmington, Iowa, and within a month regular service through eastern Van Buren County
was available (Lanman, 1989). Van Buren County continued to grow until 1870 when its
population peaked at 17,672 residents (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1870). The county
never developed an urban area and the population of the largest town, Farmington,
peaked at 1,342 residents in 1905 (Reddick, 1988). The county’s economy has always
been dominated by agriculture.
Soon after settlement, coal was reported by Lieutenant Albert Lea, who was
conducting a survey for the U.S. Army (Schwieder, 1983; State Historical Society of
Iowa, 1947). By the time Iowa became its own territory several small mines were
operating in Van Buren County (Schwieder, 1983; State Historical Society of Iowa,
20
1947).
By 1867, railroads had reached Nebraska and were pushing westward.
Railroads, which at the time used steam engines, relied heavily on coal (Heusinkveld,
1995; Iowa Geological Survey, 1930; Schwieder, 1983). Railroads often owned their
own mines (known as captive mines) or at a minimum purchased large quantities from
private mines (Heusinkveld, 1995; Schwieder, 2003). The K.D.M. railway was no
different and sometime in the 1860s installed a switch to connect the railroad directly to
the New York Coal Company Mine in the hills above Farmington (Lees and Beyer,
1908).
By 1890, coal mining was the second biggest industry in the state (Heusinkveld,
1995; Schwieder, 1983). In 1917, coal production in Iowa peaked when 18,000
underground coal miners produced over 9 million tons of coal (State Historical Society of
Iowa, 1947; Stolp, 1976). Throughout the 1900s increasing interstate competition from
neighboring states began to capture the market and reduce the demand for Iowa coal. As
demand slumped industry production began to decline. Out of this decline came surface
mining, a new more efficient mining technique, which continued in Iowa for many years
and soon brought mining into direct land use conflicts with agriculture.
Agricultural Establishment
Prior to the 1910s agricultural production was relatively small scale, with farmers
owning and planting small tracts of land without the benefit of mechanization or
government support. This began to change with the beginning of WWI in Europe and the
passage of a series of policies which encouraged greater agricultural production in what
became known as the Agricultural Establishment. These policies were successful at
21
scaling up production, but without strong control over the market farming remained a
volatile occupation for many years to come.
Agriculture has always been the most important sector of Iowa’s economy,
especially in such rural counties as Van Buren. Farming was always a difficult
occupation to survive in, with average farm income consistently lower than that of urban
workers of the time period (Phillips, 2007; Shideler, 1976). Beyond low household
incomes, farmers were also subject to the rise and fall of annual commodity prices.
Because each farmer exerted little control over the market they therefore had little control
over their income (Luttrell, 1989). These uncertainties thus lead to a continual inflow
and out flow of people in the agriculture sector (Browne, 2001).
In response to the continued failures of many in the agricultural community,
beginning around 1913 the federal government began passing legislation to stabilize
agricultural markets (Browne, 2001; Shideler, 1976). The Federal Reserve Banking Act
of 1913 offered more flexible banking for farmers: the Smith-Lever Act of 1914
established extension services through the land grant universities; the Standards Act of
1914 protected farmers from unfair trading practices; the Farm Loan Act of 1916 made
available long-term credit for the acquisition of real estate; and the Warehousing Act of
1916 made credit available to farmers choosing to warehouse grains (Browne, 2001;
Luttrell, 1989; Shideler, 1976). Collectively, these policies were very effective at
increasing agricultural land in production, total farm commodity output, and the price of
farmland. From 1900-1920 the number of acres in production and total crop production
increased nearly 20%, while farm prices increased 70% (Fox, 1962; Shideler, 1976).
22
Demand for this food was driven by European nations who were experiencing food
shortages during WWI (Blanpied, 1984; Phillips, 2007; Shideler, 1976).
This extra agricultural production often came at the expense of American farmers.
In order to produce more and take advantage of higher commodity prices, many farmers
took on large amounts of debt, as was encouraged by many of Agricultural Establishment
programs. From 1910-1920 for example, average farm debt grew 131.9% (Browne,
2001; Phillips, 2007; Shideler, 1976). The ability of farmers to pay these debts depended
on farm prices remaining high; meanwhile farm prices could only remain high if demand
for farm products continued. This relationship between American farmers and European
countries quickly ended with the allied victory in Europe.
Golden Age of American Agriculture was Short Lived
The years preceding WWI were a time of extraordinary growth for both the
agriculture and coal industries in Iowa. The period 1910-1914, in particular, was dubbed
“the golden age of American agriculture.” During this time, agrnhjicultural prices
increased tremendously (Blanpied, 1984). As WWI raged in Europe all commodity
futures trading was suspended and government-issued prices were implemented
(Peterson, 1980). The U.S., first as a neutral party and then as an allied power during the
war, began exporting large amounts of commodity crops to its European allies. By the
end of the war 16% of American farm products were being exported to Europe at
government guaranteed prices (Blanpied, 1984; Shideler, 1976). The future of
agriculture looked bright when WWI ended in November 1918. In March of 1919, the
U.S. government ceased issuing new credit to its European allies (Shideler, 1976). With
23
the sudden lack of credit from the U.S., European demand for American farm products
began to fall as many war-torn nations could not afford to purchase them. Commodity
futures markets reopened in June of 1920 and government price guarantees were
disbanded (Peterson, 1980; Phillips, 2007). With European nations unable to afford
American farm products and government pricing ending, the market value of farm
products collapsed. From July to December farm futures prices fell 57% and remained
low entering 1921 (Peterson, 1980). As commodity prices fell, farmers responded by
increasing the area under cultivation, which further saturated the market (Blanpied, 1984;
Dieterich, 1940; Lutterell, 1989). By May 1921 average commodity prices had fallen
66% from their end-of-war prices (Shideler, 1987). In Iowa, the nation’s leader in corn
production, prices fell from $1.20 per bushel in 1919 to just 30¢ in 1921 (Dieterich,
1940). This drastic fall in commodity prices forced many farmers to withhold grains
from the markets as they waited for better prices or a federal intervention (Shideler,
1987). Unfortunately for the farmers no federal help came. The Fed instead chose to
tighten credit, drying up loans previously available through small banks. With no
available credit and low crop prices, farmers encountered difficulties repaying loans, and
some lost their farms to foreclosure (Dieterich, 1940; Gaddis, 2005; Lutterell, 1989;
Phillips; 2007). As foreclosures accelerated, land values plummeted and banks could not
recoup their losses (Clingerman, 1989; Phillips, 2007). This post-WWI recession became
known as the agricultural crisis.
24
Herbert Hoover and the Farm Economy
What may have been worse than the sudden drop in agricultural demand and
prices was the government’s response. President Harding, who was deeply influenced by
his Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, thought the problem of agricultural
depression would take care of itself (Gaddis, 2005; Shideler, 1987). Hoover believed that
increased efficiency and a reduction in labor disputes would solve the problem (Gaddis,
2005). Overall, these policies worked well and pulled the nation out of a recession, but
they left most farmers in the same economic situation as before the war. One of the ways
Secretary Hoover suggested farmers improve their economic position was to organize
into cooperatives to voluntarily reduce production and stabilize markets (Phillips, 2007;
Shideler, 1976; USDA, 1984). These early cooperatives were only partially successful as
prices remained stagnant and debt remained high. When agricultural policies failed to
bring higher prices, some farmers went on strike, trying to force others to withhold
products from market (Dieterich, 1940). Overall, the policies promoted by Secretary
Hoover under Presidents Harding and Coolidge were unsuccessful at bringing farmers
back to pre-WWI prosperity (See Figures 3 and 4) (Strand, 1942). By the end of the
decade, farmers who were still in buisness were clinging to very narrow profit margins
(See Figure 5) (Fish, 1991; Phillips, 2007). To urban workers, however, the decade was a
prosperous one (Clingerman, 1989; Gaddis, 2005; Phillips, 2007). America became a
global manufacturing giant and world power, with unemployment rates dropping below
4% and urban wages increasing (Gaddis, 2005). This economic success propelled
Herbert Hoover to the White house in the spring of 1929.
