Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />c;. .'.! (".I <br />t:..lo..t'-j, t,,) <br /> <br /> <br />BASALT PROJECT <br /> <br />AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY AND <br />FINAl,CIAL ANALYSES <br /> <br />The limited portion of the feed crops that would be surplus to local <br />requirements can be readily absorbed by livestock producers and feeders <br />operating near the project. <br /> <br />Farm improvements <br /> <br />In order to obtain optimum utilization of project water, the <br />virgin lands would need to be prepared for irrigation and minor adjust- <br />ments would be required in distribution systems serving presently irri- <br />gated lands. The virgin lands would either be absorbed by existing <br />farms or developed as new farms. Preparation of virgin land would consist <br />primarily of clearing sagebrush and establishing on-the-farm water distri- <br />bution systems. In minor areas of the project some rock removal, clearing <br />of oak brush, and some floating and leveling will be necessary. It is <br />expected that all of this work will be relatively inexpensive. Costs of <br />land preparation and establishing nelf farms would be borne directly by <br />the farmers. <br /> <br />Development period <br /> <br />Development periods of 3 and 10 years would be recommended on supple- <br />mental service lands and full service lands, respectively. <br /> <br />Payment capacity <br /> <br />The estimated payment capacity of the irrigators is $126,000 <br />annually or $2.15 per acre-foot of project lfater. This estimate was <br />made by the farm budget method of analysis by the use of budgets <br />previously prepared for the Silt, Bostwick Park, and Fruitland Mesa. <br />projects. In this analysis three types of farms were considered to be <br />representative of future agriculture of the Basalt project area, namely <br />beef, farm flocks of sheep, and general farms. The budgets were appli- <br />cable to the full irrigation service lands in the project area. The <br />payment capacity per acre-foot of water determined in this manner was <br />projected to the supplemental service lands. <br /> <br />Comparison of Benefits and Costs <br /> <br />As a means of determining the economic justification of the <br />Basalt project, anticipated benefits were compared with estimated costs. <br />In the comparison, only the project effects of irrigation were con- <br />sidered since possible incidental effects to other uses have not been <br />evaluated. Both the irrigation benefits and the project costs were <br />computed as average annual equivalents over a lOO-year period using an <br />interest rate of 2~ percent. <br /> <br />36 <br />