Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA
Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and constr...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
1987 |
|---|
| Umfang: |
17 |
|---|
| Reproduktion: |
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
in: Environmental management - 1976, 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 |
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:11 ; year:1987 ; month:03 ; pages:389-405 ; extent:17 |
| Links: |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
NLEJ207218420 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLEJ207218420 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20210706223014.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 070528s1987 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLEJ207218420 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| 264 | 1 | |c 1987 | |
| 300 | |a 17 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. | ||
| 533 | |f Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Huddleston, J. Herbert |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Pease, James R. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Forrest, William G. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hickerson, Hugh J. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Langridge, Russell W. |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i in |t Environmental management |d 1976 |g 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 |w (DE-627)NLEJ18898383X |w (DE-600)1478932-2 |x 1432-1009 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:11 |g year:1987 |g month:03 |g pages:389-405 |g extent:17 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-SOJ | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_ARTICLE | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 11 |j 1987 |c 3 |h 389-405 |g 17 | ||
| matchkey_str |
article:14321009:1987----::soarclualneautoadiesesetn |
|---|---|
| hierarchy_sort_str |
1987 |
| publishDate |
1987 |
| allfields |
(DE-627)NLEJ207218420 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 17 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Huddleston, J. Herbert oth Pease, James R. oth Forrest, William G. oth Hickerson, Hugh J. oth Langridge, Russell W. oth in Environmental management 1976 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)NLEJ18898383X (DE-600)1478932-2 1432-1009 nnns volume:11 year:1987 month:03 pages:389-405 extent:17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 11 1987 3 389-405 17 |
| spelling |
(DE-627)NLEJ207218420 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 17 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Huddleston, J. Herbert oth Pease, James R. oth Forrest, William G. oth Hickerson, Hugh J. oth Langridge, Russell W. oth in Environmental management 1976 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)NLEJ18898383X (DE-600)1478932-2 1432-1009 nnns volume:11 year:1987 month:03 pages:389-405 extent:17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 11 1987 3 389-405 17 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
(DE-627)NLEJ207218420 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 17 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Huddleston, J. Herbert oth Pease, James R. oth Forrest, William G. oth Hickerson, Hugh J. oth Langridge, Russell W. oth in Environmental management 1976 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)NLEJ18898383X (DE-600)1478932-2 1432-1009 nnns volume:11 year:1987 month:03 pages:389-405 extent:17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 11 1987 3 389-405 17 |
| allfieldsGer |
(DE-627)NLEJ207218420 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 17 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Huddleston, J. Herbert oth Pease, James R. oth Forrest, William G. oth Hickerson, Hugh J. oth Langridge, Russell W. oth in Environmental management 1976 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)NLEJ18898383X (DE-600)1478932-2 1432-1009 nnns volume:11 year:1987 month:03 pages:389-405 extent:17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 11 1987 3 389-405 17 |
| allfieldsSound |
(DE-627)NLEJ207218420 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 17 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Huddleston, J. Herbert oth Pease, James R. oth Forrest, William G. oth Hickerson, Hugh J. oth Langridge, Russell W. oth in Environmental management 1976 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)NLEJ18898383X (DE-600)1478932-2 1432-1009 nnns volume:11 year:1987 month:03 pages:389-405 extent:17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 11 1987 3 389-405 17 |
| language |
English |
| source |
in Environmental management 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 volume:11 year:1987 month:03 pages:389-405 extent:17 |
| sourceStr |
in Environmental management 11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405 volume:11 year:1987 month:03 pages:389-405 extent:17 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Environmental management |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Huddleston, J. Herbert @@oth@@ Pease, James R. @@oth@@ Forrest, William G. @@oth@@ Hickerson, Hugh J. @@oth@@ Langridge, Russell W. @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
1987-03-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
NLEJ18898383X |
| id |
NLEJ207218420 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ207218420</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210706223014.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070528s1987 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ207218420</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">1987</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">17</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Huddleston, J. Herbert</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pease, James R.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Forrest, William G.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hickerson, Hugh J.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Langridge, Russell W.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">in</subfield><subfield code="t">Environmental management</subfield><subfield code="d">1976</subfield><subfield code="g">11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ18898383X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1478932-2</subfield><subfield code="x">1432-1009</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1987</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:389-405</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:17</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-SOJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">1987</subfield><subfield code="c">3</subfield><subfield code="h">389-405</subfield><subfield code="g">17</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| series2 |
