the number of farmed acres dropped from 71,000 in 1954 to 43,000 in 1978. In Washington County the acreage has dropped from 200,000 in 1964 to 153,000 in 1978. And between 1959 and 1974 farmland declined by 144,157 acres in Clackamas County. As prime agricultural lands are taken out of production, marginal, desert-like lands in the eastern part of the state, requiring extensive irrigation, are pulled into production— largely for grain export. According to the Oregon 2000 Commission, more than half of the harvested cropland in Oregon is irrigated, compared to 14 percent nationally—a figure that is expected to rise. A 1981 report by the Idaho Citizens Coalition, Wafer, Energy and Land, revealed the folly of this course by tracing the impact of expanded irrigation on water supplies, farmland and energy usage in the region. At present, virtually all the water in the Snake/Columbia river system is claimed for hydropower production. Water diversions for irrigation—as well as urbanization and other energy development projects—result in significant reductions of hydropower potential. As this cheap and renewable energy source is redirected, more expensive power supplies such as coal and nuclear fuel are drawn upon, translating into higher electricity rates. Increased costs for electricity have compounded the problems of family farmers, as irrigation development requires enormous amounts of electricity to pump water onto the land and then often over long distances to the farm site. The “technology and large- scale farming to which [irrigation] is suited require capital investments on a scale available only to large corporate entities or wealthy individuals” {Water, Energy and Land). Unknowingly, Oregonians—through publicly owned water supplies and increased electrical rates—have subsidized industrial farming and the decline of family farms. Competing demands for a finite water supply make agriculture's dependence on energy-intensive irrigation self-defeating. Historically the second largest industry after timber, accounting for 16 to 20 percent of Oregon's wealth, our agriculture has an impact far greater than the number of workers directly employed in farming. The Oregon State University Extension Service estimated the economic impact of agriculture to be three times the total amount of gross sales, $1.5 billion in 1979. Since 1963, land use regulations such as special assessments of farm lands, specific land use planning goals and zoning have been used to conserve agricultural lands. In 1975 an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) was established in an effort to contain urban sprawl and protect agricultural lands. The tradeoff is that agricultural lands within the UGB are subject to eventual development with increasing inner-city neighborhood density. The Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) guidelines are an exemplary effort to deal with land use issues, and here, as in other areas, Oregon is seen as a national model. Yet the land use planning process has its limitations as well. As one agriculture extension agent puts it, "planners love to draw lines”—yet those lines don't always make as much sense in the field as they do on paper. Some high grade agricultural land will be lost to urbanization; other less productive land better suited to construction, outside the UGB, will be zoned exclusively for farming. Land use zoning is a sensitive political issue. An increase in personal law suits may cause politicians to shy away from zoning before the method is given a chance to succeed. Even so, more than zoning is needed to protect Oregon's agriculture. "It's one thing to zone," says Lorna Stickle, a senior planner with the Multnomah County Planning and Development Division, "and another thing to have a healthy agricultural economy." A supportive infrastructure equals a secure land base in importance. Some methods for strengthening our agricultural economy include: 1) reductions in property taxes; 2) stricter standards for defining "farm use" (restricting speculation); 3) tax incentives ; 4) emphasis on research and technical assistance for small and middle-size farmers; and 5) market outlets. Market outlets are a particularly important issue for Portlanders as processing, marketing and trading aspects of the food system are the areas where the biggest profits in food are made. Eighty-six percent of all food sales in Portland flow into the hands of four retailers—Fred Meyer (25 percent) ; Safeway (23 percent); Thriftway (25 percent); and Albertsons (14 percent)—creating a monopoly-like situation where overpricing is likely to occur. A direct marketing system with food cooperatives, farmers markets and U-Pick farms (like those found around the city) are an effective means of supporting local family farms that in turn offer diversity and competition to the retail food market. Over 25 food buying clubs and three storefront stores in the tri-county area account for a small but growing percentage of the total market. Joining or starting a food co-op is an effective individual strategy for expressing consumer choices, saving money, and building strong bonds with one's neighbors. Since the mid-'70s a revival in urban gardening has swept the country. According to a 1980 Gallup poll about half of all American households currently grow some of their food at a total saving of approximately 13 billion dollars a year. In Portland, over 1200 inner-city residents participate in the Park Bureau's gardening program, with 18 gardens city-wide. The waiting list for garden plots topped 400 during 1981. Lots of open space remains on both Park and County lands for additional gardens. Several efforts to organize a Portland farmers market are in the works; the most promising is a wholesale produce warehouse that the City is developing. Planned construction of the facility is scheduled for early spring of 1983 in inner Northeast and wholesalers associated with the project have expressed interest in having a farmers market on the site. The many noteworthy projects being pursued throughout the city—and many more that are only now becoming possible—are only pieces of a larger puzzle. A coordinated approach to the concept of a stable, regional agricultural system that integrates competing needs and strategies on both a neighborhood and area-wide level is desperately needed. Local government plays a vital role in this development, creating the opportunities and incentives that will enable us to make use of our resources in an environmentally sound, economically viable and adequately productive manner. Oregon has the potential to take the lead in this critical area, offering a challenge to the rest of the country to follow. —Laura Stuchinsky 51
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz