UNPACKING	
  FRUIT:	
  	
  	
  RE-­‐EXAMINING	
  ASSUMPTIONS	
  ABOUT	
  AGRICULTURE	
  AND	
  	
  	
  URBANIZATION	
  IN	
  THE	
  “NEW	
  WEST”—	
  	
  A	
  CASE	
  STUDY	
  IN	
  JACKSON	
  COUNTY,	
  OREGON	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  by	
  	
  INNISFREE	
  L.	
  MCKINNON	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  A	
  DISSERTATION	
  	
  Presented	
  to	
  the	
  Department	
  of	
  Geography	
  and	
  the	
  Graduate	
  School	
  of	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  Oregon	
  in	
  partial	
  fulfillment	
  of	
  the	
  requirements	
  for	
  the	
  degree	
  of	
  Doctor	
  of	
  Philosophy	
  	
  June	
  2014	
  
	
  	
  
	
   ii	
  
DISSERTATION	
  APPROVAL	
  PAGE	
  	
  Student:	
  Innisfree	
  L.	
  McKinnon	
  	
  Title:	
  Unpacking	
  Fruit:	
  Re-­‐Examining	
  Assumptions	
  About	
  Agriculture	
  and	
  Urbanization	
  in	
  the	
  “New	
  West”—A	
  Case	
  Study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  Oregon	
  	
  This	
  dissertation	
  has	
  been	
  accepted	
  and	
  approved	
  in	
  partial	
  fulfillment	
  of	
  the	
  requirements	
  for	
  the	
  Doctor	
  of	
  Philosophy	
  degree	
  in	
  the	
  Department	
  of	
  Geography	
  by:	
  	
  Peter	
  Walker	
   Chairperson	
  Susan	
  Hardwick	
   Core	
  Member	
  Daniel	
  Buck	
   Core	
  Member	
  Michael	
  Hibbard	
   Institutional	
  Representative	
  	
  and	
  	
  Kimberly	
  Andrews	
  Espy	
   Vice	
  President	
  for	
  Research	
  and	
  Innovation;	
  	
   Dean	
  of	
  the	
  Graduate	
  School	
  	
  	
  Original	
  approval	
  signatures	
  are	
  on	
  file	
  with	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  Oregon	
  Graduate	
  School.	
  	
  Degree	
  awarded	
  June	
  2014	
  
	
  	
  
	
   iii	
  
	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  ©	
  2014	
  Innisfree	
  L.	
  McKinnon	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   iv	
  
	
  DISSERTATION	
  ABSTRACT	
  	
  Innisfree	
  L.	
  McKinnon	
  	
  Doctor	
  of	
  Philosophy	
  	
  Department	
  of	
  Geography	
  	
  June	
  2014	
  	
  Title:	
  Unpacking	
  Fruit:	
  Re-­‐Examining	
  Assumptions	
  About	
  Agriculture	
  and	
  Urbanization	
  in	
  the	
  “New	
  West”—A	
  Case	
  Study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  Oregon	
  	
  	
  	
   This	
  case	
  study	
  examines	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  agriculture	
  and	
  urbanization	
  in	
  the	
  context	
  of	
  Oregon’s	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system.	
  The	
  first	
  article	
  assesses	
  the	
  historical	
  relationship	
  between	
  rural	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  and	
  investment	
  in	
  agriculture	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  southern	
  Oregon.	
  The	
  second	
  article	
  uses	
  the	
  theory	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  to	
  reflect	
  on	
  the	
  patterns	
  of	
  urbanization	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  and	
  suggests	
  that	
  global	
  urbanization	
  might	
  provide	
  a	
  useful	
  framework	
  for	
  connecting	
  urban	
  political	
  ecology	
  and	
  exurban	
  political	
  ecology.	
  The	
  third	
  article	
  focuses	
  on	
  the	
  political	
  economies	
  of	
  farmland	
  preservation	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  where	
  there	
  have	
  been	
  repeated	
  calls	
  for	
  increased	
  local	
  control	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  planning.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   v	
  
	
   CURRICULUM	
  VITAE	
  	
  NAME	
  OF	
  AUTHOR:	
  Innisfree	
  L.	
  McKinnon	
  	
  GRADUATE	
  AND	
  UNDERGRADUATE	
  SCHOOLS	
  ATTENDED:	
  	
  	
   University	
  of	
  Oregon,	
  Eugene	
  	
   University	
  of	
  California,	
  Davis	
  	
   Antioch	
  College,	
  Yellowsprings,	
  OH	
  	
  DEGREES	
  AWARDED:	
  	
  	
   Doctor	
  of	
  Philosophy,	
  Geography,	
  2014,	
  University	
  of	
  Oregon	
  	
   Master	
  of	
  Arts,	
  Geography,	
  2008,	
  University	
  of	
  California	
  Davis	
  	
   Bachelor	
  of	
  Science,	
  1996,	
  Environmental	
  Science,	
  Antioch	
  College	
  	
  AREAS	
  OF	
  SPECIAL	
  INTEREST:	
  	
  	
   Political	
  Ecology	
  of	
  Land	
  Use	
  	
  	
   Environmental	
  Policy	
  	
  GRANTS,	
  AWARDS,	
  AND	
  HONORS:	
  	
  Larry	
  Ford	
  Fieldwork	
  Scholarship	
  in	
  Cultural	
  Geography,	
  Association	
  of	
  Pacific	
  Coast	
  Geographers,	
  2012	
  	
  	
  University	
  Club	
  Foundation	
  of	
  Portland	
  UO	
  Fellowship,	
  2010	
  	
  Best	
  Regional	
  Paper,	
  Association	
  of	
  Pacific	
  Coast	
  Geographers,	
  2010	
  	
  Travel	
  Award,	
  See	
  Hear	
  Make	
  Do	
  Workshop,	
  ESRC	
  and	
  The	
  University	
  of	
  Edinburgh,	
  2010	
  	
  	
  Fellowship	
  for	
  a	
  Woman	
  in	
  Cartography	
  and	
  GIS,	
  Department	
  of	
  Geography	
  University	
  of	
  Oregon,	
  2008-­‐2011	
  	
  	
  PUBLICATIONS:	
  	
  	
  2011	
  McKinnon,	
  I.	
  “Expanding	
  cartographic	
  practices	
  in	
  the	
  social	
  sciences.”	
  In	
  L.Pauwels	
  and	
  E.	
  Margolis,	
  eds.	
  The	
  Sage	
  Handbook	
  of	
  Visual	
  Research	
  Methods.	
  Sage	
  Publications	
  Ltd.	
  	
  2009	
  Owens,	
  P.	
  E.,	
  and	
  McKinnon,	
  I.	
  “In	
  pursuit	
  of	
  nature:	
  The	
  role	
  of	
  nature	
  in	
  adolescents'	
  lives.”	
  Journal	
  of	
  Developmental	
  Processes,	
  4(1),	
  43-­‐58.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   vi	
  
	
  	
   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS	
  	
  I	
  want	
  to	
  thank	
  my	
  committee	
  for	
  their	
  support	
  and	
  assistance	
  in	
  the	
  drafting	
  of	
  this	
  document.	
  In	
  addition,	
  special	
  thanks	
  are	
  due	
  to	
  Pat	
  Aklin,	
  Greg	
  Jones,	
  and	
  Gene	
  Martin	
  whose	
  deep	
  knowledge	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  helped	
  orient	
  me	
  to	
  the	
  region.	
  I	
  also	
  want	
  to	
  thank	
  all	
  my	
  interviewees	
  who	
  were	
  so	
  generous	
  in	
  sharing	
  their	
  time	
  and	
  their	
  thoughts.	
  This	
  project	
  was	
  supported	
  by	
  fellowship	
  from	
  the	
  Portland	
  University	
  Club	
  and	
  the	
  Association	
  of	
  Pacific	
  Coast	
  Geographers.	
  Most	
  importantly,	
  I	
  want	
  to	
  thank	
  my	
  family	
  for	
  supporting	
  me	
  in	
  many	
  ways	
  throughout	
  this	
  process.	
  Particularly,	
  my	
  husband	
  Ian	
  and	
  my	
  father	
  who	
  have	
  both	
  served	
  as	
  my	
  unofficial	
  research	
  assistants	
  and	
  biggest	
  supporters.	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   vii	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  This	
  dissertation	
  is	
  dedicated	
  to	
  my	
  grandparents,	
  who,	
  through	
  their	
  diverse	
  life	
  experiences,	
  gave	
  me	
  a	
  unique	
  perspective	
  on	
  land	
  use	
  in	
  the	
  American	
  West.	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   viii	
  
