(1) Obtain appraisals of the current market value 

 of lands that would benefit from the plan. These 

 lands should be divided into various categories 

 where values differ significantly. 



(2) Obtain and appropriately adjust appraisals ot 

 non-project lands in the ASA that are comparable 

 to lands in each category of project lands and that 

 have water conditions comparable to those that 

 would result from each alternative plan. 



(i) Adjust the value of these comparable lands for 

 facilities and other capital improvements that are 

 not present on project lands. For example, subtract 

 the current market value of improvements such as 

 investments in orchards. 



(ii) In the case of irrigation projects, add to the 

 appraised value of comparable lands the present 

 value of water costs incurred by the operator. 

 These water costs include both payments to out- 

 side suppliers and the cost of self-supplied water. 

 Use the project discount rate to calculate the pres- 

 ent value of these costs. 



(iii) Control for other factors that may affect the 

 value of land, such as kinds of crops grown, dis- 

 tance to urban areas, availability of transportation 

 facilities, presence of utilities, zoning regulations, 

 and special property tax rates. This control may be 

 achieved by using totally comparable parcels of 

 lands; by collecting a sample large enough so that 

 differences will be averaged out; or by a statistical 

 means such as regression analysis. 



(3) Subtract the value in (1) from the adjusted 

 value in (2). This is the intensification benefit. 



(4) Annualize the intensification benefit found in 

 (3) at the project discount rate. 



2.3.6 Evaluation procedure: Damage reduction 

 for other agricultural properties and 

 associated agricultural enterprises. 



(a) Determine damage reduction for other agricul- 

 tural properties. The term "other agricultural proper- 

 ties" includes physical improvements associated 

 with various farm enterprises and the agricultural 

 community. Measure benefits to such properties as 

 reduction in damages in the future with the project 

 compared to without the project. The following dis- 

 cussion identifies key analytical steps in the evalua- 

 tion. Benefits accrue through alterations in water 

 conditions or in altering the susceptibility of the 

 property to damage (e.g., flood-proofing). 



(i) Inventory damageable improvements. Identify 

 the location, type, number, and value of other agri- 

 cultural properties within the area that are subject 

 to damage. This information is most easily obtained 

 through interviews of farmers and field reconnais- 

 sance. 



(ii) Determine damage to improvements. Gather 

 historical data on damages to other agricultural 

 properties, such as equipment, improvements, and 

 agricultural enterprises. 



(iii) Determine average annual equivalent damage 

 to improvements. Use appropriate data to deter- 

 mine average annual equivalent damage to im- 

 provements. For example, use depth-damage rela- 

 tionships for each reach, integrated with hydrologic 

 data, to develop average annual flood damages 

 with and without the plan. Include consideration of 

 the frequency and duration of the damage. 



(b) Determine damage reduction benefits for as- 

 sociated agricultural enterprises. Associated agricul- 

 tural enterprises are economic activities that may 

 be affected by changed water supply or water man- 

 agement conditions. Evaluate damages of this type 

 as reduced net income under without-project and 

 with-project conditions. An example of this type of 

 damage is delay in spring planting on floodfree 

 lands because of flooding of access roads. 



(c) Calculate average annual equivalent benefits. 

 The damage reduction benefit is the difference be- 

 tween average annual equivalent damages with and 

 without the plan. 



2.3.7 Evaluation procedure: Off-site sediment 

 reduction. 



Determine average annual equivalent sediment 

 damages by adding the costs in constant dollars of 

 removing sediment from roads, culverts, channels, 

 etc., over a representative period of time and divid- 

 ing by the years of record. The difference in dam- 

 ages with and without the project is the benefit. Ex- 

 tending the useful life of an existing reservoir is an- 

 other type of sediment reduction benefit. Discount 

 the net value of the extension to present values, 

 and amortize it over the project life. The increased 

 cost of providing goods and services (e.g., addition- 

 al treatment costs for removing sediment from mu- 

 nicipal water) can also be used to evaluate dam- 

 ages. Reductions in the costs of sediment removal 

 or water treatment provide the basis for assessing 

 benefits with the plan. 



2.3.8 Evaluation procedures: Problems in 

 application. 



(a) Damage reduction benefits. Damage reduc- 

 tion benefits are measured by farm budget analysis. 

 Proper measurement of such benefits requires ac- 

 curate estimates of with- and without-plan soil, 

 water, and land use conditions. Changes in physical 

 conditions take place at different rates and over dif- 

 ferent time periods. Analysis can be improved by 



30 



