WSP10974 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ 00 r:: , '- Irrigation Supplies and Requirements There are several comprehensive studies of irrigation requirements in the general' vicini ty of the 3ni th Fork project. These data, wi th addi tional information supplied by personnel familiar wi th the area, are the basis for determining irrigation water requirements. In the past, water supply shortages in the project area have ranged as high as 70 percent of require- ments during years of low runoff. Based on a weighted average seasonal consumptive use of 18.7 inches per acre and an estimated on-farm irrigation efficiency of 42 percent, the estimated farm irrigation requirement per productive acre is 44.4 inches of water. Proposed project failities will deliver an average of 42.6 inches of irrigation water at the farm headgate, thus meeting 96 percent of the water requirements of the project lands. Land and Irri gation Development Development requirements for project lands are estimated by evaluation areas on the basi s of the average level of management expected on the project and within the limitations imposed by soils and site factors. They are consistent with anticipated irrigation efficiencies and expected crop yields. Weighted average development costs per acre of nonirrigated lands are $52.29 and for presently cultivated lands are $14.87. Projected Agricultural Economy The economic analysis of the proposed Smith Fork project is concerned with two primary objectives: (1) To develop estimates of potential farm incomes and (2) to estimate direct agricultural benefits. Forward Budgeting of farms is used in developing estimates of both potential incomes and direct c agricultural benefits. Four typical farm types --range beef, dairy, feeder steers, and farm sheep -- are used in t~e analysis. Development of the project would result in an improved agricultural economy. Adjusted farm incomes per farm are estimated to average $4,010. This amount would be available for operator and family labor and management and for pay- ment of land and irrigation water costs. The residual approach is used to estimate direct agricultural benefits. For analytical purposes, livestock and associated incomes are omitted from farm budgets. Thi s appro ach eliminates an income and benefi t problem related to processing feed through livestock enterprises and allocating returns to the appropriate resources. However, the influence of a livestock economy is reflected in higher prices for feed crops used in the farm budgets than would otherwise prevail. The weighted average direct agricultural benefits attributable to development of the Smi th Fork project of 8,240 acres are estimated at $8.67 per acre or a total of about $71,400 annually.‡ I iti