25
The Great Depression and the Farm Economy
President Hoover came to power hoping to build on the economic success of the
decade and seeking to end poverty in the U.S. In the fall of 1929, not long after taking
office, economic disaster struck as the stock market crashed and the Great Depression set
in. At the time, poor relief or welfare, was legislated and provided through local
government and supplemented by private donations (Federal Emergency Relief Agency,
1942). As the Great Depression worsened, local governments were overwhelmed by the
number of persons needing welfare. As the numbers of unemployed increased and the
tax base shrank, local relief for the poor proved woefully inadequate (Federal Emergency
Relief Agency, 1942). In the face of an ever growing economic depression Hoover
limited government aid (Gaddis, 2005; Federal Emergency Relief Agency, 1942). He
encouraged business leaders to maintain wages and employment to keep the economy
moving. But as the economy continued to worsen companies chose to protect themselves
and ignore the advice of the president (Gaddis, 2005).
26
Figure 3: The annual average price of corn per bushel sold in the state of Iowa. Note the
price increase during WWI, the collapse afterward, and then a leveling off followed by
the Great Depression in 1929 (Strand, 1942).
Figure 4: The average price of hogs per hundredweight sold in the state of Iowa. Note
the price increase during WWI, the collapse afterward, and then a leveling off followed
by the Great Depression in 1929 (Strand, 1942).
27
The Great Depression took a serious toll on the entire economy. As the farm
economy began to contract in the fall of 1929, Congress passed the Agricultural
Marketing Act to take extra commodities off the market. This act made $500 million
available to a Federal Farm Board to make low interest loans available to cooperatives to
purchase commodities and take them off the market (Luttrell, 1989). By 1931 this
program had purchased 231 million bushels of wheat, or 25% of the United States annual
production. However, this massive support program was not successful at keeping prices
up and in 1932 the Farm Board dropped its price supports and liquidated its assets at a
government loss of $150 million (Hurt, 2000; Luttrell, 1989). Similar to the recession
which followed WWI, the depression’s effect was worse on the rural economy (Luttrell,
1989; USDA, 1984). Three years into the Great Depression farm incomes were 30% of
their 1929 average. The average corn price in Iowa dropped from 70¢ per bushel in 1929
to just 12¢ in 1932, while U.S. farm incomes fell from $12 billion to $5 billion
(Dieterich, 1940; USDA, 1984). As with the farm crisis a decade earlier, low crop prices
forced many farmers to store their crops indefinitely, waiting for prices to rise high
enough to recoup their inputs. When farmers could no longer afford to wait many were
forced to auction their farms to pay their debts (Van Buren Record). Foreclosures once
again swept through the agricultural community. Three years into the Great Depression,
the federal government reluctantly began financing unemployment relief with the passing
of the Relief and Construction Act of 1932. For President Hoover and for many
Americans this was too little, too late. In 1933 the Federal Emergency
28
Relief Administration (FERA) estimated that one million farm families were destitute
while another two million were on public assistance (Wilson, 1940). After four years of
unsuccessful attempts to revive the economy, Franklin Roosevelt (FDR) came to power
offering a New Deal to the American people.
Figure 5: A cartoon showing the prices which farmers receive for their commodities and
the prices which they must purchase them for. From 1921 to 1936 farmers paid more for
commodities than they received (Van Buren Record, 1937).
The Agricultural Adjustment Acts
The New Deal comprised a series of economic policies aimed at increasing
employment and boosting the economy through direct government action, a route the
Hoover Administration was not willing to take. An important goal of the New Deal was
to establish government price supports for commodity crops. This was first
accomplished in 1933 through the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA). The AAA was
29
the federal government’s first attempt to control agricultural production and stabilize the
commodity market. The goal of this legislation was to restore the purchasing power of
farmers to 1910-1914 levels through a system known as parity (Blanpied, 1984;
Dieterich, 1940; Fish, 1991; Lutterell, 1989; USDA, 1934; USDA, 1984). The parity
value was adjusted based on inflation and production costs of the farmer to reach a price
which represented 100% parity or the same purchasing power they would have had
during the “golden years.” Depending on the specific commodity and annually
determined guaranteed price, farmers could accept anywhere from 50-85% of parity on
fields in production and a rental rate on the government-determined acreage taken out of
production. This parity rate was only guaranteed if farmers reduced crop acres by an
annually determined amount (Blanpied, 1984; Dieterich, 1940; Fish, 1991; Lutterell,
1989; USDA, 1934; USDA, 1984). In 1933, over 85% of Dallas County (Iowa) corn
farmers accepted this 20% reduction in acreages to guarantee commodity prices (Fish,
1991). This policy, which attempted to balance the supply and demand of commodities
through government incentives, remained in place throughout the 20th century (USDA,
1984). For farmers, a payment of 75% parity was better than the free market alternative
but with forced acreage reductions many intensified cultivation on the land kept in
production (Browne, 2001; Phillips, 2007). Other farmers began planting non-regulated
crops such as soybeans. In this regard, the AAA was only successful at increasing farm
prices, not in controlling production. Most farmers, however, cared only about which
options provided the greatest source of income, not how or why the program worked
(Hurt, 2000). The AAA also included a land retirement program for land unsuitable for
30
agricultural production (USDA, 1984; Clingerman, 1989). These policies marked a
radical shift in farm policy and resulted in agricultural land being taken out of production
for the first time in U.S. history.
Iowa Coal
Coal mining has been an important industry in Iowa since the mid-19th century.
Production of Iowa coal peaked during WWI when over 9 million tons of coal were
mined to fuel the war effort in 1917 (Iowa Geological Survey, 1930; Schwieder, 1983;
Work Plan, 2010). During WWI many new mines opened to supply energy for wartime
production. Many of these new mines were only profitable because of acute wartime
shortages and high prices (Stricklin, 1929). By the end of the war nearly 18,000 Iowans
were employed in underground coal mines (Iowa Geological Survey, 1930; Stolp, 1976).
Like agriculture, the mining industry also experienced a contraction following WWI,
when both demand and prices fell. Overall, the bituminous coal industry lost money
from 1921 to 1940 as the market contracted (Risser, 1958). In the years following WWI
nearly 4,000 coal mines around the U.S. closed and employment fell by 350,000 men
(Hotchkiss et al., 1939). In Iowa, employment fell by 38%, to just 11,000 men in 1925,
and production fell by 31% (Census of Iowa, 1926). This contraction of the bituminous
coal economy was felt harder in the smaller mines, which were often less efficient and
less likely to have mechanized (Hotchkiss et al. 1942). In Iowa, this meant the closure of
many mines. To deal with the problem of production cost the surviving industry sought
to lower its labor costs, which typically constituted 60% of the total cost of operations
(Risser, 1958). Many underground mines began to mechanize using mechanical loading
31
to increase production per man hour. By 1930, 48% of coal in Illinois was mechanically
loaded (Hotchkiss et al., 1939). The mines in Iowa were somewhat different than other
Midwestern states, however. With thinner coal seams and unstable roofs, Iowa mines
were especially dangerous and less efficient in comparison to other states.
(Schwieder,1983; Stolp, 1976). Most mines in Iowa were small, with very few
employing more than 100 people (Schwieder, 1983). The smaller Iowa mines were also
less likely to mechanize. In fact, by 1935 no Iowa coal mines were using mechanical
loading devices (Hotchkiss et al., 1939; Stricklin, 1929). Due to these inefficiencies Iowa
mines had been losing their market for coal for many years, even within the state. By
1925 just 32% of the 15 million tons of coal consumed in Iowa was mined within the
state (Census of Iowa, 1926). Besides losing market share to other states, the Iowa coal
industry was also losing some of the energy market to other sources as continuing inroads
made by oil and gas from Texas and Oklahoma spelled trouble for the coal industry (Coal
Age, 1937; Hotchkiss et al., 1939; Stricklin, 1929). In order to compete for the energy
market, a cheaper and more efficient way of mining coal was necessary. That technique,
which many in the industry hoped would make Iowa coal competitive once again, was
surface mining (Heusinkveld, 1995).