	
   TABLE	
  OF	
  CONTENTS	
  Chapter	
   Page	
  I.	
  INTRODUCTION	
  .....................................................................................................................................	
  1	
  Scale	
  in	
  Political	
  Ecology	
  ...................................................................................................................	
  3	
  The	
  Origins	
  of	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  ........................................................................................................	
  7	
  Article	
  Summaries	
  ................................................................................................................................	
  9	
  II.	
  METHODS	
  ..............................................................................................................................................	
  14	
  Interviews	
  ..............................................................................................................................................	
  14	
  Observation	
  of	
  the	
  Political	
  Process	
  ...........................................................................................	
  18	
  Analysis	
  of	
  Written	
  Documentation	
  ...........................................................................................	
  19	
  Archival	
  Research	
  ...............................................................................................................................	
  19	
  Maps,	
  Geographic	
  Information	
  Systems,	
  and	
  Quantitative	
  Data	
  ....................................	
  20	
  Conclusion	
  .............................................................................................................................................	
  21	
  III.	
  OLD	
  WEST	
  VERSUS	
  NEW	
  WEST,	
  EXURBAN	
  SPRAWL	
  AND	
  HIGH	
  VALUE	
  AGRICULTURE:	
  COMPETING	
  OR	
  COMPATIBLE	
  CAPITALISMS?	
  ........................................	
  22	
  Introduction	
  ..........................................................................................................................................	
  22	
  Literature	
  Review	
  ...............................................................................................................................	
  24	
  Methods/Study	
  Area	
  .........................................................................................................................	
  30	
  Case	
  Study	
  ..............................................................................................................................................	
  35	
  Discussion	
  ..............................................................................................................................................	
  48	
  Conclusion	
  .............................................................................................................................................	
  52	
  IV.	
  EXTENDED	
  URBANIZATION	
  AND	
  RURAL	
  IMAGINARIES:	
  USING	
  LEFEBVRE'S	
  THEORY	
  OF	
  PLANETARY	
  URBANIZATION	
  TO	
  UNDERSTAND	
  EXURBIA	
  .......................	
  55	
  Theoretical	
  Framework	
  ...................................................................................................................	
  56	
  Extended	
  Urbanization	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  ..............................................................................	
  63	
  Discussion	
  and	
  Conclusion	
  .............................................................................................................	
  81	
  V.	
  A	
  STICKY	
  SITUATION:	
  PRESERVING	
  HIGH	
  VALUE	
  SOIL	
  OR	
  COMMERCIAL	
  AGRICULTURE?	
  ........................................................................................................................................	
  84	
  Land	
  Use	
  Governance	
  in	
  Oregon	
  ..................................................................................................	
  86	
  Methods	
  ..................................................................................................................................................	
  90	
  Setting	
  ......................................................................................................................................................	
  91	
  Contradictions	
  of	
  Farmland	
  Preservation	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  .........................................	
  95	
  Defining	
  the	
  "Commercial	
  Agricultural	
  Base"	
  and	
  Debating	
  the	
  Future	
  of	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  Farming	
  ..........................................................................................................................................	
  103	
  Intraclass	
  Conflict	
  and	
  Farmland	
  Preservation	
  ..................................................................	
  110	
  Discussion	
  and	
  Conclusion	
  ..........................................................................................................	
  114	
  VI.	
  CONCLUSION	
  ...................................................................................................................................	
  119	
  Rescaling	
  ..............................................................................................................................................	
  119	
  Urban-­‐Rural	
  Interactions	
  .............................................................................................................	
  120	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  .................................................................................................................................	
  121	
  Implications	
  for	
  the	
  Future	
  of	
  Land	
  Use	
  Policy	
  ..................................................................	
  122	
  APPENDICES	
  ...........................................................................................................................................	
  125	
  A.	
  CORE	
  METROPOLITAN	
  COUNTIES.	
  ....................................................................................	
  125	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   ix	
  
Chapter	
   Page	
  	
  B.	
  EXCERPT	
  FROM	
  ERS	
  FARM	
  TYPOLOGY	
  FOR	
  A	
  DIVERSE	
  AGRICULTURAL	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  SECTOR.	
  ...............................................................................................................................................	
  128	
  REFERENCES	
  CITED	
  ............................................................................................................................	
  130	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   x	
  
	
  	
   LIST	
  OF	
  FIGURES	
  	
  Figure	
   Page	
  1.	
  Nested	
  Scales	
  ..........................................................................................................................................	
  4	
  2.	
  Jackson	
  County	
  .....................................................................................................................................	
  31	
  3.	
  Population	
  growth	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  U.S.	
  Census	
  ..............................................................	
  33	
  4.	
  Jackson	
  County	
  population	
  growth	
  since	
  1900..	
  ...................................................................	
  34	
  5.	
  A	
  1909	
  promotional	
  brochure	
  including	
  prominent	
  advertising	
  of	
  the	
  many	
  opportunities	
  for	
  recreation	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley.	
  ...........................................................	
  38	
  6.	
  A	
  promotional	
  brochure	
  showing	
  the	
  many	
  excellent	
  orchard	
  homes	
  	
  	
   in	
  the	
  valley.	
  .....................................................................................................................................	
  41	
  7.	
  Jackson	
  County	
  farm	
  sizes	
  over	
  time.	
  ........................................................................................	
  46	
  8.	
  Jackson	
  County	
  .....................................................................................................................................	
  65	
  9.	
  Total	
  number	
  of	
  workers	
  employed	
  in	
  farming,	
  fishing,	
  and	
  forestry	
  in	
  2013.	
  	
  	
   From	
  the	
  Bureau	
  of	
  Labor	
  Statistics.	
  .....................................................................................	
  67	
  10.	
  The	
  percentage	
  of	
  the	
  total	
  workforce	
  employed	
  	
   in	
  farming,	
  fishing,	
  and	
  forestry	
  in	
  2013..	
  ...........................................................................	
  67	
  11.	
  Our	
  Region	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  zone.	
  ..............................................................................	
  71	
  12.	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  urban	
  reserves	
  map.	
  ......................................................................................	
  72	
  13.	
  Marketing	
  rural	
  space,	
  Hillcrest	
  Winery,	
  Medford	
  Oregon.	
  ...........................................	
  76	
  14.	
  Billboard	
  northeast	
  of	
  Medford	
  advertising	
  home	
  sites	
  	
   with	
  "Absolute	
  Privacy	
  Forever!!"	
  ..........................................................................................	
  79	
  15.	
  New	
  mall	
  under	
  construction	
  in	
  west	
  Medford,	
  	
   	
  anchored	
  by	
  REI	
  and	
  Trader	
  Joes.	
  .........................................................................................	
  81	
  16.	
  Oregon's	
  Statewide	
  Planning	
  Goals………………………………………………………………..86	
  17.	
  Political	
  Cartoon,	
  Capital	
  Press,	
  Feb.	
  11,	
  2000	
  ....................................................................	
  88	
  18.	
  Rural	
  and	
  Farm	
  Zoning	
  west	
  of	
  Medford	
  ...............................................................................	
  99	
  19.	
  USDA	
  farm	
  typology.	
  ....................................................................................................................	
  108	
  20.	
  This	
  graph	
  is	
  based	
  on	
  a	
  GIS	
  analysis	
  of	
  assessors’	
  codes	
  of	
  quality	
  of	
  single-­‐family	
  homes	
  .................................................................................................................................	
  112	
  21.	
  Map	
  of	
  current	
  and	
  future	
  urbanization	
  and	
  high	
  value	
  farm	
  soil	
  ..........................	
  116	
  
	
  	
  
	
   1	
  
CHAPTER	
  I	
  
	
  
INTRODUCTION	
  	
  	
   Understanding	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  efforts	
  to	
  preserve	
  "the	
  environment"	
  and	
  the	
  marginalization	
  of	
  local	
  people	
  and	
  traditional	
  life	
  ways	
  is	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  central	
  themes	
  in	
  political	
  ecology	
  (Robbins	
  2004).	
  Rejection	
  of	
  top	
  down,	
  command	
  and	
  control	
  models	
  of	
  environmental	
  management	
  in	
  favor	
  of	
  "community	
  based"	
  management	
  grew	
  in	
  prominence	
  in	
  the	
  1990s	
  (Holling	
  and	
  Meffe	
  1996).	
  These	
  "community	
  based"	
  models	
  of	
  environmental	
  management	
  seek	
  to	
  benefit	
  local	
  people	
  through	
  engagement	
  with	
  community	
  members	
  and	
  actively	
  soliciting	
  participation	
  in	
  decision-­‐making.	
  Yet	
  this	
  model,	
  widely	
  (though	
  certainly	
  not	
  universally)	
  taken	
  up	
  by	
  governments,	
  NGOs,	
  and	
  conservation	
  scientists,	
  has	
  not	
  proved	
  to	
  be	
  a	
  panacea	
  for	
  the	
  problems	
  of	
  balancing	
  the	
  needs	
  of	
  local	
  people,	
  ecological	
  systems,	
  and	
  economic	
  development	
  (Goodwin	
  1998,	
  Hester	
  1996,	
  Brenner	
  and	
  Theodore	
  2002).	
  	
  The	
  complexity	
  of	
  understanding	
  participation	
  in	
  management	
  and	
  the	
  dynamics	
  of	
  communities1	
  has	
  been	
  discussed	
  and	
  debated	
  thoroughly	
  in	
  the	
  literature	
  on	
  environmental	
  management	
  (Kellert	
  et	
  al.	
  2000,	
  Herbert	
  2005).	
  As	
  McCarthy	
  (2005)	
  points	
  out	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  community	
  forestry	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.,	
  community	
  based	
  management	
  may	
  in	
  fact	
  reflect	
  the	
  adoption	
  of	
  problematic	
  neoliberal	
  forms	
  of	
  management	
  rather	
  than	
  actually	
  providing	
  increased	
  inclusion	
  for	
  marginalized	
  local	
  actors.	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  1.	
  What	
  exactly	
  is	
  meant	
  when	
  referring	
  to	
  "community"	
  has	
  also	
  been	
  debated.	
  The	
  concept	
  of	
  community	
  as	
  a	
  whole	
  and	
  coherent	
  object	
  has	
  been	
  thoroughly	
  examined	
  and	
  deconstructed.	
  At	
  this	
  point	
  the	
  idea	
  of	
  a	
  single,	
  coherent	
  community	
  is	
  highly	
  suspect	
  and	
  yet	
  is	
  still	
  broadly	
  used	
  within	
  conservation	
  and	
  planning	
  circles	
  to	
  indicate	
  a	
  concern	
  for	
  participation	
  and	
  representation.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   2	
  
	
   This	
  dissertation	
  examines	
  a	
  case	
  study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  southern	
  Oregon,	
  where	
  there	
  have	
  been	
  longstanding	
  calls	
  for	
  increased	
  local	
  control	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  regulation.	
  It	
  begins	
  with	
  the	
  assumption	
  that	
  local	
  control	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  does	
  not	
  necessarily	
  result	
  in	
  more	
  socially	
  just	
  or	
  environmentally	
  sustainable	
  management	
  (Brown	
  and	
  Purcell	
  2005).	
  This	
  case	
  study	
  takes	
  place	
  in	
  the	
  context	
  of	
  Oregon's	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system,	
  which	
  has	
  maintained	
  a	
  strong	
  role	
  for	
  state	
  management	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  since	
  it	
  was	
  passed	
  in	
  1973.	
  This	
  system	
  has	
  been	
  widely	
  praised	
  within	
  the	
  planning	
  community	
  and	
  recognized	
  as	
  effective	
  in	
  limiting	
  sprawling	
  growth	
  (Gosnell	
  2011).	
  Yet	
  this	
  system	
  has	
  not	
  always	
  been	
  popular	
  within	
  Oregon,	
  particularly	
  in	
  the	
  more	
  rural	
  parts	
  of	
  the	
  state	
  (Walker	
  and	
  Hurley	
  2011).	
  My	
  research	
  into	
  this	
  case,	
  in	
  line	
  with	
  Brown	
  and	
  Purcell's	
  (2005)	
  call	
  to	
  "critically	
  analyze	
  the	
  complex	
  and	
  dynamic	
  particularities"	
  of	
  each	
  case	
  of	
  rescaling	
  focuses	
  on	
  the	
  following	
  three	
  questions,	
  which	
  form	
  the	
  basis	
  of	
  the	
  three	
  core	
  chapters	
  of	
  this	
  dissertation:	
  	
  	
   Why	
  is	
  there	
  pressure	
  to	
  rescale	
  land	
  use	
  governance	
  in	
  Oregon?	
  	
