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: |
Huddleston, J. Herbert [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
1987 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Environmental management - Springer-Verlag, 1976, 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:11 ; year:1987 ; number:3 ; month:07 ; pages:389-405 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/BF01867168 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC2060608473 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC2060608473 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230324174103.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 200819s1987 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/BF01867168 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2060608473 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-He213)BF01867168-p | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 370 |a 350 |a 330 |q VZ |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 570 |a 690 |a 333.7 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 12 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Huddleston, J. Herbert |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| 264 | 1 | |c 1987 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 | ||
| 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. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Agricultural Land | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Sweet Corn | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Land Suitability | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Land Evaluation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Site Assessment | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Pease, James R. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Forrest, William G. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hickerson, Hugh J. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Langridge, Russell W. |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Environmental management |d Springer-Verlag, 1976 |g 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 |w (DE-627)129322970 |w (DE-600)131372-1 |w (DE-576)014557207 |x 0364-152X |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:11 |g year:1987 |g number:3 |g month:07 |g pages:389-405 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-UMW | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-ARC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-TEC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-FOR | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OPC-GGO | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_267 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2018 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4103 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4311 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4314 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4319 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 11 |j 1987 |e 3 |c 07 |h 389-405 | ||
| author_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 |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:0364152X:1987----::soarclualneautoadiesesetn |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
1987 |
| publishDate |
1987 |
| allfields |
10.1007/BF01867168 doi (DE-627)OLC2060608473 (DE-He213)BF01867168-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 370 350 330 VZ 570 690 333.7 VZ 12 ssgn Huddleston, J. Herbert verfasserin aut Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 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. Agricultural Land Sweet Corn Land Suitability Land Evaluation Site Assessment Pease, James R. aut Forrest, William G. aut Hickerson, Hugh J. aut Langridge, Russell W. aut Enthalten in Environmental management Springer-Verlag, 1976 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)129322970 (DE-600)131372-1 (DE-576)014557207 0364-152X nnns volume:11 year:1987 number:3 month:07 pages:389-405 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-FOR SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4311 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4314 GBV_ILN_4319 AR 11 1987 3 07 389-405 |
| spelling |
10.1007/BF01867168 doi (DE-627)OLC2060608473 (DE-He213)BF01867168-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 370 350 330 VZ 570 690 333.7 VZ 12 ssgn Huddleston, J. Herbert verfasserin aut Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 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. Agricultural Land Sweet Corn Land Suitability Land Evaluation Site Assessment Pease, James R. aut Forrest, William G. aut Hickerson, Hugh J. aut Langridge, Russell W. aut Enthalten in Environmental management Springer-Verlag, 1976 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)129322970 (DE-600)131372-1 (DE-576)014557207 0364-152X nnns volume:11 year:1987 number:3 month:07 pages:389-405 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-FOR SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4311 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4314 GBV_ILN_4319 AR 11 1987 3 07 389-405 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/BF01867168 doi (DE-627)OLC2060608473 (DE-He213)BF01867168-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 370 350 330 VZ 570 690 333.7 VZ 12 ssgn Huddleston, J. Herbert verfasserin aut Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 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. Agricultural Land Sweet Corn Land Suitability Land Evaluation Site Assessment Pease, James R. aut Forrest, William G. aut Hickerson, Hugh J. aut Langridge, Russell W. aut Enthalten in Environmental management Springer-Verlag, 1976 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)129322970 (DE-600)131372-1 (DE-576)014557207 0364-152X nnns volume:11 year:1987 number:3 month:07 pages:389-405 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-FOR SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4311 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4314 GBV_ILN_4319 AR 11 1987 3 07 389-405 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/BF01867168 doi (DE-627)OLC2060608473 (DE-He213)BF01867168-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 370 350 330 VZ 570 690 333.7 VZ 12 ssgn Huddleston, J. Herbert verfasserin aut Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 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. Agricultural Land Sweet Corn Land Suitability Land Evaluation Site Assessment Pease, James R. aut Forrest, William G. aut Hickerson, Hugh J. aut Langridge, Russell W. aut Enthalten in Environmental management Springer-Verlag, 1976 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)129322970 (DE-600)131372-1 (DE-576)014557207 0364-152X nnns volume:11 year:1987 number:3 month:07 pages:389-405 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-FOR SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4311 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4314 GBV_ILN_4319 AR 11 1987 3 07 389-405 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/BF01867168 doi (DE-627)OLC2060608473 (DE-He213)BF01867168-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 370 350 330 VZ 570 690 333.7 VZ 12 ssgn Huddleston, J. Herbert verfasserin aut Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA 1987 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 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. Agricultural Land Sweet Corn Land Suitability Land Evaluation Site Assessment Pease, James R. aut Forrest, William G. aut Hickerson, Hugh J. aut Langridge, Russell W. aut Enthalten in Environmental management Springer-Verlag, 1976 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 (DE-627)129322970 (DE-600)131372-1 (DE-576)014557207 0364-152X nnns volume:11 year:1987 number:3 month:07 pages:389-405 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-FOR SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4311 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4314 GBV_ILN_4319 AR 11 1987 3 07 389-405 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Environmental management 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 volume:11 year:1987 number:3 month:07 pages:389-405 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Environmental management 11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405 volume:11 year:1987 number:3 month:07 pages:389-405 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Agricultural Land Sweet Corn Land Suitability Land Evaluation Site Assessment |
| dewey-raw |
370 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Environmental management |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Huddleston, J. Herbert @@aut@@ Pease, James R. @@aut@@ Forrest, William G. @@aut@@ Hickerson, Hugh J. @@aut@@ Langridge, Russell W. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
1987-07-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
129322970 |
| dewey-sort |
3370 |
| id |
OLC2060608473 |
