What is the downside to living in Oregon? (Portland, Tillamook: appointed, renting)

[WESTCOASTER_19]

okay it just seems like your tryin to find the littlest things that can put oregon done when your wrong...if your noty a native then don't even open your mouth on the subject. cool thing about Oregon is there's no sale tax and you don't have to pump your own gas like every other U.S city

[jadgeb]

Originally Posted by karlsch

If your husband has a degree in Industrial Engineering from a highly ranked university, why are you living in a primarily rural area with very little manufacturing?

Sometimes you have to move to where the jobs are.

I have several answers on why we don't move:

1) My health isn't good;
2) We have a farm, livestock, and the attendant "junque";
3) Our place is PAID FOR (I have lived here over 20 years) and we could never find the equivalent in acreage and location at these absurd over-prices;
4) My husband does NOT want to live in the Valley again;
5) The employers here are mostly clueless as to how to perceive his skills and the value he could be to their companies (i.e., Good Ol' Boy syndrome) but we keep hoping for improvement in this area;
6) My husband can take contract positions out of the area if necessary. (I work full time but it doesn't pay enough to support both of us. Where I work is about $5/hr. too low on a scale with colleagues in other parts of the state w/same skills).
7) I am a farm/ranch gal and there is no WAY that I could ever live in a town or a city or outside of a big populated area.
And the biggest reason of all:
8) We can't afford to move!

[^Numi^]

Try Lake County.
1. Not The Valley
2. Alot of ranchers/cowboys/cowgirls (I am not one of them)
3. Everyone knows everyone
4. Schools are small and no-body gets teased.
So There!

[jiffin4java]

There's going to be negatives wherever you choose to live. Doesn't matter whether you're a native or not. If you're happy there, who cares? If you're not, move! I can't claim to be a transplant of any of the five states I've lived in...you have to be rooted to transplant, right? LOL!

Just a note....those "rich Californians" don't just take their money to Oregon and they don't just come from California, and the same thing happens in California. When my husband first moved out of the foothills east of Sacramento for college, he said it was absolutely beautiful to drive through. No houses at all. When we moved there 5yrs later it was riddled with those cookie-cutter, multi-million dollar housing developments and the traffic that goes with it. It's happening everywhere...not just Oregon.

That being said, I've heard a lot more good than bad about Oregon. There certainly could be a lot worse places to end up and I'll be so excited if it's where we ultimately end up. Hopefully we'll be able to find a house we can afford and be able to stay for a long time. My kids need that and so do I.

[dtmoss14]

Is lake county in Oregon?

[Larry Caldwell]

Originally Posted by dtmoss14

Is lake county in Oregon?

Yep, and it's a BIG 'un. 8136 sq. mi., plus 222.7 sq. mi.
of water. Population of the county is 7,350, give or take a few hundred who refuse to be counted and may not be there anyway.

Lake County, Oregon detailed profile - houses, real estate, agriculture, wages, work, ancestries, and more

[Ravie]

I'm only on page two in my reading here, and I haven't heard on person defend the crazy environmentalists... It's because of those crazy environmentalists that there aren't "more" clear cuts around the state. I was just talking to a girl at work who just visted there...she said she would be riding along on a road.... and there would be beautiful forest...then suddenly, giant clear-cut fields.

I understand that the world needs it's paper and it's wood, and that Oregon has a lot of wood to give to that...but someday, after people have cut it all down, you and your children and grandchildren will have no jobs in the timber industry, cause it takes a LONG time to get those trees back. Why do you think they call it old growth?

Maybe I'm just reading people wrong and I'm yelling for no reason. But, if not...I really wonder why people would think the crazy environmentalists are really so crazy.

[freedom]

Originally Posted by Ravie

I'm only on page two in my reading here, and I haven't heard on person defend the crazy environmentalists... It's because of those crazy environmentalists that there aren't "more" clear cuts around the state. I was just talking to a girl at work who just visted there...she said she would be riding along on a road.... and there would be beautiful forest...then suddenly, giant clear-cut fields.

I understand that the world needs it's paper and it's wood, and that Oregon has a lot of wood to give to that...but someday, after people have cut it all down, you and your children and grandchildren will have no jobs in the timber industry, cause it takes a LONG time to get those trees back. Why do you think they call it old growth?