Surface Mining
In surface mining, heavy machinery is used to remove all of the soil above the
coal seam and pile it in reverse order, inverting and burying topsoil. This mining
technique has many advantages over underground mining. In addition to being safer for
the worker, it is more economical and it allows for the removal of a higher percentage of
32
coal than subsurface mining (Coffelt, 2007; Heusinkveld, 1958; National Research
Council, 1981a; National Research Council, 1981b). Surface mining became popular in
the 1920s and 1930s as advances in earth moving equipment made the process cheaper
and more effective. The power shovel or steam shovel was the first great advance in
earthmoving equipment. By the 1880s these shovels were being perfected in the iron
mines of northern Minnesota (See Figure 6)(Haycraft, 2000). By the 1920s electric
shovels and track-mounted bulldozers were gaining in popularity (Haycraft, 2000).
Using this equipment, a small crew of several men could accomplish what previously
took dozens of men to achieve. The most important advancement in earthmoving
technology was the walking dragline. Patented in 1913, the dragline was faster, could dig
deeper, and move material further than the stripping shovel (Haycraft, 2000). So efficient
was surface mining that by 1937 the output per man hour from surface mining was 300%
that of shaft mining (Hannah and Vandervliet, 1939). Because of this advantage in
efficiency, overall production of surface-mined coal continued to increase after WWI,
even as the greater bituminous coal industry was contracting (Hotchkiss et al., 1939).
33
Figure 6: An early example of a steam powered stripping shovel from 1885 (Coal Age,
1938).
The main drawback, however, was the environmentally destructive nature of the
technique. The burying of the topsoil in the mining process completely destroys any
living organic matter necessary to support plant life (Coffelt, 2007). By 1936, 2,500
acres of agricultural land throughout the Midwest was devastated annually by surface
mining (Hotchkiss et al., 1939). With government policies pushing the retirement of
marginal land, some argue these policies encouraged the surface mining of agricultural
lands instead (Hannah and Vandervliet, 1939) (See figure 7). With the value of
agricultural land low, and many thousands of tons of coal under each acre of land, rarely
was the destruction of a permanent resource taken into account (Cady, 1927). In Iowa
the destruction of soil is a serious problem because fertile soil is the state’s most valuable
natural asset. This resource paradox is best explained by Fay and Glenn-Lewin: “There
is no dispute that Iowa coal is a valuable natural resource for which there is a growing
34
need. However, the coal is under Iowa’s most valuable permanent resource, the land.”
(Fay and Glenn-Lewin, 1976, 1) In addition to the burying of topsoil, shale is left in piles
known as spoil banks. Mixed in with this shale are several types of naturally occurring
sulfides. When these sulfides are exposed to oxygen and water they produce sulfuric acid
in what is known as acid mine drainage (AMD). Iowa surface mining is particularly
destructive due to the high percentage of overburden material having a pH below 4.0
which is considered toxic and incapable of supporting vegetation (Limstrom, 1948) (See
figure 8). These environmental problems were known very early on as the destruction
was fairly evident. Efforts to pass reclamation laws or requirements to reclaim mine sites
to their pre-mining condition failed to pass the state legislature in 1939 (Hannah and
Vaderverliet, 1939). The problem of unregulated surface mining continued in Iowa until
1971 when the state finally adopted reclamation rules (Fay and Glenn-Lewin, 1976; State
of Iowa, 1972). The result of this delay cost Iowa over 12,000 acres of mined land which
was eventually abandoned (Mines and Minerals Bureau, 2011) (See figure 9).
35
Figure 7: An example of the surface mining of agricultural land. Note the highwall in the
middle of the picture and the overburden just to the left (Hotchkiss et al., 1939).
Figure 8: The acidity of land surface mined in Iowa. Notice how much higher the
percentage of toxic land is when compared to other states. This toxic land is defined as
having a pH less than 4.0 and therefore unlikely to support plant life (Limstorm, 1948)
36
Figure 9: An abandoned surface mine in Van Buren County. Although the mine was
abandoned in the early 1950s it remains relatively unvegetated today. Photo by author
7/6/2010.
Conclusion
This time period in rural America was a volatile one. The agricultural crisis and
Great Depression took a serious toll on the rural economy and economic uncertainty was
a perennial issue. With the introduction of New Deal price supports, some of those
burdens could have been lifted. To some, however, these policies might have been seen
as another government attempt which would eventually fail. But with the introduction of
surface mining to the county and the profit which one could receive, some of these
worries could have been alleviated. What is not known is why some farmers chose to
have land surface mined while others did not. Were these New Deal policies effective at
37
dissuading farmers from seeking alternative income sources or was the taking of
farmland out of production under the AAA forcing farmers to seek alternative sources of
income? The complex decisions made by individuals in Van Buren County are not yet
understood.
38
CHAPTER 3: THE GREAT DEPRESSION IN VAN BUREN COUNTY
Introduction
Just when things in the county were starting to look up again after the agricultural
crisis, the agricultural economy was rocked by the Great Depression. As global markets
collapsed so too did the demand for agricultural products. With reduced demand for farm
products prices also fell and the same vicious cycle which had devastated farmers during
the farm crisis plagued the agricultural economy again. In response to the depression,
FDR implemented many New Deal policies designed to help farmers by directly raising
farm prices and decreasing farm production. These price supports helped many farmers
survive, but the production limits also turned large areas of land over to alternative land
uses such as timber, land conservation, and surface mining because agriculture was
restricted.
The Onset of the Depression
After sputtering through most of the 1920s, the farm economy finally began to
turn around again in 1928. This was a welcome sign for the state of Iowa as it was
particularly susceptible to the rise and fall of the farm economy. In fact, one study
estimated that more than 99% of the land surface within the state was used for
agricultural purposes (Van Buren Record). As the market for farm products began to
recover, so did the state’s economy. Beef prices in 1928 reached levels not seen since
just prior to the last farm crisis. Hog prices were also on the rise and the Iowa corn crop
of 1928 set a new record of nearly 500 million bushels (Strand, 1942). Even in Van
Buren County, where the cost of producing corn was the highest in the state (at $1.01 per
39
bushel according to an Iowa State College Study), farmers were making money (Van
Buren Record). Nationally, farm prices had finally stabilized from the farm crisis a
decade earlier. Nearly every indicator pointed to higher agricultural prices in the coming
years including land prices which were once again on the rise throughout the state. Large
land banks which had repossessed many farms throughout the county began to resell
them. All seemed well again, as explained in the Van Buren Record: “There seems to be
a belief that agriculture has seen its darkest days and that improvement from now on will
be steady and continuous.” (12/19/1929) This positive outlook on the future of
agriculture lasted even after many investors lost enormous sums with the collapse of the
stock market on October 29, 1929. This turmoil in the market occurred without even a
mention in the Van Buren Record. It did, however, elicit a response from the governor,
who urged people to invest in farmland as a safe alternative to stocks. Unfortunately
such optimism was short-lived; as the economy slowed so too did the demand for farm
products.
The depression descended quickly on the county. As industrial demand within
the United States slowed, manufacturers cut production by as much as 60% to limit
surpluses and keep the prices of manufactured goods high. Farmers, who individually
exerted negligible control over total food production, could not afford to produce less and
were forced to accept what the market would pay (See figure 10). By the end of 1930
corn prices in Van Buren County had fallen from $1.25 per bushel to 50¢. The price of
farm products continued to fall and by 1932 corn prices fell to just 20¢ per bushel while
hog prices fell from over ten dollars per head to the record low price of $3.25 (Strand,
40
1942). With production costs within the county already high, and with extremely low
prices, it became nearly impossible for farmers to make ends meet. The purchasing
power of farmers and their ability to pay debts was the lowest since 1920. Foreclosures
on agricultural lands once again swept the county as many farmers found it hard to
survive: “High prices of farm produce were chiefly responsible for land purchasing
activity and debt expansion, low prices are the present cause of foreclosures and debt
reductions as records will indicate.” (Excerpt from Economic Analysis of Farm
Mortgages in Van Buren Record 2/16/1933). Those trying to sell their farms to avoid
foreclosure were faced with prices as low as $20 per acre, prices much lower than their
purchasing price. Farm sale advertisements began to appear in the newspaper in greater
numbers (See Figure 11). A poor fund of Van Buren County, which provided some food
and emergency medical care to residents, was initiated in 1928 with $7,211. By January
of 1932 this fund had become overdrawn by $17,000. As the depression continued to
worsen, the distain for President Hoover, an Iowa native, increased. An article in the Van
Buren Record attacked President Hoover, one of the ten richest men in the nation, for
giving only $2,500 to charity when he could easily have given ten times as much. As the
nation went to the polls in November 1932, over 5 million Americans relied on charity or
government support. In that year’s elections Republicans were soundly defeated in Iowa
with both of its senators, the governor, and the president all going to the Democratic
candidates.