  	
   What	
  is	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  divide	
  in	
  this	
  process?	
  	
   What	
  are	
  the	
  implications	
  of	
  this	
  localization	
  for	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  in	
  Oregon?	
  	
  	
   Each	
  of	
  the	
  following	
  chapters	
  is	
  a	
  stand-­‐alone	
  piece	
  designed	
  to	
  be	
  submitted	
  for	
  publication	
  in	
  a	
  journal.	
  However,	
  to	
  give	
  a	
  better	
  sense	
  of	
  the	
  overall	
  scope	
  of	
  project,	
  what	
  follows	
  in	
  the	
  introduction	
  is	
  a	
  brief	
  review	
  of	
  the	
  literature	
  on	
  scale	
  with	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  how	
  political	
  ecologists	
  have	
  conceptualized	
  scale	
  in	
  their	
  work.	
  Then	
  I	
  give	
  a	
  short	
  explanation	
  of	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  process.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   3	
  
This	
  planning	
  process	
  was	
  the	
  starting	
  point	
  for	
  my	
  case	
  study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  The	
  process	
  was	
  complex	
  and	
  lengthy	
  enough	
  that	
  a	
  short	
  review	
  here	
  will	
  provide	
  context	
  for	
  the	
  articles	
  that	
  follow.	
  Finally	
  I	
  give	
  a	
  brief	
  summary	
  of	
  the	
  three	
  articles	
  and	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  ways	
  they	
  fit	
  together.	
  
Scale	
  in	
  Political	
  Ecology	
  	
  	
   The	
  literature	
  on	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  scale	
  in	
  human	
  geography	
  is	
  extensive	
  and	
  has	
  been	
  reviewed	
  numerous	
  times	
  (Marston	
  2000,	
  Brenner	
  2001,	
  Howitt	
  2003,	
  Sheppard	
  and	
  McMaster	
  2004,	
  Neumann	
  2009,	
  Reed	
  and	
  Bruyneel	
  2010).	
  My	
  intention	
  here	
  is	
  not	
  to	
  repeat	
  these	
  efforts	
  but	
  to	
  briefly	
  touch	
  on	
  a	
  few	
  key	
  points	
  of	
  these	
  debates	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  frame	
  the	
  current	
  study	
  and	
  my	
  assumptions	
  about	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  scale	
  in	
  the	
  politics	
  of	
  land	
  use.	
  In	
  particular,	
  my	
  focus	
  here	
  is	
  on	
  how	
  political	
  ecologists	
  have	
  conceptualized	
  scale	
  in	
  their	
  work.	
  	
  	
  	
   Blaikie	
  and	
  Brookfield	
  (1987)	
  in	
  their	
  foundational	
  research	
  described	
  a	
  method	
  for	
  understanding	
  environmental	
  degradation	
  that	
  relied	
  on	
  what	
  they	
  called	
  "a	
  chain	
  of	
  explanation."	
  In	
  this	
  approach,	
  research	
  began	
  with	
  an	
  examination	
  of	
  a	
  degradation	
  event	
  on	
  the	
  landscape	
  and	
  then	
  worked	
  outwards	
  from	
  this	
  event,	
  beginning	
  with	
  the	
  actions	
  of	
  land	
  managers	
  and	
  then	
  their	
  relationships	
  with	
  "broader"	
  political	
  and	
  economic	
  forces	
  on	
  the	
  regional,	
  national,	
  or	
  global	
  level	
  (see	
  Figure	
  1).	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   4	
  
	
  
Figure	
  1:	
  Nested	
  Scales	
  	
   	
  This	
  methodology,	
  while	
  not	
  without	
  current	
  relevance,	
  has	
  been	
  challenged	
  by	
  several	
  developments	
  in	
  human	
  geography	
  -­‐-­‐	
  primarily	
  the	
  increasing	
  dominance	
  of	
  concepts	
  of	
  the	
  social	
  construction,	
  both	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  the	
  categories	
  of	
  environmental	
  degradation	
  and	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  scale	
  itself.	
  So	
  today,	
  the	
  question	
  of	
  what	
  constitutes	
  an	
  environmental	
  problem	
  and	
  who	
  defines	
  these	
  problems	
  remains	
  an	
  open	
  one.	
  Additionally,	
  human	
  geographers	
  have	
  largely	
  come	
  to	
  agreement	
  that	
  scale	
  itself	
  is	
  socially	
  constructed.	
  The	
  categories	
  commonly	
  used	
  to	
  describe	
  various	
  scales	
  or	
  levels	
  at	
  which	
  political	
  action	
  takes	
  place	
  are	
  themselves	
  constructed	
  through	
  political	
  and	
  cultural	
  processes.	
  In	
  political	
  geography	
  there	
  is	
  a	
  significant	
  literature	
  on	
  the	
  politics	
  of	
  scale	
  that	
  examines	
  how	
  political	
  actors	
  at	
  various	
  levels	
  of	
  government	
  engaging	
  in	
  "scale	
  jumping"	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  gain	
  an	
  advantage	
  in	
  a	
  particular	
  political	
  struggle.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   5	
  
	
   Marston,	
  Johns,	
  and	
  Woodward	
  (2005)	
  suggest	
  that	
  the	
  entire	
  concept	
  of	
  scale	
  in	
  human	
  geography	
  should	
  be	
  abandoned	
  in	
  favor	
  of	
  what	
  they	
  call	
  flat	
  ontologies.	
  The	
  intention	
  of	
  Marston's	
  intervention	
  is	
  to	
  open	
  up	
  spaces	
  for	
  political	
  intervention	
  and	
  to	
  demystify	
  the	
  power	
  of	
  the	
  global	
  in	
  our	
  explanations.	
  She	
  calls	
  for	
  attention	
  to	
  the	
  particular	
  sites	
  where	
  action	
  takes	
  place	
  rather	
  than	
  relying	
  on	
  the	
  somewhat	
  mystifying	
  concept	
  of	
  "global"	
  forces.	
  In	
  Marston's	
  terms,	
  efforts	
  to	
  localize	
  land	
  use	
  decision-­‐making	
  in	
  Oregon	
  are	
  not	
  about	
  scale	
  or	
  rescaling,	
  but	
  rather	
  about	
  the	
  particular	
  site	
  of	
  political	
  power.	
  Will	
  people	
  in	
  Salem	
  or	
  Portland	
  make	
  decisions	
  about	
  land	
  use	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  or	
  will	
  decision-­‐making	
  be	
  centered	
  in	
  the	
  county	
  itself?	
  	
   While	
  I	
  am	
  sympathetic	
  to	
  Marston's	
  intervention,	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  scale	
  continues	
  to	
  have	
  epistemological	
  significance	
  if	
  not	
  ontological	
  purchase.	
  That	
  is,	
  scalar	
  terminology	
  and	
  scalar	
  thinking	
  continue	
  to	
  dominate	
  political	
  debates	
  and	
  be	
  used	
  in	
  common	
  parlances.	
  Additionally,	
  while	
  Marston	
  et	
  al.	
  (2005)	
  seek	
  to	
  disempower	
  the	
  hierarchical	
  nature	
  of	
  scalar	
  thinking	
  and	
  refocus	
  the	
  emphasis	
  on	
  "globalization"	
  onto	
  particular	
  sites	
  of	
  power	
  and	
  influence,	
  I	
  remain	
  skeptical	
  of	
  efforts	
  that	
  a	
  priori	
  reject	
  all	
  forms	
  of	
  hierarchy.	
  Levels	
  of	
  government	
  are	
  hierarchical	
  in	
  their	
  territorializations.	
  That	
  is,	
  national	
  governments	
  make	
  laws	
  for	
  a	
  larger	
  territory,	
  which	
  encompasses	
  state	
  and	
  local	
  governments.	
  While	
  these	
  forms	
  of	
  hierarchy	
  are	
  socially	
  constructed	
  and	
  contingent,	
  they	
  also	
  have	
  histories	
  and	
  geography	
  and	
  significant	
  grounding	
  in	
  material	
  realities	
  (Sayre	
  2005).	
  	
