2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber language law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Up or out, the answer is obvious based on years of evidence that nobody gains from sprawl except the land speculators who have lobbied and made contributions to elected officials in order to have their rural land declared urban.  And in Washington, D.C. the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties can add another square to their national checkerboard.

The taxpayers lose when property taxes are used to provide new infrastructure in the countryside rather than fix and redevelop what already exists within the urban growth boundary.  The farmers lose when their landbase shrinks making farming less profitable and farming infrastructure supplying seeds, equipment, repairs, fertilizer, etc. goes out of business.  City residents lose when they have to drive so many more miles or forego trips to visit the open space provided by the orchards, Christmas tree farms, CSA's, u-picks, vineyards, wineries and other rural uses that provide direct farm marketing.  Wildlife loses when habitat is paved over and streams are made to run through pipes.  Commuters lose when their daily worktrip is extended by traffic that can't be alleviated in an efficient way by mass transit. 

Going up still employs the electricians, plumbers, framers, even excavators, who build industrial plants and dwelling units.  But going up requires that the counties develop policies that value rural lands as a part of the county economy rather than as a land bank for new, sprawling development and multi-acre paved parking lots.

posted 3 years, 5 months ago
view in context

Even if you accept that Snake River dam removal is the least expensive and fastest way to recovery salmon, what if it is not politically feasible to obtain the votes in the Congress.  Do conservationists simply hammer away at the easiest argument or, instead, take actions that will reduce mortality in the tributaries and increase natural spawning which benefits both human beings and the ecosystems by virtue of the marine nutrients that the salmon bring from the ocean to the fisheries and the habitat?  Failure to take such actions is a sure recipe for destruction of salmon populations and loss of important ecosystems.

posted 3 years, 10 months ago
view in context

In 1982  the Columbia River treaty fishing tribes first proposed using a strategy utilizing habitat protection and hatchery supplementation to rebuild wild salmon populations.  At first, what is now NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) argued that salmon runs could not be rebuilt above the dams without diminishing the ocean fishery by hydro impacts and tribal catch.  By 1987, the political argument shifted to a scientific theory stating that even unhealthy, inbred salmon populations would be adversely affected by "hatchery fish."  Despite  NMFS's allegedly scientific objections, tribes succeeded in restoring runs to the Clearwater, the Umatilla and other rivers and rebuilding runs in the Yakima, the Lower Snake, and the Imnaha.  NOAA seems to be the one federal agency that has resisted recovery through these tried and true methods and has continued to side with exaggerated conclusions from limited studies like that on Hood River steelhead.  Will you review this position and bring an open mind to the use of artificial propagation for recovery as required in the Endangered Species Act?

posted 3 years, 10 months ago
view in context

Jgram2, You must be looking for love in all the wrong places. You are correct; reasonable fees are an effective marketing tool but only if enough wine lovers take the effort to look for them rather than assuming that high tasting fees mean better wine. My most favorite winery charges a $2 fee for a taste of everything. The fee is refundable if the customer purchases a bottle. Souvenir glasses are available for $3.50 but [u]only[/u] if you want one.

posted 4 years, 5 months ago
view in context

Different varieties have different climatic ranges for optimal ripeness. As Earl Jones indicated, Southern Oregon has a climate well-suited for Temperanillo. Here in the Northern Valley, Temperanillo is unlikely to ripen fully whereas we continue to see a long-term improvement in Pinot Noir ripening.

I don't know how much pesticide and herbicide is used in Oregon but it is a good question. We use sulfur to control mildew along with cultural practices like hedging and leaf thinning; we don't have any insect problems so far (knock on wood!), and we use Round-Up once a year to control weeds in the vine row. We farm on a steep slope so we leave grass in the rows for tractor traction and to control runoff. Organic and bio-dynamic alternatives are fully available and utilized.

posted 4 years, 5 months ago
view in context

How about moving past Reisling to Riesling though the spelling is used so often interchangeably that it is hard to know the difference without a year of high school German.

Speaking of Riesling, when are our esteemed wine educators going to move wine perspective from seeking the perfect sweetness in a Riesling to appreciating the fruit and the balance.

It's unfortunate that many of Oregon's vineyards and wineries pulled their Riesling and replaced it with Pinot Noir or grafted PN onto the fine strong trunks of 20 year-old Chardonnay. Both are noble grapes and often ripen wonderfully in the North Willamette Valley and both seem to be regaining popularity.

When it comes to wine in the Willamette Valley part of the world, I don't think we can have too much of this good thing. If we wish to maintain farmland and therefore open space in Oregon, we need to grow what grows best. The noble grapes grow well here, perhaps as well as any place in the country which also means the world.