41
A New Deal for farmers
With the election of FDR to the presidency, government policies towards farming
drastically changed. New Dealers believed that the imbalance between farm prices and
incomes was a serious and perpetual problem that played an important role in causing the
Great Depression. Beginning with the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 (AAA), the
federal government took a more proactive role in maintaining the balance between
production and consumption of farm products (Luttrell, 1989). This was achieved
through parity. One hundred percent parity is the price at which a farmer could sell his
goods and receive the same amount of purchasing power or benefit as they would have
during the “golden years of American agriculture” or 1910-1914 (Blanpied, 1984;
Luttrell, 1989; North, 1991; Phillips, 2007; USDA, 1985). This required the artificial
inflation of farm prices. Farmers who chose to participate would use their harvested crop
as collateral to secure a nonrecourse loan. At the end of the loan period farmers could opt
for the parity rate and surrender their collateral, or they could pay back the principle with
interest, and withdraw their crop from storage, and attempt to sell it on the open market
(Luttrell, 1989).
42
Figure 10: Infographs in the Van Buren Record showing as the Great Depression set in
manufactures cut production and their labor force by as much as 60% to keep prices high
where as farmers tried to increase production to compensate for reduced prices which
only pushed the price of agricultural products lower (2/11/1937).
43
Figure 11: A typical farm sale advertisement in the Van Buren Record.
44
The one catch for farmers was that in order to participate in the program they had
to be willing to reduce their corn acreage by 20%. On the land taken out of production,
farmers were paid 30cents per bushel on their average yield received from this land
(USDA, 1984). This forced acreage reduction was designed to reduce production and
bring supply for agricultural products back in line with demand. Ideally, this would also
increase market prices and slowly remove farmers from relying on price supports. The
AAA also provided for price adjustments to be made on cattle, hogs, cotton, sugar beets,
potatoes, tobacco, wheat, and other crops (Hurt, 2000; USDA, 1985). The signup for the
adjustment programs was carried out at the township level with each township appointing
two members to be trained to manage the signup. The Van Buren Record advertised all
the necessary information to farmers about when and how to sign up for the programs
and benefits. Because of the connectedness between the two commodities, the corn and
hogs programs were launched together in what was known as the corn-hogs program.
The first goal of this program was to immediately reduce hog populations in the winter of
1933, as to wait for future litter reductions to balance the market. As a result, the
program purchased 615,800 hogs from farmers in 1933 at fair market value to reduce
surplus (Dieterich, 1934). The processed hogs were distributed for disaster relief. In
Iowa 176,000 producers signed up for corn or hog payments the first year alone,
receiving $75 million in benefits (Dieterich, 1934).
45
Land Use Requirements
With so many farmers choosing to take the price adjustment, large amounts of
land were opened up for other land uses. The obvious choice for a field taken out of corn
or wheat production would have been pasture for cattle, sheep, or the planting of another
crop. Unfortunately for farmers, both hog and cattle markets were oversaturated with
final sale prices well below investment costs. Excess production was also controlled
under the AAA. For a hog producer to remain compliant with the corn-hogs program
they were required to reduce hog populations 25 percent for the year 1934. If a farmer
had not previously been raising hogs he would be limited to three litters per year to
receive parity prices and thus keeping them out of the market. Cattle production was also
limited under the AAA.
Making things worse for farmers was the weather of the 1930s. A terrible
drought in 1934 forced the USDA to issue rebates to farmers so they could import feed
from other counties. Eventually the government stepped in to purchase cattle from
farmers unable to provide for them, but only if the farmers we willing to participate in
future cattle reduction programs under the AAA. Despite this requirement 1,000 cattle
were sold to the government in September of 1934 and another 500 in January of 1935
(Van Buren Record). The following year of 1935 was wetter than average year and 1936
was once again a drought year (Fox, 1962; Reddick, 1988). This series of bad years along
with the restrictive land use policies prevented most profitable farm production from
occurring on newly fallow land.
46
One crop not restricted under the reduction program was soybeans. Soybeans
could be used as a cover crop, feed for cattle, or harvested for milling. Because they
were not regulated under the AAA, soybean production increased 800% from 1929 to
1939. Unfortunately, unless they were sold for milling many of these options would not
have been profitable to the farmers who were hamstrung by the AAA to produce only
their allotment of animals and other crops. Many farmers produced other crops such as
apples, wheat, wool, eggs, butter, and milk which were sold locally but with the market
for agricultural products depressed it is unknown how profitable these crops would have
been. During this period of production controls, securing additional land as a farmer was
very difficult. Most land was effectively frozen as land in or out of agriculture, because
any farmer wanting to purchase land would be denied credit from the Farm Service
Agency (Phillips, 2007). For three years prior to the Soil Conservation and Domestic
Allotment Act of 1936, land taken out of agricultural production could be utilized,
however the farmer thought best, as long as it was not planted in a restricted commodity.
These restrictive land use policies led to many alternative land uses around the county.
Alternative Land Uses
One of these alternatives to farming was reforestation of the county.
Reforestation occurred for many reasons including erosion control, personal timber
sources, hunting land, and the retirement of marginal land (Reddick, 2011). As part of
the New Deal reforms, Keosauqua received the first reforestation camp in Iowa. This
camp employed twenty men from the county to help farmers implement better soil
conservation practices using tree plantings. Iowa State University Nursery donated
47
112,000 seedlings to 24 landowners in the county. Another alternative land use which
increased during this restrictive period was the surface mining of coal. The proliferation
of surface mining will be discussed in the next chapter. A third alternative land use
which began in this time period was planting of grasses and legumes for conservation.
The government began to tie parity payments or other subsidies to soil-building practices
beginning with the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1936 (SCDAA).
Under this bill the government would pay farmers for participating in soil-building
practices. This bill, which passed in response to the Supreme Court declaring the AAA
of 1933 unconstitutional due to a tax on grain processers, required farmers to reduce “soil
depleting” crops by 15% and replace them with soil-building crops in exchange for
government payments (Blanpied, 1984; Hurt, 2000; Phillips, 2007; USDA, 1985).
Building on the success of the SCDAA, the government passed the AAA of 1938 which
reinstituted the price supports of the first AAA while keeping the soil conservation
requirement of the SCDAA (Blanpied, 1984; Phillips, 2007; USDA, 1985). This new
AAA did a better job of protecting farmland but still essentially limited land to in or out
of agricultural production.
Other New Deal Policies in the County
Besides agricultural price supports, many other New Deal policies benefited the
county. Keosauqua became home to a Civilian Conservation Corps camp. This camp
housed 200 young men from 1933 to 1941 who, among other things, worked to establish
a large state park and state forest. Other make-work projects in the county included the
hiring of 50 men in 1934 to lay sewer lines, culverts, and other road construction projects
48
through the Federal Emergency Relief Administration. Under this program the federal
government would pay for half of the material cost and the county would pay the rest.
Farmers could work these projects to pay back their relief payments that some may have
received. The federal government also supported the poor fund and unemployment
benefits as the county could not afford to cover citizens on its own.
The 1930s were a hard time for farmers; one study suggested that from 1931 to
1937 they lost as much as 43% of their net worth (Hurt, 2000). The agricultural census
of 1940 showed a 35% decline in the value of all products sold, traded, or used by
farmers within Van Buren County (Agricultural Census, 1940).
The weather of the
decade also took a toll on farm incomes. 1934 was a drought year, followed by flooding
in 1935 and another drought in 1936 (Fox, 1962; Hurt, 2000; Reddick, 2011; Van Buren
Record). Although additional support was given due to these weather events, it certainly
did not make life any easier. Those who hung on did so by relying on federal aid,
diversifying their production, and community support. Throughout the long and difficult
decade, many people simply left farming altogether. The census of 1940 showed that the
county continued to lose population, with 550 people, or 4.4%, leaving the county (U.S.
Bureau of the Census, 1940).