  	
   Sayre	
  (2005)	
  suggests	
  that	
  attention	
  to	
  the	
  ways	
  that	
  ecologists	
  handle	
  scale	
  may	
  assist	
  social	
  scientists	
  in	
  conceptualizing	
  scale.	
  In	
  this	
  case	
  there	
  are	
  multiple	
  
	
  	
  
	
   6	
  
scalar	
  moments,	
  some	
  to	
  do	
  with	
  scales	
  of	
  governance	
  and	
  others	
  to	
  do	
  with	
  ecological	
  and	
  mapping	
  scales.	
  Additionally	
  there	
  are	
  the	
  levels	
  at	
  which	
  I	
  chose	
  to	
  study	
  the	
  problem.	
  I	
  began	
  with	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  in	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Valley,	
  part	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  The	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  process	
  constituted	
  a	
  new	
  scale	
  for	
  land	
  use	
  governance	
  in	
  the	
  area	
  that	
  involved	
  not	
  only	
  the	
  county	
  government,	
  but	
  also	
  local	
  municipalities	
  within	
  the	
  most	
  highly	
  populated	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  county.	
  Methodologically	
  my	
  focus	
  was	
  on	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  this	
  new	
  regional	
  governmental	
  process,	
  but	
  understanding	
  developments	
  at	
  this	
  level	
  also	
  required	
  understanding	
  the	
  factors	
  operating	
  at	
  levels	
  "above"	
  and	
  "below."	
  To	
  understand	
  the	
  formation	
  of	
  this	
  regional	
  process	
  therefore,	
  I	
  examined	
  the	
  discourses	
  circulating	
  among	
  actors	
  involved	
  in	
  state	
  level	
  governance	
  and	
  the	
  processes	
  impacting	
  landowners	
  at	
  the	
  level	
  of	
  the	
  individual	
  household.	
  	
  	
   This	
  case	
  illustrates	
  the	
  utility	
  of	
  Sayre's	
  separation	
  of	
  scale	
  into	
  grain	
  and	
  extent.	
  Sayre	
  claims	
  these	
  two	
  aspects	
  of	
  scale,	
  as	
  used	
  by	
  ecologists,	
  could	
  be	
  usefully	
  applied	
  by	
  critical	
  human	
  geographers	
  to	
  better	
  understand	
  how	
  scale	
  functions.	
  As	
  Sayre	
  points	
  out,	
  particular	
  ecological	
  effects	
  are	
  only	
  visible	
  when	
  studied	
  at	
  the	
  appropriate	
  scale.	
  Oregon's	
  planning	
  system	
  has	
  a	
  distinct	
  extent,	
  but	
  the	
  impact	
  of	
  global	
  markets	
  for	
  agricultural	
  products	
  only	
  act	
  at	
  the	
  granular	
  level	
  of	
  individual	
  farm	
  households.	
  So	
  rather	
  than	
  a	
  nest	
  of	
  scales	
  in	
  which	
  global	
  forces	
  act	
  upon	
  national	
  or	
  state	
  levels,	
  imposing	
  forces	
  downwards,	
  in	
  this	
  case	
  it	
  is	
  the	
  actions	
  of	
  individual	
  land	
  owners	
  in	
  response	
  to	
  global	
  markets	
  which	
  produce	
  the	
  pressure	
  "upwards"	
  onto	
  the	
  mid-­‐level	
  scale	
  of	
  the	
  state.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   7	
  
The	
  Origins	
  of	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  	
  	
   I	
  began	
  my	
  examination	
  of	
  scale	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  environmental	
  management	
  through	
  a	
  case	
  study	
  examining	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  (RPS)	
  process,	
  which	
  was	
  taking	
  place	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  southern	
  Oregon.	
  There	
  are	
  several	
  aspects	
  of	
  this	
  case	
  that	
  make	
  it	
  both	
  typical	
  and	
  unique,	
  providing	
  a	
  lens	
  for	
  the	
  examination	
  of	
  broad	
  issues	
  around	
  the	
  governance	
  of	
  land	
  use.	
  Oregon's	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  provides	
  a	
  unique	
  context	
  to	
  study	
  top-­‐down	
  environmental	
  regulation.	
  The	
  system,	
  enacted	
  with	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  SB	
  100	
  in	
  1973,	
  provides	
  a	
  rare	
  example	
  of	
  state-­‐level	
  control	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  governance	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.	
  Oregon's	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  has	
  been	
  widely	
  hailed	
  as	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  most	
  successful	
  systems	
  for	
  regulating	
  sprawl	
  and	
  shaping	
  urban	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.,	
  perhaps	
  the	
  world.	
  However,	
  the	
  system	
  has	
  been	
  plagued	
  by	
  problematic	
  efforts	
  to	
  overturn	
  it	
  since	
  its	
  passage.	
  These	
  have	
  been	
  fueled	
  by	
  claims	
  of	
  unfairness,	
  particularly	
  by	
  many	
  rural	
  landowners.	
  Like	
  McCarthy’s	
  study	
  of	
  the	
  (2002)	
  Wise	
  Use	
  movement,	
  private	
  property	
  activists	
  and	
  rural	
  land	
  owners	
  in	
  Oregon	
  oppose	
  a	
  top	
  down	
  imposition	
  of	
  strict	
  environmental	
  regulations	
  by	
  far	
  away	
  government.	
  	
  	
   The	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  process	
  began	
  through	
  two	
  different	
  planning	
  processes,	
  which	
  took	
  place	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  during	
  the	
  1990s.	
  One,	
  a	
  grassroots	
  effort	
  started	
  by	
  a	
  group	
  of	
  local	
  citizens	
  concerned	
  about	
  continuing	
  rapid	
  growth,	
  and	
  a	
  sprawling	
  pattern	
  of	
  development	
  despite	
  statewide	
  planning	
  regulations.	
  This	
  process	
  began	
  with	
  early	
  morning	
  meetings	
  at	
  coffee	
  shops	
  and	
  trips	
  around	
  the	
  
	
  	
  
	
   8	
  
valley	
  to	
  observe	
  and	
  discuss	
  how	
  growth	
  was	
  changing	
  the	
  region,	
  and	
  evolved	
  into	
  a	
  process	
  called	
  Our	
  Region.	
  From	
  1995	
  to	
  2000	
  planners	
  from	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  Council	
  of	
  Governments	
  worked	
  with	
  about	
  75	
  local	
  citizens	
  from	
  a	
  wide	
  variety	
  of	
  backgrounds	
  to	
  create	
  a	
  regional	
  plan	
  for	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Valley,	
  the	
  location	
  of	
  7	
  of	
  the	
  11	
  incorporated	
  cities	
  in	
  the	
  county2,	
  where	
  most	
  population	
  growth	
  was	
  taking	
  place.	
  This	
  process	
  resulted	
  in	
  a	
  report	
  with	
  recommendations	
  for	
  how	
  growth	
  should	
  take	
  place	
  over	
  50	
  years.	
  	
  	
   Around	
  the	
  same	
  time	
  that	
  the	
  Our	
  Region	
  process	
  was	
  coalescing	
  in	
  the	
  early	
  1990s,	
  a	
  new	
  set	
  of	
  administrative	
  rules	
  was	
  put	
  into	
  place	
  that	
  required	
  all	
  cities	
  over	
  a	
  certain	
  size	
  in	
  Oregon	
  to	
  designate	
  "urban	
  reserves."	
  Urban	
  reserves	
  were	
  created	
  to	
  work	
  somewhat	
  like	
  an	
  urban	
  growth	
  boundary,	
  but	
  to	
  further	
  organize	
  and	
  rationalize	
  growth.	
  In	
  Oregon	
  urban	
  growth	
  boundaries	
  are	
  a	
  required	
  element	
  of	
  cities'	
  comprehensive	
  plans.	
  They	
  hold	
  enough	
  buildable	
  land	
  for	
  20	
  years	
  of	
  growth.	
  Urban	
  reserves	
  extend	
  the	
  temporal	
  element	
  of	
  planning	
  for	
  growth	
  by	
  establishing	
  areas	
  outside	
  the	
  urban	
  growth	
  boundary	
  for	
  growth	
  over	
  10-­‐30	
  years	
  beyond	
  that	
  timeframe.	
  In	
  1992,	
  the	
  City	
  of	
  Medford	
  was	
  required	
  to	
  create	
  set	
  of	
  urban	
  reserves.	
  Over	
  the	
  next	
  three	
  years	
  the	
  city	
  and	
  county	
  were	
  unable	
  to	
  come	
  to	
  an	
  agreement	
  over	
  a	
  location	
  for	
  these	
  reserves.	
  This	
  process	
  was	
  highly	
  contentious	
  and	
  the	
  disagreement	
  between	
  the	
  county	
  and	
  city	
  caused	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  mistrust	
  and	
  frustration	
  over	
  being	
  required	
  to	
  work	
  together.	
  The	
  urban	
  reserves	
  statute	
  was	
  later	
  modified	
  to	
  make	
  the	
  process	
  optional	
  rather	
  than	
  required.	
  However,	
  the	
  process	
  was	
  often	
  cited	
  in	
  my	
  interviews	
  as	
  prompting	
  local	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  2.	
  The	
  cities	
  included	
  in	
  this	
  area	
  are	
  Medford,	
  Ashland,	
  Talent,	
  Phoenix,	
  Central	
  Point,	
  Jacksonville,	
  and	
  Eagle	
  Point.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   9	
  
governments	
  to	
  seek	
  more	
  productive	
  ways	
  to	
  work	
  together.	
  In	
  1998	
  the	
  city	
  of	
  Medford	
  and	
  the	
  county	
  board	
  of	
  commissioners	
  set	
  up	
  the	
  Multijurisdictional	
  Committee	
  on	
  Urban	
  Reserves	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  work	
  out	
  a	
  plan	
  for	
  urban	
  reserves	
  for	
  Medford.	
  The	
  cities	
  of	
  Phoenix,	
  Jacksonville,	
  Central	
  Point,	
  Eagle	
  Point	
  decided	
  to	
  also	
  participate	
  and	
  create	
  urban	
  reserves.	
  In	
  1999	
  the	
  Department	
  of	
  Land	
  Conservation	
  and	
  Development	
  suggested	
  that	
  this	
  process	
  might	
  reasonably	
  be	
  considered	
  a	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  process	
  and	
  invited	
  the	
  participants	
  to	
  apply	
  for	
  that	
  status,	
  which	
  gave	
  state	
  grant	
  funding	
  to	
  help	
  support	
  the	
  process.	
  	
  	
   The	
  Oregon	
  Legislature	
  created	
  the	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  statute	
  in	
  1996	
  to	
  allow	
  for	
  the	
  resolution	
  of	
  difficult	
  land	
  use	
  disputes	
  through	
  a	
  collaborative	
  planning	
  process.	
  The	
  process	
  requires	
  that	
  all	
  affected	
  local	
  governments	
  and	
  state	
  agencies	
  must	
  be	
  allowed	
  to	
  participate.	
  And	
  in	
  exchange,	
  the	
  resulting	
  plan	
  is	
  permitted	
  to	
  vary	
  from	
  state	
  administrative	
  rules,	
  although	
  it	
  should	
  still	
  comply	
  with	
  the	
  spirit	
  of	
  the	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  goals.	
  This	
  rule	
  was	
  designed	
  to	
  provide	
  a	
  tool	
  for	
  regional	
  planning	
  which	
  would	
  allow	
  local	
  governments	
  some	
  flexibility,	
  and	
  respond	
  to	
  repeated	
  complaints	
  that	
  statewide	
  regulations	
  don't	
  fit	
  well	
  with	
  local	
  conditions.	
  The	
  requirement	
  to	
  plan	
  regionally	
  and	
  achieve	
  consensus	
  among	
  participating	
  local	
  governments	
  has	
  proved	
  difficult,	
  and	
  prior	
  to	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  process	
  only	
  one	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  process	
  had	
  been	
  carried	
  through	
  to	
  completion	
  and	
  it	
  was	
  significantly	
  more	
  limited	
  in	
  scope	
  (Nabeta	
  2013).	
  
Article	
  Summaries	
  	
   The	
  first	
  article	
  in	
  this	
  dissertation	
  is	
  titled	
  "Old	
  West	
  Versus	
  New	
  West:	
  Exurban	
  Sprawl	
  and	
  High	
  Value	
  Agriculture,	
  Competing	
  or	
  Compatible	
  Capitalisms.“	
  
	
  	
  
	
   10	
  
This	
  piece	
  examines	
  the	
  history	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  particularly	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  fruit	
  growing	
  and	
  real	
  estate	
  development.	
  In	
  it	
  I	
  argue	
  that	
  the	
  political	
  economy	
  and	
  culture	
  of	
  orchard	
  fruit	
  growing	
  was	
  essentially	
  compatible	
  with	
  marketing	
  of	
  a	
  rural	
  lifestyle	
  to	
  wealthy	
  and	
  middle	
  class	
  urban	
  and	
  suburban	
  migrants	
  to	
  the	
  region.	
  Fruit	
  growing	
  requires	
  significant	
  inputs	
  of	
  capital	
  and	
  an	
  investment	
  of	
  7-­‐10	
  years	
  before	
  trees	
  start	
  to	
  bear	
  commercially,	
  so	
  new	
  fruit	
  growers	
  had	
  to	
  have	
  a	
  source	
  of	
  significant	
  startup	
  funding.	
  Once	
  land	
  was	
  planted	
  with	
  mature	
  fruit	
  trees,	
  that	
  investment	
  was	
  reflected	
  in	
  the	
  land	
  price	
  and	
  there	
  was	
  significant	
  speculation	
  and	
  parcilization.	
  	
  A	
  number	
  of	
  wealthy	
  investors,	
  after	
  growing	
  tired	
  of	
  playing	
  the	
  gentleman	
  farmer,	
  decided	
  instead	
  to	
  subdivide	
  their	
  properties	
  and	
  market	
  them	
  as	
  orchard	
  homes	
  to	
  middle	
  class	
  retirees	
  and	
  others	
  looking	
  for	
  a	
  rural	
  lifestyle.	
  This	
  process	
  was	
  also	
  facilitated	
  by	
  a	
  small	
  but	
  ever	
  growing	
  tourism	
  industry	
  centered	
  around	
  outdoor	
  recreation	
  and	
  health	
  promotion.	
  	
  	
   This	
  article	
  contributes	
  to	
  the	
  literature	
  on	
  the	
  political	
  ecology	
  of	
  exurbia	
  by	
  examining	
  the	
  growth	
  of	
  an	
  exurban	
  pattern	
  of	
  development	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  a	
  form	
  of	
  resource	
  based	
  industry	
  that	
  is	
  significantly	
  different	
  in	
  its	
  political	
  economy	
  than	
  ranching	
  or	
  mining,	
  discussion	
  of	
  which	
  has	
  dominated	
  much	
  of	
  literature.	
  It	
  also	
  contributes	
  to	
  the	
  overall	
  focus	
  of	
  the	
  dissertation	
  by	
  setting	
  up	
  the	
  historical	
  patterns	
  of	
  land	
  use,	
  economy,	
  and	
  politics	
  that	
  made	
  up	
  the	
  environmental	
  governance	
  regime	
  in	
  place	
  when	
  Oregon's	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system	
  was	
  put	
  into	
  place	
  in	
  the	
  1970s.	
  This	
  historical	
  governance	
  regime	
  favored	
  parcelization	
  and	
  a	
  rural/exurban	
  pattern	
  of	
  sprawl.	
  In	
  turn,	
  the	
  appeal	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  to	
  exurban	
  
	
  	
  
	
   11	
  
migrants	
  and	
  their	
  desire	
  to	
  purchase	
  rural	
  land	
  gave	
  fruit	
  growers	
  an	
  easy	
  source	
  of	
  capital	
  during	
  less	
  profitable	
  years	
  for	
  purchase	
  of	
  technological	
  improvements	
  or	
  the	
  replanting	
  of	
  aging	
  orchards.	
  This	
  historical	
  background	
  on	
  the	
  culture	
  and	
  political	
  economy	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  sets	
  the	
  stage	
  for	
  the	
  two	
  other	
  articles,	
  which	
  focus	
  on	
  recent	
  debates	
  over	
  land	
  use	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  largely	
  center	
  around	
  the	
  existing	
  and	
  ideal	
  relationship	
  between	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  space.	
  	
   The	
  second	
  article	
  argues	
  that	
  Lefebvre's	
  theorization	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  is	
  helpful	
  for	
  understanding	
  conflict	
  around	
  urban-­‐rural	
  interface	
  conflicts.	
  In	
  it	
  I	
  argue	
  that	
  as	
  urban	
  society	
  takes	
  hold	
  across	
  the	
  globe,	
  there	
  is	
  a	
  tendency	
  to	
  see	
  increasing	
  nostalgia	
  for	
  real	
  and	
  mythological	
  forms	
  of	
  rural	
  life.	
  Exurbanites	
  and	
  others	
  seeking	
  rural	
  living	
  mistakenly	
  attempt	
  to	
  escape	
  the	
  alienation	
  of	
  their	
  lives	
  under	
  capitalist	
  urbanization	
  through	
  migration	
  to	
  rural	
  space.	
  In	
  turn,	
  as	
  rural	
  economies	
  become	
  increasingly	
  subsumed	
  and	
  subordinated	
  to	
  urban	
  domination,	
  the	
  image	
  of	
  rurality	
  becomes	
  increasingly	
  commodified.	
  I	
  use	
  examples	
  from	
  my	
  case	
  study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  to	
  support	
  this	
  argument.	
  	
   This	
  article	
  calls	
  for	
  increased	
  engagement	
  between	
  political	
  ecologists	
  working	
  on	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  issues	
  and	
  outlines	
  the	
  continuing	
  importance	
  of	
  existing	
  and	
  ongoing	
  research	
  on	
  rural	
  and	
  exurban	
  issues.	
  Rather	
  than	
  erasing	
  rurality,	
  global	
  urbanization	
  theorizes	
  the	
  continuing	
  reemergence	
  of	
  the	
  image	
  of	
  rurality	
  within	
  an	
  increasingly	
  chaotic	
  fabric	
  of	
  urban	
  society.	
  	
   The	
  third	
  article	
  examines	
  the	
  debate	
  around	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  with	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  local	
  farmers	
  and	
  agricultural	
  experts.	
  In	
  this	
  article	
  I	
  argue	
  that	
  farmers'	
  frustrations	
  with	
  statewide	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  
	
  	
  
	
   12	
  
policy	
  are	
  not	
  simply	
  motivated	
  by	
  an	
  ideological	
  commitment	
  to	
  private	
  property	
  rights,	
  but	
  rather	
  that	
  the	
  particularities	
  of	
  local	
  physical	
  geographies	
  and	
  the	
  political	
  economies	
  of	
  farming	
  and	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  have	
  contributed	
  to	
  widespread	
  feelings	
  that	
  current	
  policies	
  are	
  insufficient	
  in	
  their	
  efforts	
  to	
  support	
  a	
  vibrant	
  agricultural	
  industry	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  	
  	
   This	
  article	
  contributes	
  to	
  the	
  literature	
  in	
  political	
  ecology	
  on	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  scale	
  in	
  conservation	
  policy.	
  In	
  particular,	
  it	
  starts	
  from	
  the	
  assumption	
  that	
  local	
  or	
  community	
  based	
  natural	
  resource	
  management	
  does	
  not	
  necessarily	
  result	
  in	
  more	
  just	
  or	
  sustainable	
  outcomes	
  (Purcell	
  and	
  Brown	
  2005).	
  Purcell	
  and	
  Brown	
  rather	
  suggest	
  that	
  political	
  ecologists	
  should	
  set	
  to	
  work	
  "critically	
  analyzing	
  the	
  complex	
  and	
  dynamic	
  particularities	
  of	
  each	
  situation."	
  In	
  the	
  Oregon	
  case	
  there	
  is	
  significant	
  evidence	
  that	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  has	
  been	
  at	
  least	
  somewhat	
  effective	
  in	
  controlling	
  growth	
  and	
  protecting	
  farmland	
  from	
  development	
  (Gosnell	
  et	
  al.	
  2011)	
  So	
  this	
  article	
  is	
  not	
  suggesting	
  that	
  increasing	
  local	
  control	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  in	
  Oregon	
  would	
  result	
  in	
  more	
  just	
  and	
  sustainable	
  solutions.	
  Rather,	
  it	
  is	
  worth	
  closely	
  examining	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  farmers	
  in	
  supporting	
  opposition	
  to	
  statewide	
  planning	
  because	
  farmers	
  have	
  significant	
  symbolic	
  capital	
  (Bourdieu	
  1986)	
  in	
  the	
  political	
  debates	
  over	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  rural	
  land	
  in	
  Oregon.	
  As	
  Walker	
  and	
  Hurley	
  (2011)	
  state	
  "the	
  fortunes	
  of	
  Oregon's	
  farmers	
  and	
  the	
  fortunes	
  of	
  Oregon's	
  planning	
  system	
  have	
  always	
  gone	
  together.	
  Policies	
  that	
  help	
  farmers	
  to	
  stay	
  in	
  business	
  may	
  be	
  essential	
  to	
  maintaining	
  political	
  support	
  for	
  the	
  state's	
  planning	
  system."	
  Farming	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  is	
  undergoing	
  significant	
  restructuring	
  and	
  the	
  