Maybe I'm just reading people wrong and I'm yelling for no reason. But, if not...I really wonder why people would think the crazy environmentalists are really so crazy.

If you are truly interested in understanding the timber industry there is plenty of info out there. Extreme enviros do not care about sustainability, they want no tree, ever to be cut.
Clear cutting is the most practical way of harvesting this renewable resource, it does the least amount of damage to a given area. I agree they are unsightly, and they have gone to great lengths to limit the scenic drive areas of the state, but guess what, people still have property rights, and the feds only own 63% (choke on my word - only) of the land in Oregon. As well, people need jobs. For what you may ask, TO LIVE, EAT, PURSUE HAPPINESS.....
Some enviros have become very selfish in their pursuits, and flushed PEOPLE down the toilet of the economy.

So there is your retort. How was it?

freedom

[WestCoastGirl]

If you are truly interested in understanding the timber industry there is plenty of info out there. Extreme enviros do not care about sustainability, they want no tree, ever to be cut.
Clear cutting is the most practical way of harvesting this renewable resource, it does the least amount of damage to a given area. I agree they are unsightly, and they have gone to great lengths to limit the scenic drive areas of the state, but guess what, people still have property rights, and the feds only own 63% (choke on my word - only) of the land in Oregon. As well, people need jobs. For what you may ask, TO LIVE, EAT, PURSUE HAPPINESS.....
Some enviros have become very selfish in their pursuits, and flushed PEOPLE down the toilet of the economy.

So there is your retort. How was it?

freedom


I've done alot of research on the best way to manage forests. Studies have shown that select cut is the best way to sustain the forest and the environment. Unfortunately - this is a very costly way to cut the trees. Clear cutting does a lot of damage - especially where heavy equipment is used. It tears up the ground, leads to a lot of soil runoff and unless there is considerable tree replanting with good soil maintenance, just leaves a blighted area for a considerable length of time. We live in a very high-demand profit driven world. People make money as quickly and cost effectivly as possible. Until we are willing to use alternatives ways to build, we will continue to clear cut. There are no easy answers.

What's ironic is that most loggers really love being in the out of doors in nature.

My 2 cents worth.

West Coast Girl

[freedom]

Originally Posted by WestCoastGirl

If you are truly interested in understanding the timber industry there is plenty of info out there. Extreme enviros do not care about sustainability, they want no tree, ever to be cut.
Clear cutting is the most practical way of harvesting this renewable resource, it does the least amount of damage to a given area. I agree they are unsightly, and they have gone to great lengths to limit the scenic drive areas of the state, but guess what, people still have property rights, and the feds only own 63% (choke on my word - only) of the land in Oregon. As well, people need jobs. For what you may ask, TO LIVE, EAT, PURSUE HAPPINESS.....
Some enviros have become very selfish in their pursuits, and flushed PEOPLE down the toilet of the economy.

So there is your retort. How was it?

freedom


I've done alot of research on the best way to manage forests. Studies have shown that select cut is the best way to sustain the forest and the environment. Unfortunately - this is a very costly way to cut the trees. Clear cutting does a lot of damage - especially where heavy equipment is used. It tears up the ground, leads to a lot of soil runoff and unless there is considerable tree replanting with good soil maintenance, just leaves a blighted area for a considerable length of time. We live in a very high-demand profit driven world. People make money as quickly and cost effectivly as possible. Until we are willing to use alternatives ways to build, we will continue to clear cut. There are no easy answers.

What's ironic is that most loggers really love being in the out of doors in nature.

My 2 cents worth.

West Coast Girl

Humboldt state university determined that clear cutting was by far the lowest impact on the enviroment. There is far less road building and equipment used in a defined area then a thinning operation, where abundant roads and siltation that effect the watershed.
New growth areas (post clearcut) attract more wildlife than surrounding stands, the new growth is easily accessable for foraging and cover.
Oregon was never nor will ever run out of trees. We could not overlog them if we tried. Billions of board feet are added every year.
But hey Canada is lovin' it. They made up for every board we let burn and die in the forests.