Conclusion
The Great Depression took a tremendous toll on farmers in Van Buren County.
Many were forced from their land as prices hit record lows. Of those who survived,
many had to find alternative land uses for part of their land because of acreage control
policies. These acreage control policies lasted for many years turning many acres back
49
into woods, pasture, or other land uses such as surface mines. Although some of these
alternatives such as surface mining may not have looked good in the long run, they may
have provided enough money for many farmers to simply get by another year.
50
CHAPTER 4: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SURFACE MINING IN VAN BUREN
COUNTY
Introduction
In the fall of 1932 surface mining first came to Van Buren County with little
public recognition or fanfare. Although the county and the nation were in the depths of
the Great Depression, there remained a demand for coal within the county for heating and
other energy needs. The early surface mines in the county were small operations run by
landowners or small groups of entrepreneurs who could cheaply and easily provide coal
to the community. For the most part, these mines began through easily accessible coal
via streambeds and ravines. As surface mining became more widespread towards the end
of the 1930s, the Hamlin Brothers Coal Company, ran by four brothers from Bonaparte,
came to dominate the surface mining industry in the county. Many landowners chose to
allow surface mining on their land to bolster their income. Today, the scars left by this
mining are still visible on the landscape and continue to pollute the environment. This
chapter examines how and when surface mining came to the county and the devastation it
left behind.
Early Surface Mines
Surface mining in Iowa appears rather spontaneously around southeast Iowa
beginning in 1932. The state mine inspector’s 1934 report notes that no active surface
mines were in operation when the previous biannual report was published on December
31, 1931, but in1932 17 strip pits were recorded within the state. Although the data upon
which these reports are based are incomplete, we do know that between fall 1932 and
51
spring 1934 three landowners began surface mining operations on their farms in Van
Buren County, and by 1940 seven different operations had worked in the county.
The first property in the county to begin surface mining, and one of the only
surface mining operations to be recorded in the newspaper, was the property of Homer
and Lela Von Seggen. Little is known of the Von Seggen family or the property history
except what appears in the newspaper. On February 16th, 1928 just months before the
stockmarket crash, Charles Von Seggen held a farm sale presumably ending his farming
career at age 77(U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1920; Van Buren Record, 1928). Available
at the sale were many farm implements, cattle, and other farming necessities. Although
the sale was handled by Charles, his son Homer had owned the property since 1920.
Within a few years of the sale, Homer and his son began surface mining coal from the
streambed at the back of the property. This mining was first recorded in the Van Buren
Record in January 1933: “Homer Von Seggen and son use considerable of their time
during the fall and winter in mining and delivering coal from a strip mine on their farm
southeast of Bonaparte” (Van Buren Record, 1933). The mining continued for many
years, as it appears in the State Mine Inspectors Report through 1940. The profitability
of the mining operation is unknown. According to the mine inspector’s report, in 1938
the Von Seggen Coal Company sold 205 tons of coal and a mere 178 tons in 1939 (State
of Iowa, 1940). The actual production and profitability of the mine site is unknown but
with 17 acres eventually mined the family was highly invested in the mining operation.
A second early mine site in Van Buren County was the McQuire mine operated
by the McQuire Coal Company. This mine also follows a streambed and is the first
52
surface mine to appear in the state mine inspector’s report for 1934. In that year the
McQuire mine was reported to have employed just two men for a total of 200 days. As
with the Von Seggen family, little is known about the owner, Dr. McQuire, who
purchased the land just three years prior to mining in 1930. In its first year 300 tons of
mine run, or unprocessed coal, was produced. Over the years the mine site expanded to
encompass 19 acres, including several acres which were previously farmland. This
mining appears to have been done by first the Miller Coal Company, who owned land
adjacent to the property, and then the Hamlin Brothers Coal Company of Bonaparte.
After just two years of operation the McQuire Coal Company disappeared from the State
Mine Inspector’s Report and was replaced by the Miller Coal Company. The Miller Coal
Company was presumably run by the Miller Family who owned the adjacent land.
The third of these early surface mine sites is the B.F. Downard Mine. Mr.
Downard was a longtime mine owner in Van Buren County. Throughout the1920s Mr.
Downard was the superintendent of an underground room and pillar mine on his land
northeast of Keosauqua. In June 1933 Mr. Downard, who was turning 73 years old,
chose to pursue a new path by agreeing to lease his land to a third party for the purpose of
“stripping coal on Coppers Creek bottom land” (Miscellaneous Record No. 8, Page 195;
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1930). This more hands- off approach was probably easier
for Mr. Downard who was old but wished to continue receiving revenue from his land.
The mining was done by the Mulvena Coal Company, a partnership between the two men
who ran the mine, S.R. Hoover, Lloyd Stevens, and the man who provided the shovel,
Albert Mulvena (Miscellaneous Record No. 8, Page 195). Mining was done using an
53
electric shovel and a caterpillar bulldozer. The bulldozer was used to remove the soil and
expose the coal. Once the coal was exposed it was drilled and blasted with
dynamite(Thomas, 2011). After the coal was loosened the electric shovel loaded the coal
into trucks which delivered coal to the local community. This mechanized process only
required four miners to work the site at a time (Thomas, 2011). The last lease granted on
his property expired in 1946, ending 13 years of surface mining. Over that time period
30 acres of land were mined, 15 of which were on his land and the rest on neighbor Earl
Moore’s property. The royalty payments received by Mr. Downard varied from 2550cents/ton depending on the lessees. Depending on the production each year this
money could have represented a large portion of Mr. Downard’s income.
It can be safely assumed that other surface mining operations were occurring in
the county during this time period but due to limited records little is known about them.
An example of one of these other early coal companies was the Bretz Coal Company.
The only evidence of this company comes from an accident which occurred on the mine
site in January 1935. As reported in the Van Buren Record, Dean Bretz died from an
accidental explosion at the Bretz coal mine near Farmington. The explosion occurred
when a spark from the dragline ignited a 25 lb powder keg which was being used to
loosen frozen earth. Unfortunately, there are no other records of the Bretz Coal Company
and no landowner with the name Dean Bretz can be found in the county. This newspaper
article does provide the first evidence of a dragline being operated in Van Buren County
and reminds us that even surface mining could be a dangerous occupation. Two other
small landowner run mines also appeared in the 1938 mine inspectors report (See figure
54
12). The Cummings Coal Company and the Perkins Coal Company began operations in
1936 with the landowners reported as superintendents (State of Iowa, 1938). Just as with
the Bretz Coal Company no other information can be located on the operation.
Figure 12: Active mines in Van Buren County during the years 1936-1937 as recorded in
the State Mine Inspectors Report of 1938. (s) refers to surface mine operations. Notice
the Cummings, Perkins, and Von Seggen Coal Companies are operated by family
members.
These early mines in Van Buren County had much in common with one another
(See table 1). First, each of these early mines began by stripping creek bottoms before
moving into more agriculturally productive land. The stripping of drainages or bottoms
was quite common because the coal was often already exposed or close to the surface due
to erosional processes. In these early years most of the mining appears to have been
done by stripping shovels, not by draglines, which came to the county later and made the
mining of deeper coal possible (See figure 13). The landowners were directly involved in
the mining; the mining was occurring on their land with the landowners operating as the
superintendent and mine owner. These early mines also employed very few miners
relative to the size of the mine sites. The McQuire mine reported employing two miners
while the Downard mine employed only four (State of Iowa, 1934; Thomas, 2011). A
55
final commonality of these early surface mines was their location. All of this mining
occurred in the eastern part of Van Buren County near the communities of Bonaparte and
Farmington. The reason for this is unknown but may be attributable to the geology of the
coal or the market for the coal. Surface mining would eventually take place in the
western half of the county but not until the 1940s or 1950s.
Hamlin Brothers Coal Company
A few years after these small operators introduced surface mining to the county, a
larger and more aggressive company entered the picture. The Hamlin Brothers Coal
Company was the most prolific surface mine operator in Van Buren County. The
company was formed by four brothers, Cecil, Douglas, Robert, and Roy Hamlin of
Bonaparte, to both mine and market coal. The four brothers moved to Bonaparte from
Illinois where Douglas had been employed as a dragline operator at a large surface mine
(Van Buren County Genealogy, 2011). Their company first appeared in a newspaper
advertisement in January 1938 mining coal at the Gardner farm north of Bonaparte (Van
Buren Record, 1938) (See figure 14). This appears to be the same location where the
McQuire Coal Company commenced operations years earlier. Hamlin Brothers soon
became the most successful mining company in the county, operating at least five surface
mines in Van Buren County and one in Clark County, Missouri.