| 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">OLC2060608473</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230324174103.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s1987 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/BF01867168</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2060608473</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)BF01867168-p</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="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">370</subfield><subfield code="a">350</subfield><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">570</subfield><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="a">333.7</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">12</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Huddleston, J. Herbert</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</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="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987</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="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Agricultural Land</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Sweet Corn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Land Suitability</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Land Evaluation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Site Assessment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pease, James R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Forrest, William G.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hickerson, Hugh J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Langridge, Russell W.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Environmental management</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1976</subfield><subfield code="g">11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129322970</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)131372-1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014557207</subfield><subfield code="x">0364-152X</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">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:389-405</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-UMW</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-ARC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-FOR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-GGO</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4103</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4311</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4314</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4319</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="e">3</subfield><subfield code="c">07</subfield><subfield code="h">389-405</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Huddleston, J. Herbert |
| spellingShingle |
Huddleston, J. Herbert ddc 370 ddc 570 ssgn 12 misc Agricultural Land misc Sweet Corn misc Land Suitability misc Land Evaluation misc Site Assessment Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| authorStr |
Huddleston, J. Herbert |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)129322970 |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
370 - Education 350 - Public administration & military science 330 - Economics 570 - Life sciences; biology 690 - Buildings 333 - Economics of land & energy |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
0364-152X |
| topic_title |
370 350 330 VZ 570 690 333.7 VZ 12 ssgn Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA Agricultural Land Sweet Corn Land Suitability Land Evaluation Site Assessment |
| topic |
ddc 370 ddc 570 ssgn 12 misc Agricultural Land misc Sweet Corn misc Land Suitability misc Land Evaluation misc Site Assessment |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 370 ddc 570 ssgn 12 misc Agricultural Land misc Sweet Corn misc Land Suitability misc Land Evaluation misc Site Assessment |
| topic_browse |
ddc 370 ddc 570 ssgn 12 misc Agricultural Land misc Sweet Corn misc Land Suitability misc Land Evaluation misc Site Assessment |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Environmental management |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
129322970 |
| dewey-tens |
370 - Education 350 - Public administration & military science 330 - Economics 570 - Life sciences; biology 690 - Building & construction |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Environmental management |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)129322970 (DE-600)131372-1 (DE-576)014557207 |
| title |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC2060608473 (DE-He213)BF01867168-p |
| title_full |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| author_sort |
Huddleston, J. Herbert |
| journal |
Environmental management |
| journalStr |
Environmental management |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
300 - Social sciences 500 - Science 600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
1987 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
389 |
| author_browse |
Huddleston, J. Herbert Pease, James R. Forrest, William G. Hickerson, Hugh J. Langridge, Russell W. |
| container_volume |
11 |
| class |
370 350 330 VZ 570 690 333.7 VZ 12 ssgn |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Huddleston, J. Herbert |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/BF01867168 |
| dewey-full |
370 350 330 570 690 333.7 |
| 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. © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 |
| 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. © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 |
| 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. © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-FOR SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4311 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4314 GBV_ILN_4319 |
| container_issue |
3 |
| title_short |
Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168 |
| remote_bool |
false |
| author2 |
Pease, James R. Forrest, William G. Hickerson, Hugh J. Langridge, Russell W. |
| author2Str |
Pease, James R. Forrest, William G. Hickerson, Hugh J. Langridge, Russell W. |
| ppnlink |
129322970 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/BF01867168 |
| up_date |
2024-07-04T01:46:29.468Z |
| _version_ |
1803611106936094720 |
| 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">OLC2060608473</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230324174103.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s1987 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/BF01867168</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2060608473</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)BF01867168-p</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="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">370</subfield><subfield code="a">350</subfield><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">570</subfield><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="a">333.7</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">12</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Huddleston, J. Herbert</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</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="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987</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="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Agricultural Land</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Sweet Corn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Land Suitability</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Land Evaluation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Site Assessment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pease, James R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Forrest, William G.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hickerson, Hugh J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Langridge, Russell W.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Environmental management</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1976</subfield><subfield code="g">11(1987), 3 vom: Juli, Seite 389-405</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129322970</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)131372-1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014557207</subfield><subfield code="x">0364-152X</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">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:389-405</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867168</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-UMW</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-ARC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-FOR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-GGO</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4103</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4311</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4314</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4319</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="e">3</subfield><subfield code="c">07</subfield><subfield code="h">389-405</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4031916 |