Laserfiche WebLink
<br />N <br />~ <br />C'? <br /> <br />CHAPTER VII <br /> <br />FINANCIAL ANALYSIS <br /> <br />Fish and wildlife benefits. <br />the project would result in total <br />$2,010. <br /> <br />The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates <br />annual fish and wildlife benefits of <br /> <br />Recreational benefits. No recreational benefits are claimed from <br />project development. The costs required to obtain the recreational <br />benefits evaluated by the National Park Service, exclusive of fish and <br />wildlife benefits, would exceed the benefits. <br /> <br />Summary of benefits. The direct and indirect benefits anticipated <br />from the project are summarized in the followine tabulation. <br /> <br />Direct <br /> <br />Annual Value <br />Indirect Total <br /> <br />Irrigation <br /> <br />$93,100 <br /> <br />$77,700 <br /> <br />$170,800 <br />2,010 <br />$172,810 <br /> <br />Fish and wildlife <br /> <br />Total Benefit <br /> <br />2,010 <br />$95,110 <br /> <br />$77,700 <br /> <br />Annual Equi valen t Co sts <br /> <br />Construction costs. An annual amount of $87,200 would be required <br />annually to amortize the project construction cost over a 100-year <br />period at 2.5 percent interest. In determining this amount allowances <br />were made for interest during construction and the present worth of <br />items that could be salvaged at the end of the lOO-year period. <br /> <br />Operation, maintenance, and replacement costs. Approximately <br />$5,850 would be required annually over the 100-year period of analysis <br />for operation, maintenance, and replacements of project features. For <br />the determination of annual equivalent costs, the replacement costs <br />were computed on a sinking fund basis at 2.5 percent interest over a <br />lOo-year period. <br /> <br />Assignment of Colorado River storage project costs. Approximately <br />G13,600 annually would be assigned to the Silt project as its prorated <br />share of the cost of regulatory features of the Colorado River Storage <br />project. Costs of the storage project's regulatory features would be <br />paid by revenues of the storage project. They are, however, being <br />assigned for purposes of benefit-cost analyses to future water-consuming <br />projects in the upper basin since development of such projects is depend- <br />ent on the river regulation that would be provided by the storage project. <br /> <br />50 <br />