Two advantages which
may have contributed to their success in the local market were Douglas’s knowledge of
the industry and their ownership of a walking dragline. While many smaller mining
companies used stripping shovels and bulldozers only, the Hamlin Brothers owned and
operated a 1.5 cubic yard dragline. Using a dragline allowed for the mining of deeper
56
coal seams and for mining to occur in areas not adjacent to streambeds. At the time,
Hamlin Brothers was the only large-scale mining company in the county and accounted
for nearly half of all surface mining. While other surface mines of the time period were
only producing several hundred tons of coal per year, Hamlin Brothers produced 5,850
tons of coal in 1938 and 8,752 tons in 1939. In 1939 they also began operating two strip
pits in one year, something no other mine company in the county achieved (State of Iowa,
1940). The company had various ways of acquiring land for mining. In some cases they
would mine for coal on other farmers’ lands, presumably through a leasing agreement,
paying a royalty to the landowner as other companies in the county did. In other
instances the four Hamlin brothers would purchase land, operate a surface mine for
several years, and then resell the land. Another way Hamlin Brothers would acquire coal
to mine was through the re-mining of other surface mines. Over time their operations
became larger and more sophisticated, with several of their mining operations covering
nearly 20 acres and leaving spoil piles 40 feet in height. The last surface mine operated
by Hamlin Brothers in Van Buren County was their biggest, covering nearly 60 acres of
farmland.
The Hamlin Brothers retired from mining sometime in the 1950s or 1960s.
Shortly after ceasing operations the brothers moved away from Bonaparte, leaving behind
only memories and many devastated acres of farmland (Van Buren County Genealogy,
2011). Based on their years of operation and number of mines it is clear that Hamlin
Brothers was a successful surface mining operation. It is also clear that some of the
benefits of this success were shared with the lessors with whom they worked.
57
Figure 13: A picture of a walking dragline. (Bethlehem Steel Company, 1938).
Table 1: Early Surface Mines
Early surface mine sites and operators in the county.
58
Figure 14: Some advertisements for the Hamlin Brothers Coal Company which appeared
in the Van Buren Record in the 1930s.
Later Surface Mines
Surface mining in Van Buren County probably peaked as the United States
entered WWII. The loss of available labor during WWII closed many mines. Based on
historical aerial photographs and available mine records most mine sites were mined out
prior to 1945. The few exceptions were the last active Hamlin Brothers mine and a few
small operations initiated after WWII that are not considered in this study. The boom
59
time for surface mining in Van Buren County was short lived as the same competitive
forces that pushed underground mining out of Iowa also pushed out surface mining. Van
Buren County, whose coal seams were not as thick and productive as counties to the
northwest, was abandoned relatively quickly as more profitable mines opened up
elsewhere.
Benefits of Surface Mining
The main positive aspect of surface mining was how cheaply coal could be mined.
Lower labor costs and fewer safety issues gave surface mining a distinct advantage over
underground mining. These profits were passed on to the company owners. Owners in
turn paid royalty rates to the lessors for permitting access to their land. In Van Buren
County these royalty rates ranged from 25-50 cents per ton of coal mined. Using the
simple equation of 1,600 tons per acre of land, multiplied by the thickness of the seam in
feet and then multiplied by the recovery rate, the amount of coal under each acre of land
can be determined (Hannah and Vaderverliet, 1939). With a 90% recovery rate and an
average thickness of 2 ½ feet, each acre of land could produce 3,600 tons of coal. A 25
cent royalty payment would be worth $900 per acre of land mined. Because surface
mining recovers a higher percentage of available coal farmers seeking the maximum
financial return would opt for surface over subsurface mining.
Consequences of Surface Mining
There were also many negative consequences of surface mining in the county.
One consequence was the reduction in coal mining jobs. Underground mining operations
required many more laborers to produce similar amounts of coal. With the proliferation
60
of surface mining many coal miners in Van Buren County potentially could have lost
their jobs. A second problem is the effect that a surface mine has on adjacent property
values. As one study suggested, the real estate value of farmland within a two-mile
radius of a surface mine can decrease up to 35% (Hannah and Vaderveliet, 1939). As
property values are diminished mine operators can buy or lease more land for mining at a
cheaper price, thus encouraging more mining. This may explain why surface mines in
Van Buren County appear to be clustered in a few areas of the county. The most serious
consequence of surface mining, however, was the destruction of Iowa’s most valuable
resource, its topsoil. By the time surface mining ran its course in Van Buren County, a
total of 18 separate sites had been mined, covering nearly 350 acres of land.
Regulation of Surface Mining
All surface mining in Iowa occurred in an unregulated environment. In 1939 the
issue of requiring surface mine operators to reclaim mine sites after mining was brought
to the state legislature. Those in favor of requiring reclamation argued that surface-mined
coal could be produced 400% more cheaply than shaft-mined coal and therefore the cost
of reclaiming the land should be borne by the mining company (Van Buren Record,
1939). Ultimately, this argument failed and reclamation did not become law. The topic
of surface mine reclamation in Iowa resurfaced in the 1960s when the General Assembly
of Iowa created the Mines and Minerals Bureau and a State Mining Board in 1961 to
make recommendations to the Governor (State of Iowa, 1972). In 1968 the legislature
finally passed a reclamation law “to provide for the rehabilitation and conservation of
land affected by surface mining and thereby to preserve natural resources, protect and
61
perpetuate the taxable value of property, and promote the health, safety and general
welfare of the people of this state (62GA, ch 114,§1). Unfortunately for Van Buren
County and most mine sites in Iowa this was far too late. This new law required that only
one of the 18 mine sites be partially reclaimed because the other mine sites had been
abandoned prior to 1968. In a federal response to this lack of state regulation, some
money was provided to reclaim abandoned mine sites beginning in the 1970s. This
funding was limited and targeted only the mine sites most dangerous to the public. As a
result only two mine sites in Van Buren County qualified and have been reclaimed. A
third abandoned mine site was partially converted into a county landfill by the county and
sealed upon closure. The remaining 15 abandoned mine sites remain untouched,
continuing to weather and erode.
Abandoned Mine Site Pollution
Because of the extremely low pH of the shale and other rock which was exposed
during mining, most of the sites remain largely devoid of vegetation. The average pH of
the spoil material was 2.97 when last sampled in 2010. (See table 2) With every rainfall
event this material continues to erode, causing terrible water pollution and the potential
for flooding. Streams crossing these abandoned mines can have pH values as low as 3.1
and iron contents as high as 300mg/l (See table 3) (See figure 15). Oftentimes this
pollution runs off the site, contaminating and damaging other properties. Another
problem with many of these sites is the dangerous features that were left behind that can
cause harm to humans and animals. These features include abandoned highwalls, pit
ponds, and piles of overburden. . In total nearly 350 acres of land were destroyed due to
62
surface mining in Van Buren County and 5 miles of stream now cross polluted sites. The
mine sites themselves will never have any agricultural value and landowners have little
incentive to reclaim them. Even if a landowner wished to reclaim a site the cost of
reclamation prevents it from occurring. The reclamation of one abandoned mine site in
the county reclaimed by the Office of Surface Mining in 2011cost $17,829 per acre (U.S.
Department of Interior, 2001). Proper reclamation requires the movement of millions of
cubic yards of dirt, engineering design to ensure proper water control and drainage, and
the treatment of soil with many tons of agricultural lime. Because of these factors,
abandoned mine sites will continue to be a part of the landscape of Van Buren County for
many years to come.
63
Table 2: Soil pH samples
Soil pH samples taken from abandon mine sites in eastern Van Buren County. Samples
taken by author in summer 2010 for the Mines and Minerals Bureau of Iowa.
Table 3: Water Quality Samples
64
Table 3: Water samples
Water quality samples from abandon mine sites in eastern Van Buren County. Stream
start samples were taken as a stream enters a mine site and stream end samples were
taken as the stream exits the mine site. Samples taken by author in summer 2010 for the
Mines and Minerals Bureau of Iowa.