Oregon offers great wine to the world market. But best of all, we provide wine to a local wine market whose member/citizens can come out and appreciate one of the things that makes Oregon uniquely Oregon.

posted 4 years, 5 months ago
view in context

I think Tom Ford's numbers are at least a magnitude off. The Northwest Power and Conservation Council estimated a Columbia River run size at Bonneville of 11 to 16 million fish. As I recall, that number is now down to around 2.5 million fish. Perhaps, Mr. Ford is talking about total run size including the lower river but the number still seems too high.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

Human beings eat salmon and have done so on the Columbia for at least 10,000 years. Tribal members say that they also killed sea lions for their meat and coat as well as to control predation prior to construction of the dams. Salmon are one of the healthiest, most nutritious food fishes known to humans. Other animals eat spawned out salmon in the tributaries and their excrement then fertilizes the plants of the forest. Sea lions are taking more than their share and thereby limiting spawning. Hazing is ineffective. Lethal take eliminates the animals that are known to take salmon, sturgeon and steelhead and may provide a scent that repels them from the area of the dam where much of the predation takes place.

posted 4 years, 11 months ago
view in context

Nor do we hear sea lion advocates mounting a serious campaign against the Free Lunch Counter by formally advocating for the removal of Bonneville or The Dalles Dam. Instead, so the argument goes, Bonneville Dam and fishing are the main current threats to endangered species despite scientific evidence demonstrating that approximately 4000 spring salmon and 607 sturgeon were taken within sight of the dam. This does not address salmon and sturgeon taken at the other 141.5 miles from the river mouth. Seems like "wide stance" hypocrisy to me.

posted 4 years, 11 months ago
view in context

So many angles on this question. Why do sea lions rise to a higher order than salmon? Why does the Humane Society of the United States spend its resources on protecting unwanted sea lions when it literally kills millions of unwanted dogs at its shelters throughout the United States every year. . . and it is not doing so to protect either animals or people. It's doing so primarily because the animals are "inconvenient."

posted 4 years, 11 months ago
view in context

[b]Public Art Where Artist Lampoons His/Her Patron[/b]

The points made about ego-maniacal self-expressionists apply to those artists and their patrons who lampoon their subjects with whimsy by the public "art" sculpture I mentioned previously. Where is Mildred Schwab when we need her? She was the City "Arts" Commissioner, now deceased, who combined business lawyer skills connecting her to the business community with art talents and connections of her own. She was a concert pianist who regularly communed with artists such as Jerry Arpino of the Joffrey, VanCliburn, and Ferante and Teicher. She took her responsibility seriously, though often with pique, but set an example of how a city government needed to deal with its art responsibilities. Public art is art seen by the public and can be as annoying as air, noise or water pollution. We have the right to keep a smelly, noisy or dirty house but we can't impose our mess on others. Stamp out public art pollution.

posted 4 years, 12 months ago
view in context

[b]Public Art Where Artist Lampoons His/Her Patron[/b]

[b]Faceless Bureaucrat[/b]: Empty gown statu(t)e in front of State Office Building in Lloyd District

[b]Fir Tree Future[/b]: Shell of old growth log with spikes pointing to baby tree in center at the Georgia Pacific Building

[b]Progress, Not[/b]: Progress depicted as a giant bronze mobius strip at Standard Insurance.

[b]Three Groins in a Fountain[/b] at Georgia Pacific has nothing on these jibes.

posted 4 years, 12 months ago
view in context

Probably more environmentally sensitive than the last major Cascade Locks economic development proposal: a tram from the town to the ridge top. What research are you citing when you say half of the town opposes the casino? I've never heard that figure quoted previously . . . certainly not by Mayor Freeborn or Council President Cindy Mitchell.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Would you also close Multnomah Falls, eliminate Bonneville Dam, and close down Pendleton Round-Up in order to minimize Gorge traffic and avoid global warming. There are many ways to minimize pollution for the forty minute trip from I-5 to Cascade Locks including casino buses. Maybe Tri-Met could extend light rail if the traffic was really that significant. In any event, the tribe has chosen to site the casino in Cascade Locks and tribal members, believe it or not, are not required to obtain permits to travel or live off the reservation.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

The tribe is entitled to build in Hood River on tribal land but accepted the Hood River residents' suggestion that the casino not be built on that land. They accepted the invitation of Cascade Locks to build on land zoned industrial and have committed to a development that was environmentally and culturally sensitive. The Governor, Hood River, and Cascade Locks support the decision as does the zoning within the Gorge Scenic area. Nothing in the Gorge Act would prevent the development. The position of Friends of the Gorge appears to be only opposition to a tribal casino. The tribe is speaking with one voice on this issue and should be respected as such.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context