	
  	
  
	
   13	
  
strains	
  of	
  this	
  transformation,	
  as	
  the	
  fortunes	
  of	
  some	
  farmers	
  rise	
  while	
  others	
  decline,	
  are	
  often	
  expressed	
  through	
  dissatisfaction	
  with	
  the	
  land	
  use	
  system.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   14	
  
CHAPTER	
  II	
  
METHODS	
  	
  	
   This	
  chapter	
  describes	
  the	
  methods	
  used	
  in	
  developing	
  my	
  case	
  study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  The	
  case	
  began	
  with	
  reports	
  by	
  state	
  employees	
  and	
  members	
  of	
  the	
  planning	
  community	
  of	
  a	
  troublesome	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  process	
  taking	
  place.	
  The	
  case	
  study	
  progressed	
  in	
  an	
  inductive	
  manner	
  from	
  that	
  basic	
  start,	
  adding	
  methods	
  as	
  issues	
  came	
  to	
  light.	
  The	
  planning	
  process	
  in	
  question	
  was	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  process.	
  However,	
  understanding	
  the	
  dynamics	
  of	
  that	
  process	
  involved	
  an	
  expansion	
  of	
  the	
  case	
  to	
  include	
  the	
  history	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  and	
  planning	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  and	
  situating	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  within	
  the	
  ongoing	
  dynamics	
  of	
  Oregon’s	
  statewide	
  planning	
  system.	
  	
  The	
  methods	
  I	
  chose	
  for	
  building	
  this	
  case	
  study	
  were	
  shaped	
  by	
  my	
  critical	
  realist	
  outlook	
  towards	
  how	
  to	
  study	
  environmental	
  change	
  and	
  the	
  social	
  and	
  physical	
  processes	
  that	
  create	
  that	
  change.	
  My	
  assumption	
  is	
  that	
  how	
  we	
  define	
  physical	
  changes	
  in	
  the	
  landscape	
  as	
  problems	
  is	
  shaped	
  by	
  cultural	
  systems,	
  though	
  “external	
  reality	
  is	
  not	
  collapsible	
  to	
  the	
  cognitive	
  or	
  social	
  domain	
  of	
  creator	
  or	
  reader”	
  (Galt	
  2011).	
  
Interviews	
  	
  	
   The	
  study	
  began	
  with	
  interviews	
  with	
  key	
  informants	
  involved	
  in	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  focusing	
  on	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  Process.	
  The	
  first	
  interviewees	
  were	
  selected	
  because	
  of	
  their	
  prominent	
  roles	
  in	
  the	
  RPS	
  process.	
  I	
  then	
  began	
  a	
  snowball	
  sampling	
  method,	
  using	
  multiple	
  informants	
  as	
  
	
  	
  
	
   15	
  
starting	
  points.	
  My	
  intention	
  was	
  to	
  understand	
  the	
  dynamics	
  of	
  the	
  RPS	
  process	
  and	
  any	
  conflicts	
  over	
  the	
  creation	
  of	
  a	
  plan	
  for	
  growth	
  management	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  In	
  addition	
  to	
  snowball	
  sampling,	
  I	
  made	
  an	
  effort	
  to	
  interview	
  people	
  in	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  positions	
  related	
  to	
  the	
  planning	
  process	
  itself	
  including	
  staff	
  planners	
  for	
  the	
  cities	
  and	
  county,	
  elected	
  officials,	
  and	
  representatives	
  of	
  various	
  state	
  agencies	
  who	
  were	
  involved	
  in	
  representing	
  the	
  interests	
  of	
  the	
  State	
  of	
  Oregon.	
  I	
  also	
  attempted	
  to	
  make	
  sure	
  that	
  my	
  interviews	
  included	
  people	
  living	
  in	
  the	
  various	
  different	
  cities	
  and	
  in	
  rural	
  parts	
  of	
  the	
  county.	
  	
  In	
  conducting	
  my	
  initial	
  round	
  of	
  interviews	
  I	
  rapidly	
  found	
  there	
  were	
  two	
  dominant	
  discourses	
  around	
  the	
  emerging	
  regional	
  plan.	
  Supporters	
  of	
  the	
  plan	
  emphasized	
  the	
  amount	
  of	
  work	
  having	
  gone	
  into	
  the	
  plan,	
  the	
  way	
  the	
  process	
  had	
  been	
  constructed	
  to	
  be	
  fair	
  and	
  accomplish	
  the	
  goals,	
  how	
  it	
  had	
  been	
  a	
  long	
  tough	
  process,	
  but	
  ultimately	
  worthwhile.	
  People	
  with	
  a	
  stronger	
  concern	
  for	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  and	
  connections	
  to	
  local	
  watchdog	
  land	
  use	
  groups	
  including	
  1000	
  Friends	
  of	
  Oregon	
  said	
  they	
  felt	
  excluded	
  from	
  the	
  process	
  and	
  concerns	
  about	
  both	
  the	
  fairness	
  of	
  the	
  process	
  and	
  the	
  outcome	
  which	
  they	
  felt	
  was	
  allocating	
  too	
  much	
  land	
  for	
  urban	
  growth.	
  Some	
  of	
  these	
  concerns	
  were	
  addressed	
  as	
  the	
  process	
  progressed	
  which	
  ultimately	
  led	
  watchdog	
  groups	
  not	
  to	
  challenge	
  the	
  final	
  plan.	
  	
  	
   As	
  my	
  interviews	
  progressed,	
  I	
  began	
  to	
  feel	
  that	
  further	
  interviews	
  with	
  those	
  heavily	
  involved	
  with	
  the	
  planning	
  process	
  would	
  yield	
  little	
  additional	
  information.	
  So	
  I	
  made	
  an	
  effort	
  to	
  recruit	
  interviewees	
  who	
  were	
  only	
  peripherally	
  involved	
  or	
  seemed	
  to	
  have	
  been	
  involved	
  at	
  some	
  point	
  and	
  were	
  no	
  longer	
  active.	
  I	
  did	
  this	
  by	
  reviewing	
  the	
  written	
  records	
  including	
  lists	
  of	
  who	
  had	
  been	
  involved	
  in	
  
	
  	
  
	
   16	
  
various	
  committees	
  and	
  groups	
  and	
  written	
  comments	
  by	
  citizens	
  that	
  had	
  been	
  entered	
  into	
  the	
  official	
  records.	
  I	
  then	
  consulted	
  with	
  several	
  key	
  informants	
  (long	
  time	
  residents	
  who	
  were	
  active	
  in	
  local	
  politics)	
  who	
  gave	
  me	
  additional	
  information	
  into	
  individuals’	
  backgrounds	
  and	
  interests.	
  I	
  began	
  to	
  interview	
  several	
  people	
  who	
  were	
  not	
  directly	
  involved	
  in	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS,	
  but	
  were	
  experienced	
  observers	
  of	
  local	
  politics	
  and	
  long	
  time	
  residents	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  better	
  understand	
  the	
  context	
  and	
  long	
  term	
  dynamics	
  of	
  the	
  situation.	
  	
  	
   I	
  also	
  focused	
  on	
  obtaining	
  interviews	
  with	
  farmers	
  and	
  agricultural	
  experts	
  such	
  as	
  extension	
  agents	
  as	
  the	
  project	
  progressed.	
  By	
  the	
  time	
  I	
  became	
  an	
  observer	
  of	
  the	
  RPS	
  process	
  very	
  few	
  farmers	
  were	
  actively	
  involved	
  except	
  a	
  few	
  whose	
  lands	
  were	
  still	
  under	
  debate	
  for	
  inclusion	
  in	
  future	
  growth	
  areas.	
  I	
  worked	
  to	
  get	
  interviews	
  with	
  as	
  many	
  of	
  the	
  members	
  of	
  the	
  Resource	
  Lands	
  Review	
  Committee	
  (RLRC)	
  as	
  I	
  could.	
  This	
  was	
  the	
  committee	
  made	
  up	
  of	
  farmers	
  and	
  agricultural	
  experts	
  who	
  designated	
  which	
  lands	
  under	
  consideration	
  for	
  future	
  growth	
  should	
  be	
  designated	
  as	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  “commercial	
  agricultural	
  base.”	
  I	
  also	
  interviewed	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  farmers,	
  particularly	
  pear	
  and	
  grape	
  growers,	
  who	
  had	
  been	
  less	
  directly	
  involved	
  in	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  about	
  the	
  farm	
  economy,	
  their	
  attitudes	
  towards	
  land	
  use	
  planning,	
  and	
  issues	
  facing	
  farmers	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  	
   In	
  the	
  end	
  I	
  interviewed	
  52	
  people	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  on	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  issues	
  relating	
  to	
  land	
  use	
  planning.	
  I	
  created	
  a	
  set	
  of	
  interview	
  questions,	
  which	
  I	
  used	
  during	
  the	
  process,	
  but	
  the	
  interviews	
  were	
  largely	
  open	
  ended	
  and	
  unstructured.	
  Since	
  my	
  goal	
  was	
  to	
  allow	
  themes	
  and	
  issues	
  to	
  emerge	
  from	
  interviewees	
  during	
  the	
  interview	
  I	
  asked	
  a	
  few	
  broad	
  questions	
  about	
  their	
  involvement	
  in	
  land	
  use	
  