65
Figure 15: a stream running through an abandon surface mine in Van Buren County.
Water exiting this mine site had a pH of 3.1 with 313mg/l of iron when sampled in the
summer of 2010. Photo taken by author 7/9/2010.
Conclusions
Surface mining came to and left Van Buren County over the course of about forty
years. During this interval mining destroyed 350 acres of land and left five miles of
streams lifeless. Early mining operations began during the grips of the Great Depression
and flourished just prior to WWII. The small early mines gave way to larger operations
66
using draglines to access deeper coal often at the expense of farmland. With no monetary
or agricultural value left to the mine sites, most remain as scars on the landscape slowly
becoming overgrown with weeds. With limited funding most abandoned mine sites will
never be reclaimed and the damage done by surface mining will last for many years.
67
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION
This research sought to examine the reasons for the development of surface
mining in rural Van Buren County, Iowa, and the history of land use conflicts between
agriculture land and surface mining. Although the county had a long history of
subsurface mining, it was only after two decades of market instability and the
introduction of new federal land use requirements that surface mining began. This
chapter will reexamine the research questions and answer the questions proposed.
My research asked the following questions: 1.) what factors led to the
development of surface mining in Van Buren County; 2.) how did government farm
policies influence farmers’ decision to surface mine; 3.) did the overall economic
uncertainty of the period encourage farmers to secure other sources of income such as
surfaced-mined coal; and 4.) how do these past land use decisions affect the environment
today. This county was selected because of my previous work experience with
abandoned mine land owners and knowledge of county history.
Many factors led to the development of surface mining in Van Buren County.
The first factor was the longstanding history of mining in the county. Commercial coal
mining was first recorded in 1840 and it continued as the county grew. The coal was
used locally for heating and industry, and in later years used in the railroads which came
through the county. Over time, as competition increased from cleaner and cheaper coals,
often from Missouri and Illinois, and over took the Iowa coal market. In response to this
loss of market, many coal companies switched to surface mining as a cheaper way to
produce coal. In fact coal could be mined from surface mines at just 25% of the prices of
68
shaft mined coal. Production costs were low because a few men could now accomplish
what previously took dozens. With agricultural land values low, due to many years of
depressed agricultural markets during the agricultural crisis and Great Depression, coal
companies could buy or lease land for a fraction of the value of the coal beneath it. This
made the surface mining of farmland economically attractive. Other factors included the
lack of profitable alternatives which farmers had to generate income due to restrictions
under the AAA. Together these factors produced a situation where there was very little
support for the protection of farmland.
Government farm policy appears to have played an important yet unintended role
in the development of surface mining. In the years just prior to WWI new government
policies encouraged increased agricultural production by making credit widely available
and guaranteeing high commodity prices. Because of these policies farmers took on large
amounts of debt to take advantage of high prices. As the war came to an end so too did
high prices, leaving many farmers out in the cold and unable to pay bills with the new
lower commodity prices. This post war recession hit farmers especially hard and could
have been prevented if more concern was given to farm incomes. The same process of
high farm debt and falling prices took place during the Great Depression as once again
the farm populations were largely ignored by the government forcing many farmers to
abandon their lands. To some degree it appears that farmers became tools used by
government when necessary and ignored when they were not.
At the height of the Great Depression came dramatic changes to farm policy.
Instead of passively watching farmers’ fortunes rise and fall at the whim of the market,
69
the AAA intervened to guarantee commodity prices to farmers willing to reduce their
acreage. These rules required a 20% reduction of corn, wheat, hog, beef, dairy and other
farm products in exchange for livable commodity prices. These policies also prevented
people from entering agriculture and further saturating the market by denying credit to
those looking to purchase land. The goal of the AAA was for farmers to plant their best
land in crops while taking their unsuitable lands out of production through reforestation
and soil building legumes. These policies may have back fired by protecting marginal
lands through retirement while doing nothing to protect more valuable land from being
surface mined. At the very least the AAA freed up many acres which were available for
anything except agriculture. It is no wonder that surface mining began in Iowa in 1933,
just after the implementation of these policies.
The underlying problem which probably influenced farmers to surface mine their
land was the unstable farm economy. From 1910 to 1940 the farm economy was
tremendously volatile. Beginning with the golden years of American agriculture, 19101914, farm profits rose to record highs as farmers fed allied nations during WWI. The
tightening of credit to farmers post-war brought about the farm crisis of 1919. After a
decade of stagnation in the farm economy, farm prices began to pick up in the late 1920s.
Unfortunately for farmers, the onset of the Great Depression once again ended all
prospects of profit. In fact, farm prices during the Great Depression fell well below the
lows of the farm crisis. The profits and livelihoods of farmers rose and fell along with
the market, with more people falling out of farming every time the market dipped. It
would be easy to see how farmers may have perceived the next year as the one to finally
70
bankrupt the farm. What is not known is whether the policies of the New Deal, which
eventually did stabilize the farm markets, were perceived as a long term solution to the
unpredictability of rural life or as another policy which would eventually let farmers
down. If uncertainty persisted, farmers would have looked for a more stable and
predictable source of income.
When combined, the problems of instability in the agricultural markets, low
commodity values, lack of federal aid, and new policies which took previously cropped
land out of production, all led to the destruction of farm land for the surface mining of
coal. Very little effort appears to have been made by the government to preserve land
from mining. Van Buren County and many other Midwestern counties were caught
between two undesirable decisions throughout much of the 1900s. When times got tough
many had to choose, either to sell the family farm and exit agriculture or lease the land to
a surface mining operation with the prospect of greater profits. Although not everyone in
the Van Buren County opted for mining, farmers in other Midwestern states chose to
surface mine their land in higher numbers suggesting that agricultural policies did not
sufficiently protect land from the ravaging effects of surface mining (Limstrom, 1948).
The landscape of Van Buren County is eternally scarred from surface mining. Destroyed
are nearly 175 acres of farmland, forest, streambed and pasture, replaced by mountains of
slag piles, some nearly 50 feet high. Ponds left on site are crystal clear yet do not support
aquatic life. Many mines look more like the surface of the moon than the farmland they
replaced (See figure 16). The value of the land destroyed in Van Buren County by
mining would be worth $350,000 to $1million today. With the taking of these lands out
71
of agricultural production, these sites no longer contribute to the local tax base nor do
they serve any productive function. Instead these mine sites support a variety of personal
uses including 4wheeling, shooting ranges, hunting ground, and archeological
exploration.
Figure 16: a cornfield at the edge of an abandoned surface mine. Notice the shale and
other waste material in the foreground and the cornfield in the background. Photo taken
by author 7/1/2010.
Since mining ceased in the county several decades ago very little has changed.
The county continues to lose population as more people leave rural counties for cities.
As farm sizes continue to grow, fewer people are needed to farm. Agriculture remains
the most important segment part of the economy. Mining still occurs in the county, in the
form of gravel and limestone, both regulated by the state with strict reclamation
72
requirements. Most abandoned surface mines remain on the landscape, often cordoned
off to be used as pasture for cattle or other personal use. In recent years the state of Iowa
has increased reclamation efforts with one mine site in the county reclaimed in 2011 and
another scheduled for 2012. Progress is slow and with reclamation costs high, most sites
will never be reclaimed. They instead they are part of the unique landscape of Van Buren
County.
This research sheds light on the unintended consequences of the AAA in Iowa.
Although the connection between land use restrictions, land retirement and farm policies
could not be directly linked to the development of surface mining, there does appear to be
a relationship as reported by Hannah and Vandervliet in Illinois. Future research should
examine the development of surface mining in counties with more valuable farmland,
higher quality coal seams and in states with stricter mining regulations. With higher
yielding farmland farmers may have had less incentive to opt for surface mining and in
states with tougher reclamation law the disincentives of surface mining would have been
minimized. But in areas where coal seams are thicker and the quality of coal was better,
the negligible value of agricultural land may have led to even greater proliferation of
surface mining.
73
REFERENCES CITED
“Bethlehem Steel Company.” Coal Age 43, (1938): 38.
Blanpied, Nancy C. (1984). Farm Policy the Politics of Soil, Surplus, and Subsidies.