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)NLEJ18898383X |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| collection |
NL |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1432-1009 |
| topic_title |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
j h h jh jhh j r p jr jrp w g f wg wgf h j h hj hjh r w l rw rwl |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Environmental management |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
NLEJ18898383X |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Environmental management |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)NLEJ18898383X (DE-600)1478932-2 |
| title |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| spellingShingle |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)NLEJ207218420 |
| title_full |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| journal |
Environmental management |
| journalStr |
Environmental management |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
1987 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
389 |
| container_volume |
11 |
| physical |
17 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| title_sort |
use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in linn county, oregon, usa |
| title_auth |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| abstract |
Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. |
| abstractGer |
Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE |
| title_short |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Huddleston, J. Herbert Pease, James R. Forrest, William G. Hickerson, Hugh J. Langridge, Russell W. |
| author2Str |
Huddleston, J. Herbert Pease, James R. Forrest, William G. Hickerson, Hugh J. Langridge, Russell W. |
| ppnlink |
NLEJ18898383X |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth oth oth |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T09:04:48.459Z |
| _version_ |
1803819877358632960 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ207218420</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210706223014.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070528s1987 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ207218420</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">1987</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">17</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Oregon state law requires each county in the state to identify agricultural land and enact policies and regulations to protect agricultural land use. State guidelines encourage the preservation of large parcels of agricultural land and discourage partitioning of agricultural land and construction of nonfarm dwellings in agricultural areas. A land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system was developed in Linn County to aid in the identification of agricultural land and provide assistance to decision makers concerning the relative merits of requests to partition existing parcels of ricultural land and introduce nonagricultural uses. Land evaluation was determined by calculating soil potential ratings for each agricultural soil in the county based on the soil potentials for winter wheat, annual ryegrass, permanent pasture, and irrigated sweet corn. Soil potential ratings were expressed on a scale of 0 to 150 points. The land evaluation score for a parcel consists of the weighted average soil potential rating for all of the soils in the parcel, weighted by the percentage of each soil present in the parcel. Site assessment was based on the size of a parcel and on the amount of existing conflict between agricultural and nonagricultural uses, particularly rural residential uses, both adjacent to and in the vicinity of a parcel. Parcel size refers to both size in relation to a typical field and size in relation to a typical farm unit. Conflict takes into account the number of nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of a parcel, the amount of the perimeter that adjoins conflicting land uses, and the residential density adjacent to the parcel. Empirical scales were derived for assigning points to each of the site assessment factors. Both parcel size and conflict were worth 75 points in the model. For parcel size, 45 points were allocated to field size and 30 points to farm-unit size. For conflict, 30 points were allocated to nonfarm dwellings within 1/4 mile and 45 points to perimeter conflicts. The LESA model was validated by testing on 23 parcels in Linn County for which requests to partition and/or convert to nonagricultural uses had been received by the County Planning Department. This testing was an essential part of the development process, as it pointed out inconsistencies and errors in the model and allowed continuous adjustment of factors and point scales. The results of application of the final model to three of the case studies are presented to illustrate the concepts. Three possible uses of the information generated by the LESA system include determining the relative agricultural value of a parcel, determining grades of agricultural land suitability, and determining the impacts of changing land use on other parcels in the vicinity. Relative agricultural value is a direct outcome of application of the evaluation criteria in the LESA model. Good, marginal, and nonagricultural grades of agricultural suitability were determined by examining the data from all 23 test cases and establishing threshold point values for soil quality, conflict, parcel size, and total LESA score. Impact analyses were not done in this study, but could be achieved by calculating LESA scores for all parcels possibly affected by a land-use change both before and after a proposed change. All three applications fall short of making a specific land-use decision, but they do provide information that should be of value to the local jurisdiction charged with making such decisions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Huddleston, J. Herbert</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pease, James R.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Forrest, William G.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hickerson, Hugh J.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Langridge, Russell W.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">in</subfield><subfield code="t">Environmental management</subfield><subfield code="d">1976</subfield><subfield code="g">11(1987) vom: März, Seite 389-405</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ18898383X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1478932-2</subfield><subfield code="x">1432-1009</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1987</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:389-405</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:17</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-SOJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">1987</subfield><subfield code="c">3</subfield><subfield code="h">389-405</subfield><subfield code="g">17</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4021854 |