	
  	
  
	
   17	
  
planning	
  and	
  politics	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  allowed	
  the	
  discussions	
  to	
  emerge	
  from	
  there.	
  The	
  exact	
  questions	
  covered	
  during	
  the	
  interviews	
  also	
  varied	
  significantly	
  as	
  the	
  project	
  progressed	
  and	
  I	
  was	
  pursuing	
  interviews	
  with	
  particular	
  people	
  to	
  following	
  on	
  issues	
  others	
  had	
  raised.	
  I	
  also	
  asked	
  all	
  my	
  interviewees	
  a	
  few	
  basic	
  questions	
  about	
  their	
  backgrounds,	
  profession,	
  length	
  of	
  time	
  lived	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  and	
  reason	
  for	
  moving	
  to	
  the	
  area.	
  This	
  allowed	
  me	
  to	
  get	
  a	
  sense	
  of	
  who	
  were	
  longtime	
  residents	
  and	
  who	
  were	
  relative	
  newcomers	
  to	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  The	
  idea	
  of	
  a	
  cultural	
  or	
  political	
  clash	
  between	
  newcomers	
  and	
  local	
  residents	
  is	
  long	
  time	
  theme	
  in	
  political	
  ecology	
  research	
  on	
  land	
  use	
  issues	
  in	
  the	
  American	
  West	
  (Walker	
  and	
  Fortmann	
  2003).	
  However,	
  in	
  my	
  interviews	
  I	
  found	
  that	
  only	
  a	
  very	
  few	
  people	
  involved	
  in	
  land	
  use	
  debates	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  were	
  born	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  or	
  had	
  long	
  term	
  family	
  ties	
  to	
  it.	
  Many	
  had	
  lived	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  for	
  10-­‐20	
  years	
  or	
  more,	
  but	
  there	
  seemed	
  to	
  be	
  no	
  clear	
  split	
  in	
  attitudes	
  or	
  politics	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  length	
  of	
  residence	
  or	
  family	
  ties.	
  	
  All	
  my	
  interviews	
  were	
  done	
  on	
  the	
  condition	
  of	
  confidentiality.	
  Some	
  interviewees	
  noted	
  that	
  they	
  had	
  expressed	
  their	
  views	
  on	
  land	
  use	
  and	
  local	
  politics	
  publicly	
  many	
  times	
  before	
  but	
  others	
  commented	
  that	
  they	
  had	
  lost	
  friendships	
  and	
  business	
  associations	
  over	
  these	
  dynamics.	
  In	
  general	
  I	
  believe	
  the	
  promise	
  of	
  confidentiality	
  allowed	
  interviewees	
  to	
  speak	
  freely	
  about	
  the	
  contentious	
  politics	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  	
   I	
  made	
  audio	
  recordings	
  of	
  all	
  my	
  interviews	
  along	
  with	
  written	
  notes.	
  I	
  reviewed	
  my	
  notes	
  and	
  the	
  recordings	
  during	
  the	
  analysis	
  process,	
  but	
  did	
  not	
  fully	
  transcribe	
  all	
  the	
  recordings.	
  This	
  partial	
  transcription	
  process	
  was	
  aided	
  by	
  my	
  use	
  
	
  	
  
	
   18	
  
of	
  a	
  Livescribe	
  pen,	
  which	
  allowed	
  me	
  to	
  play	
  back	
  portions	
  of	
  the	
  audio	
  recording	
  associated	
  with	
  particular	
  sections	
  of	
  my	
  written	
  notes.	
  As	
  the	
  research	
  process	
  developed	
  I	
  found	
  that	
  certain	
  themes	
  were	
  emerging	
  and	
  so	
  I	
  focused	
  on	
  transcribing	
  portions	
  of	
  my	
  interviews	
  relating	
  directly	
  to	
  those	
  themes.	
  
Observation	
  of	
  the	
  Political	
  Process	
  	
  	
   From	
  2009	
  to	
  2012	
  I	
  attended	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  committee	
  meetings,	
  city	
  council	
  meetings,	
  county	
  commissioners	
  meetings,	
  and	
  other	
  hearings.	
  Attending	
  meetings	
  allowed	
  me	
  to	
  observe	
  the	
  process	
  and	
  particularly	
  hear	
  testimony	
  from	
  the	
  public.	
  Observing	
  meetings	
  and	
  reviewing	
  the	
  testimony	
  submitting	
  to	
  the	
  official	
  record	
  were	
  the	
  main	
  ways	
  I	
  was	
  able	
  to	
  understand	
  how	
  the	
  general	
  public	
  viewed	
  land	
  use	
  planning.	
  The	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  process	
  took	
  12	
  years	
  and	
  very	
  few	
  people	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  followed	
  the	
  process	
  in	
  the	
  long	
  term.	
  While	
  there	
  were	
  numerous	
  announcements	
  in	
  the	
  local	
  papers	
  of	
  hearings	
  and	
  mailings	
  to	
  landowners	
  who	
  were	
  potentially	
  impacted	
  by	
  the	
  proposed	
  plan,	
  most	
  people	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  did	
  not	
  follow	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  or	
  this	
  specific	
  process.	
  The	
  local	
  paper,	
  the	
  Medford	
  Mail	
  Tribune,	
  regularly	
  published	
  articles	
  and	
  letters	
  to	
  the	
  editor	
  relating	
  to	
  the	
  process,	
  but	
  the	
  lengthy	
  nature	
  of	
  the	
  process	
  ensured	
  that	
  only	
  the	
  most	
  dedicated	
  observers	
  were	
  able	
  to	
  follow	
  it.	
  In	
  addition,	
  although	
  the	
  committee	
  meetings	
  were	
  open	
  to	
  the	
  public,	
  most	
  meetings	
  took	
  place	
  early	
  on	
  a	
  weekday	
  morning,	
  making	
  it	
  difficult	
  for	
  anyone	
  working	
  regular	
  hours	
  to	
  attend.	
  By	
  and	
  large	
  most	
  attendants	
  were	
  paid	
  staff	
  or	
  elected	
  officials	
  along	
  with	
  consultants	
  for	
  developers	
  and	
  landowners.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   19	
  
	
   In	
  addition	
  to	
  observing	
  meetings	
  in	
  person	
  I	
  was	
  able	
  to	
  obtain	
  audio	
  recordings	
  of	
  about	
  30	
  meetings	
  of	
  the	
  Resource	
  Lands	
  Review	
  Committee	
  that	
  took	
  place	
  between	
  2000	
  and	
  2005.	
  This	
  amounted	
  to	
  about	
  50-­‐60	
  hours	
  of	
  audio	
  recordings.	
  	
  I	
  listened	
  to	
  these	
  recordings	
  to	
  supplement	
  my	
  interviews	
  with	
  RLRC	
  members.	
  
Analysis	
  of	
  Written	
  Documentation	
  	
   In	
  order	
  to	
  better	
  understand	
  the	
  dynamics	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  politics	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  I	
  collected	
  and	
  analyzed	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  written	
  documents.	
  The	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  process	
  produced	
  a	
  plan	
  and	
  supplemental	
  documentation	
  of	
  several	
  thousand	
  pages.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  the	
  OUR	
  REGION	
  report	
  provided	
  an	
  interesting	
  contrast	
  since	
  that	
  also	
  included	
  a	
  proposed	
  regional	
  plan.	
  I	
  also	
  collected	
  newspaper	
  articles	
  and	
  letters	
  to	
  the	
  editor	
  from	
  local	
  newspapers.	
  I	
  used	
  discourse	
  analysis	
  to	
  identify	
  themes	
  in	
  these	
  written	
  documents	
  and	
  relate	
  what	
  I	
  was	
  hearing	
  in	
  my	
  interviews	
  to	
  the	
  written	
  record.	
  	
  
Archival	
  Research	
  	
   Several	
  of	
  the	
  key	
  points	
  of	
  contention	
  that	
  emerged	
  during	
  my	
  observation	
  of	
  the	
  planning	
  process	
  related	
  to	
  the	
  history	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  and	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  This	
  led	
  me	
  to	
  investigate	
  several	
  archives	
  in	
  an	
  effort	
  to	
  understand	
  how	
  the	
  region’s	
  growth	
  and	
  development	
  going	
  back	
  to	
  the	
  original	
  settlement	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  around	
  1850.	
  This	
  involved	
  visits	
  to	
  special	
  collections	
  in	
  the	
  Knight	
  Library	
  at	
  University	
  of	
  Oregon	
  and	
  the	
  Research	
  Library	
  of	
  the	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  Historical	
  Society.	
  I	
  also	
  searched	
  the	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  Digital	
  Archives	
  created	
  and	
  hosted	
  by	
  
	
  	
  
	
   20	
  
the	
  Hannon	
  Library	
  at	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  University	
  and	
  Historic	
  Oregon	
  Newspapers,	
  a	
  searchable	
  digital	
  database,	
  at	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  Oregon.	
  	
  The	
  Sunset	
  Bibliography,	
  created	
  and	
  hosted	
  by	
  the	
  Stanford	
  University	
  Libraries,	
  was	
  also	
  instrumental	
  to	
  my	
  research.	
  This	
  is	
  a	
  searchable	
  online	
  index	
  of	
  articles	
  in	
  Sunset	
  Magazine	
  going	
  back	
  to	
  1898.	
  Sunset	
  was	
  created	
  by	
  the	
  Southern	
  Pacific	
  Railroad	
  to	
  promote	
  the	
  western	
  U.S.	
  to	
  tourists.	
  Jackson	
  County’s	
  location	
  on	
  a	
  rail	
  line	
  and	
  near	
  Crater	
  Lake	
  National	
  Park	
  was	
  a	
  key	
  element	
  in	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  this	
  was	
  reflected	
  in	
  the	
  many	
  Sunset	
  articles	
  on	
  the	
  region	
  published	
  in	
  the	
  early	
  20th	
  century.	
  	