Washington D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Inc.
Browne, William P., (2001). The Failure of National Rural Policy : Institutions and
Interests. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Cady, G.H., (1927). Coal Stripping Possibilities in Southern and Southwestern Illinois.
Urbana Il: Illinois Mining Investigations.
Clingerman, Harold Bennett. (1989). Field Man: the Chronicle of a Bank Farm Manager
in the 1940’s. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
Coal Age 42, 7 (1937): 319-320 “Surplus Capacity”.
Coal Age 43, 3 (1938): 43-45 “Yesterday and Today”.
Coffelt, Todd A. (2007). Management Practice Impact on Soil Organic Matter Content
of Reclaimed Abandoned Mine Lands in Southeastern Iowa. Retrieved from
http://masters.agron.iastate.edu/DB/CC/CoffeltCCProject.pdf
Dieterich, H. L. (1940). The A.A.A. in Iowa. Brooklyn, Ia: Iowa Agricultural
Conservation Committee.
Drake, Lon D. and Ririe, G. Todd. (1981). A Low-cost Method of Reclaiming Stripmined Land in Iowa to Agriculture. Journal of Environmental Geography, 3 267279.
ESRI (2005). United States (Generalized), Redlands, CA: ESRI.
Fay, Gregory and David C. Glenn-Lewin. (1976). Legislative Regulation of the
Environmental Impact of Strip-Mining. Ames, IA: Energy and Mineral
Resources Research Institute.
Fish, Donald E. (1991). The Emergency Years Remembrances of a County Agent in the
Great Depression. The Palimpset, 72 (2), 90-103.
Fox, Karl A., Ruttan, Vernon W. and Witt, Lawrence W. (1962). Farming, farmers, and
markets for farm goods; essays on the problems and potentials of American
agriculture. New York: Committee for Economic Development.
74
Gaddis, Vincent. (2005). Herbert Hoover, Unemployment, and the Public Sphere.
Lanham, MD: University Press of America Inc.
Hannah, H. W. and Vandervliet, Bert. (1939). Effects of Strip Mining on Agricultural
Area in Illinois and Suggested Remedial Measures. The Journal of Land &
Public Utility Economics, 15 (3), 296-311.
Heusinkveld, Harriet. (1995). Coal mining days in Marion County, Iowa, 1880s-1992.
Pella, IA: Pella Printing Company Inc.
Heusinkveld, Harriet. (1958). The historical geography of population in Mahaska,
Marion, and Monroe counties in Iowa. Iowa City, IA: State University of Iowa.
Hotchkiss, Willard E., et al. (1939). Mechanization, employment, and output per man in
bituminous-coal mining. Washington D.C.: Federal Works Agency Work
Projects Administration.
Hurt, Douglas R. (2000). Prices, Payments, And Production: Kansas Wheat Farmers and
the Agricultural Adjustment Administration. Kansas History, 23 (1), 72-87.
Iowa Geological Survey. (1930). Studies of Iowa Coal. Technical Paper No. 2. Des
Moines, IA: The State of Iowa.
Lanman, Clay. (1989). “The Railroad Came to Keosauqua and it Left.” In The
Keosauqua Experience, 34-37. Douds, IA: The Van Buren County Historical
Society.
Lees, James H. and Beyer, S. W. (1908). History of Coal Mining in Iowa. Iowa
Geological Survey Annual Report.
Limstrom, G. A. (1948). Extent, character, and forestation possibilities of land stripped
for coal in the Central States. Columbus, Ohio: Central States Forest Experiment
Station.
Luttrell, Clifton B. (1989). The High Cost of Farm Welfare. Washington D.C.: CATO
Institute.
Mines and Minerals Bureau. “Abandoned Mined Land Reclamation.” 2011.
http://www.iowaagriculture.gov/MinesAndMinerals/abandonedMinedLandRecla
mation.asp
75
National Research Council. (1981a). Surface Mining: Soil, Coal, and Society. A Report
Prepared by the Committee on Soil as a Resource in Relation to Surface Mining
for Coal. Washington, D.C. National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (1981b). Disposal of Excess Spoil from Coal Mining and
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977: A Study of Regulatory
Requirements, Engineering Practices, and Environmental Protection Objectives.
A Report Prepared by the Committee on Disposal of Excess Spoil Board on
Mineral and Energy Resources Commission on Natural Resources. Washington,
D.C. National Academy Press.
Peterson, Trudy Huskamp. (1980). Farmers, Bureaucrats and Middlemen: Historical
Perspectives in American Agriculture. Washington D.C.: Howard University
Press.
Phillips, Sarah T. (2007). This land, this nation : conservation, rural America, and the
New Deal. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Risser, Hubert E. (1958). The Economics of the Coal Industry. Lawrence, KS: Bureau of
Business Research School of Business University of Kansas.
Reddick, Andy. Personal Interview. 16 July 2011.
Schwieder, Dorthy. (1983). Black Diamonds Life and Work in Iowa’s Coal Mining
Communities, 1895-1925. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
Schwieder, Dorthy. (2003). Buxton: a Black utopia in the heartland. Iowa City, IA:
University of Iowa Press.
Shideler, James H. (1976). Farm Crisis, 1919-1923. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
State Historical Society of Iowa . (1947). History of Coal Mining in Iowa. Annals of
Iowa, 29 (1), 61-63.
State of Iowa. (1926). Census of Iowa For The Year 1925. Des Moines, Ia: The State of
Iowa.
State of Iowa. (1972). Report of the State Mine Inspector. Des Moines, Ia: The State of
Iowa.
State of Iowa. (1934). Report of the State Mine Inspector. Des Moines, Ia: The State of
Iowa.
76
State of Iowa. (1936). Report of the State Mine Inspector. Des Moines, Ia: The State of
Iowa.
State of Iowa. (1938). Report of the State Mine Inspector. Des Moines, Ia: The State of
Iowa.
State of Iowa. (1940). Report of the State Mine Inspector. Des Moines, Ia: The State of
Iowa.
Stolp, Richard and De Luca, F. P. (1976). Perspectives on Iowa Coal. Ames, IA: Energy
and Mineral Resources Research Institute.
Strand, Norman V. (1942). Prices of Farm Products in Iowa, 1851-1940. Ames, IA:
Agricultural Experiment Station, Iowa State College of Agriculture and Mechanic
Arts.
Stricklin Jr., Travie W. (1929). A Survey of the Iowa Coal Mining Industry. Iowa City,
IA: State University of Iowa.
Thomas, Cecil. Personal Interview. 5 August 2011.
U.S. Department of Interior. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
AMLIS Problem Area Description IA000108, 2001.
United States Agricultural Adjustment Administration. (1934). The Agricultural
Adjustment Act in Iowa.
United States Bureau of the Census. (1850). Seventh Census of the United States.
Washington D.C.: United State Bureau of the Census.
United States Bureau of the Census. (1870). Ninth Census of the United States.
Washington D.C.: United State Bureau of the Census.
United States Bureau of the Census. (1920). Fourteenth Census of the United States.
Washington D.C.: United State Bureau of the Census.
United States Bureau of the Census. (1930). Fifteenth Census of the United States.
Washington D.C.: United State Bureau of the Census.
United States Bureau of the Census. (1940). Sixteenth Census of the United States.
Washington D.C.: United State Bureau of the Census.
United States Bureau of the Census. (1940). Sixteenth Census of the United States:
Agriculture. Washington D.C.: United State Bureau of the Census.
77
United States Department of Agriculture. (1984). History of Agricultural Price-Support
and Adjustment Programs, 1933-1984.
Van Buren County Genealogy. Obituaries. Keosauqua, Ia: 2011.
Van Buren Record. Keosauqua, Ia: 1928-1945.
Western Historical Company. (1878). The History of Van Buren County. Chicago:
Western Historical Society.
Wilson, M. L. (1940). Problem of Poverty in Agriculture. Journal of Farm Economies,
22(1), 10-29.
78
APPENDIX A: ABANDON MINE SITE SURVEY
A surveyed abandoned mine site in Van Buren County overlaid on a 1951aerial
photograph.
79
A surveyed abandoned mine site in Van Buren County overlaid on a lidar derived hill
shade image.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Thesis and Dissertation Services
!