Looking to move here in the future, but concerned about wildfires (Portland: lawyers, earthquakes)

[Larry Caldwell]

Originally Posted by Deserterer

Who said anything about Oregon?

This may be relevant to Oregon. Many of the homes up the river canyons were built in a richer time, when a mill job and some initiative could create a good place to raise a family. Now, most of the mills are gone and the ones that remain have lost most of their jobs to automation. Private timber has taken a big hit. Salvage logging will keep mills running for a couple of years, but then the soil will be barren for a minimum of 30 years while new trees grow. The state has lost huge portions of its best Cascade Mountains recreation and tourist areas. Restoring those will be expensive, and will also take about 15 years before new growth covers the scars.

If I were up there, and had been burned out, I would be thinking seriously about relocating rather than rebuilding. Take the insurance money and run. That would particularly be the case if the home was not insured for full replacement value, and the occupant was older. If they have to take on a mortgage to rebuild, that might not be a good choice for someone who is retired or nearing retirement.

I don't know what that means for someone thinking of moving to Oregon. I can see it providing options, and I can see it creating uncertainties. I think the mountain communities will recover, but they will never again be what they were.

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

It was several years back in a "westward migration discussion." You were conflating the Klondike gold rush crowd (late 19th century) with the settlers who relocated to Oregon.

Okay, thanks for reminding me about that thread. It was a great thread. We were talking about why Russia sold Alaska to the US. I pointed out that they gave up Alaska for the same reason that the British gave up Oregon. Because American settlers would have flooded into Alaska, the same way Americans had flooded into Oregon, and Russia would have been powerless to stop it. It makes total sense. I standby everything I posted.

[Metlakatla]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

Okay, thanks for reminding me about that thread. It was a great thread. We were talking about why Russia sold Alaska to the US. I pointed out that they gave up Alaska for the same reason that the British gave up Oregon. Because American settlers would have flooded into Alaska, the same way Americans had flooded into Oregon, and Russia would have been powerless to stop it. It makes total sense. I standby everything I posted.

Settlers flooded to Oregon because of the rich ag land. Alaska didn't have what it would have taken to sustain floods of settlers; most would have been wiped out during their first winter. Even the farmers who relocated during the Great Depression didn't make it more than a couple of years.

Russia "sold" Alaska because it needed the money and only two potential buyers were the U.S. and England. Since England and Russia were pretty fierce rivals during that time, they sold it to the U.S. ETA I think you're in that they realized it was too big for them to really govern, but I think they were more worried about losing it to England than floods of settlers from the U.S. (which never happened even after the purchase, so....).

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

Settlers flooded to Oregon because of the rich ag land. Alaska didn't have what it would have taken to sustain floods of settlers; most would have been wiped out during their first winter. Even the farmers who relocated during the Great Depression didn't make it more than a couple of years.

Russia "sold" Alaska because it needed the money and only two potential buyers were the U.S. and England. Since England and Russia were pretty fierce rivals during that time, they sold it to the U.S. ETA I think you're in that they realized it was too big for them to really govern, but I think they were more worried about losing it to England than floods of settlers from the U.S. (which never happened even after the purchase, so....).

I already covered all that on the other thread. But if you want to revive that thread, I'll be happy to respond to you there.

[Metlakatla]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

I already covered all that on the other thread. But if you want to revive that thread, I'll be happy to respond to you there.

I'm not really that interested in digging it up. My point remains that Alaska wasn't in any danger of being "flooded" by U.S. settlers. Russia was probably more concerned about keeping it out of the hands of the British (Canada was under British dominion at that time).

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

I'm not really that interested in digging it up. My point remains that Alaska wasn't in any danger of being "flooded" by U.S. settlers. Russia was probably more concerned about keeping it out of the hands of the British (Canada was under British dominion at that time).

Oh what the hell, I'll do it for you as soon as I get a chance. Since obviously it's been bugging you all these years and you want to talk about it.

[Metlakatla]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

Oh what the hell, I'll do it for you as soon as I get a chance. Since obviously it's been bugging you all these years and you want to talk about it.

Yes, I've been thinking of nothing else for years.

I responded to you, but you'd actually made my point with a link you posted, so I'm back to planning my upcoming trip to Ecuador.

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

Yes, I've been thinking of nothing else for years.

I responded to you, but you'd actually made my point with a link you posted, so I'm back to planning my upcoming trip to Ecuador.

I had forgotten all about that thread. You are the one who brought it up after three years. LOL.

[Metlakatla]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

I had forgotten all about that thread. You are the one who brought it up after three years. LOL.

You're not special. I also remember the telephone number at the home my family lived in when I was six.

[JackieLovesSun]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

I agree 100%. I think wild fires are a major health issue for all Americans regardless of where you live. And staying indoors is not a solution either. Last week I had all my windows and doors closed, and still had smoke pouring into my apartment. It was just about killing me. I was close to calling an ambulance to take me to the hospital. We must have good air quality. And no managing the forests as our anti-science leader proposes is not the answer either, other then to put out the fires.

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

I had forgotten all about that thread. You are the one who brought it up after three years. LOL.

Cloudy Dayz, I'd be hitting like for all your posts but the stupid forum won't let me until I spread the reputation around.

so I just quoted you to say