Agriculture statistics for Oregon

The top 10 agricultural products for Oregon in 2001 were:
Greenhouse and nursery products $696 million.
Cattle and Calves $423 million
Hay $336 million
Grass Seed $323 million
Milk $271 million
Christmas Trees $131 million
Potatoes $122 million
Wheat $113 million
Pears $77 million
Onions $72 million

wow mary, that is a whole lot of bucks on Ag. Were any of those crops damaged by the fires?

Wow, Mary, very interesting, I knew nursery industry was number one. But here we live in a state with huge timber potential and we can't exploit it. I really think we are in for more fire problems as the years go by. We need to harvest some of those trees and replant of course. Some of the big old growth stuff can be left alone but it is such a great natural resource here and we import lumber and wood from Japan.

Oh, yes, several Billion $ worth of timber is gone in the fires, but the environmentalists have pretty much stopped the logging state wide. So there are many more Billion $ worth just standing there getting killed by beetles or dieing of old age, or growing so thick that they will never be more than a few inches in diameter. All that adds to the explosive fuels that are already in our western forests, waiting for the next lightening storm to ignite it. I think most of the fire burned area is forest, not cropland. We also sell squared off timbers called cants by the shipload to Japan. By law logs cannot be exported, but they run them through a saw and make them sort of square, then they can sell them as sawn lumber.(this may have changed in the last few years). Meanwhile US jobs are lost because of shortages of raw materials, which are either on a ship going overseas or going to waste standing or laying in the forest. It's a sad situation. Somebody out there needs to wake up.

When talking to my son in Corvallis, I was amazed at the power of the environmentalists in Oregon. Because of one fish, water is cut off for herds of cattle. Because of one beetle, trees can't be cut down. What's that all about? Where the balance?

There doesn't seem to be any balance. The spotted owl issue shut down a lot of forests and families lost their livelihood and their homes. The environmentalists are more concerned about the wildlife than about the people. There doesn't seem to be any common sense to it. Timber sales get tied up in court over some such issue for years, and meanwhile some trees die, small trees and brush grow like an untended garden patch, the dead materials pile up and a fire comes through like a freight train, unstoppable in most cases. The US Forest Service has started to make controlled burns in the spring and early fall when there is higher humidity and dampness in the logs and brush in an effort to clean up areas with heavy debris, but it will be a long time before the job is done. In the previous 75 years their policy was to put out every fire. Smokey the Bear has changed his message from "Only you can prevent forest fires" to a message about preventing wildfire. Human caused fires still account for about 90% of the fires. www.smokeybear.com will get you to the website.

I too believe environmentalists need too look at the "whole picture". There has been a prarie dog issue in western Nebraska. Ranchers vs. environmentalists. I'm not sure of all the details but ranchers were told they could not destroy prairie dogs, etc. This is all they need to be told in the middle of one of the worst droughts ever, etc. I believe, in the end, the Game and Parks agreed to withhold the restrictions. I had to shake my head - several weeks ago there was a letter to the editor from an environmentalist telling people what "bullies" the ranchers were and that people should quit eating beef. While he has his right to his opinion, this person certainly did not think about how much our state depends on the beef industry.