Cf. United States v. 15.00 Acres of Land in Miss. Cty., 468 F. Supp. 310, 314-16 & n.9 (E.D. Ark. 1979) (“The court is not unmindful of the special significance of this land to the [landowners], their families, friends and associates. And, while the court is sympathetic to the unique problems posed by the increasing demand for the limited natural resources involved in this case, the court must resolve the issues herein on the same basis as a jury, without regard to sympathy or prejudice or like or dislike of any party to this suit. . . . [W]hile the value of the . . . tract for duck hunting purposes is conceded, it does not follow that the [landowners] are to be compensated on the basis of that particular value . . . .”); A pprAisAl i nsTuTuTe, T he A pprAisAl o F r eAl e sTATe331 (14th ed. 2013) (“[H]ighest and best use is an economic