  
Maps,	
  Geographic	
  Information	
  Systems,	
  and	
  Quantitative	
  Data	
  	
   In	
  order	
  to	
  understand	
  the	
  claims	
  being	
  made	
  in	
  the	
  current	
  political	
  processes	
  it	
  was	
  important	
  to	
  understand	
  as	
  much	
  as	
  possible	
  the	
  current	
  mix	
  of	
  land	
  uses,	
  historical	
  land	
  use,	
  and	
  land	
  ownership	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  My	
  approach	
  to	
  using	
  GIS	
  might	
  best	
  be	
  described	
  as	
  exploratory	
  data	
  analysis	
  or	
  grounded	
  visualization.	
  Knigge	
  and	
  Cope	
  (2006),	
  reflecting	
  recent	
  work	
  in	
  critical	
  GIS,	
  outline	
  a	
  method	
  for	
  combining	
  qualitative	
  and	
  quantitative	
  data	
  through	
  recursive	
  analysis	
  in	
  which	
  the	
  researcher	
  examines	
  GIS	
  data	
  through	
  an	
  iterative	
  and	
  reflexive	
  process	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  qualitative	
  data.	
  This	
  process	
  enriches	
  both	
  sources	
  of	
  data	
  by	
  allowing	
  the	
  researcher	
  to	
  explore	
  emerging	
  themes	
  and	
  search	
  for	
  potential	
  relationships.	
  	
  	
   I	
  obtained	
  GIS	
  data	
  layers	
  from	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  sources,	
  primarily	
  from	
  the	
  Jackson	
  County	
  GIS	
  Department,	
  but	
  also	
  from	
  the	
  Oregon	
  Department	
  of	
  Agriculture,	
  and	
  the	
  Oregon	
  Geospatial	
  Data	
  Clearinghouse.	
  In	
  addition,	
  I	
  was	
  able	
  to	
  
	
  	
  
	
   21	
  
obtain	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  historical	
  maps	
  from	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  Oregon	
  Map	
  Library,	
  which	
  I	
  georeferenced,	
  matching	
  historical	
  landmarks	
  with	
  the	
  same	
  features	
  on	
  current	
  satellite	
  data.	
  This	
  allowed	
  me	
  to	
  analyze	
  historical	
  patterns	
  of	
  growth	
  and	
  development	
  and	
  compare	
  current	
  and	
  historical	
  patterns	
  of	
  sprawl	
  and	
  parcelization.	
  Of	
  particular	
  use	
  was	
  data	
  on	
  the	
  location	
  of	
  various	
  soil	
  types,	
  land	
  ownership,	
  tax	
  rates,	
  zoning,	
  and	
  assessor’s	
  analysis	
  of	
  housing	
  types.	
  	
  	
   Quantitative	
  data	
  on	
  the	
  historical	
  development	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  is	
  limited.	
  I	
  used	
  current	
  and	
  historical	
  census	
  data	
  to	
  supplement	
  my	
  archival	
  research.	
  I	
  obtained	
  the	
  historical	
  census	
  data	
  from	
  the	
  Historical	
  Census	
  Browser	
  hosted	
  by	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  Virginia	
  Library.	
  This	
  allowed	
  me	
  to	
  analyze	
  the	
  number	
  and	
  type	
  of	
  farmers	
  during	
  different	
  censuses	
  and	
  the	
  growth	
  in	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  population	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  over	
  time.	
  
Conclusion	
  	
   In	
  developing	
  my	
  case	
  study	
  I	
  chose	
  to	
  use	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  methods	
  and	
  data	
  sources.	
  No	
  one	
  source	
  of	
  data	
  is	
  without	
  its	
  weaknesses	
  and	
  combining	
  various	
  data	
  sources	
  enriches	
  our	
  understanding	
  of	
  not	
  only	
  the	
  case,	
  but	
  also	
  the	
  data	
  sources	
  themselves.	
  In	
  this	
  case,	
  my	
  goal	
  was	
  to	
  examine	
  all	
  these	
  sources	
  of	
  data	
  critically,	
  with	
  an	
  eye	
  for	
  the	
  ways	
  that	
  all	
  data	
  are	
  socially	
  constructed.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   22	
  
CHAPTER	
  IV	
  
OLD	
  WEST	
  VERSUS	
  NEW	
  WEST,	
  EXURBAN	
  SPRAWL	
  AND	
  HIGH	
  
VALUE	
  AGRICULTURE:	
  COMPETING	
  OR	
  COMPATIBLE	
  
CAPITALISMS?	
  
Introduction	
  In	
  1973	
  the	
  first	
  land	
  use	
  laws	
  were	
  enacted	
  and	
  my	
  dad	
  was	
  furious.	
  He	
  was	
  so	
  unhappy	
  about	
  it.	
  	
  It	
  was	
  just	
  that	
  someone	
  was	
  going	
  to	
  be	
  telling	
  him	
  what	
  to	
  do	
  with	
  his	
  property.	
  This	
  property	
  has	
  been	
  in	
  the	
  family	
  since	
  1902	
  and	
  they	
  were	
  the	
  ones	
  who	
  were	
  making	
  decisions	
  about	
  it.	
  He	
  did	
  have	
  a	
  brother	
  who	
  built	
  a	
  small	
  subdivision	
  on	
  his	
  property,	
  so	
  I	
  don't	
  know	
  if	
  my	
  dad	
  had	
  visions	
  of	
  that.	
  Because	
  he	
  liked	
  doing	
  that	
  a	
  lot	
  better	
  than	
  farming	
  and	
  in	
  his	
  diary	
  he	
  talks	
  about	
  how	
  he	
  divided	
  his	
  farm	
  up	
  amongst	
  his	
  children	
  and	
  he	
  went	
  to	
  Medford	
  and	
  started	
  building	
  commercial	
  buildings.	
  That	
  was	
  more	
  lucrative	
  and	
  more	
  what	
  he	
  liked	
  to	
  do.	
  That	
  was	
  the	
  main	
  thing.	
  Just	
  taking	
  away	
  some	
  rights	
  they	
  felt	
  they	
  had.3	
  -­‐	
  Small	
  fruit	
  grower,	
  
discussing	
  her	
  father's	
  attitudes	
  towards	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  Oregon's	
  statewide	
  
land	
  use	
  planning	
  system.	
  Interview,	
  2012.	
  
	
  	
   The	
  passage	
  of	
  Oregon's	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system	
  in	
  1973	
  provides	
  an	
  intriguing	
  context	
  for	
  the	
  study	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  change.	
  This	
  regulatory	
  system	
  strongly	
  limits	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  outside	
  urban	
  growth	
  boundaries.	
  	
  Although	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  primary	
  goals	
  of	
  the	
  planning	
  system	
  has	
  been	
  to	
  limit	
  the	
  conversion	
  of	
  agricultural	
  land	
  to	
  urban	
  and	
  residential	
  uses,	
  from	
  the	
  start,	
  Oregon's	
  farmers	
  were	
  divided	
  in	
  their	
  attitudes	
  toward	
  it.	
  Since	
  its	
  passage,	
  there	
  has	
  been	
  ongoing	
  resistance	
  and	
  resentment	
  across	
  much	
  of	
  rural	
  Oregon	
  toward	
  the	
  imposition	
  of	
  regulations	
  viewed	
  as	
  enacted	
  by	
  urban	
  outsiders.	
  This	
  case	
  study	
  reveals	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  roots	
  of	
  this	
  discontent	
  in	
  southern	
  Oregon.	
  It	
  provides	
  a	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  3.	
  Interview	
  with	
  small	
  fruit	
  grower.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   23	
  
nuanced	
  picture	
  of	
  the	
  complex	
  intertwining	
  of	
  farming	
  and	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  and	
  uncovers	
  how	
  early	
  growth	
  of	
  the	
  agricultural	
  sector	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  was	
  fueled	
  by	
  real	
  estate	
  speculation,	
  tourism,	
  and	
  the	
  arrival	
  of	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migrants	
  with	
  access	
  to	
  external	
  capital.	
  	
  In	
  this	
  case,	
  Old	
  West	
  economies	
  (extractive	
  industries	
  such	
  as	
  mining,	
  timber,	
  and	
  agriculture),	
  rather	
  than	
  conflicting	
  with	
  New	
  West	
  economies	
  (consumptive	
  industries	
  such	
  as	
  tourism	
  and	
  real	
  estate	
  development),	
  provided	
  capital	
  and	
  labor	
  for	
  their	
  growth.	
  The	
  passage	
  of	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  regulation	
  represented	
  a	
  major	
  shift	
  in	
  the	
  environmental	
  management	
  regime	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  a	
  disruption	
  of	
  the	
  ability	
  of	
  rural	
  landowners	
  to	
  engage	
  in	
  both	
  New	
  and	
  Old	
  West	
  economies.	
  	
   This	
  article	
  examines	
  the	
  current	
  and	
  historical	
  relationship	
  between	
  agriculture	
  and	
  exurban	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  in	
  the	
  American	
  West	
  through	
  analysis	
  of	
  a	
  case	
  study	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley,	
  southern	
  Oregon.	
  	
  In	
  the	
  popular	
  press	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  the	
  academic	
  literature,	
  political	
  conflicts	
  over	
  resource	
  management	
  are	
  often	
  assumed	
  to	
  materialize	
  as	
  a	
  result	
  of	
  cultural	
  and	
  ideological	
  differences	
  between	
  newly	
  arrived	
  "amenity"	
  migrants	
  and	
  long	
  time	
  residents	
  of	
  rural	
  areas.	
  	
  The	
  Old	
  West	
  and	
  New	
  West	
  represent	
  a	
  shorthand	
  way	
  to	
  refer	
  to	
  what	
  are	
  assumed	
  to	
  be	
  separate	
  and	
  distinct	
  economies	
  involving	
  two	
  groups	
  of	
  people	
  with	
  disconnected	
  cultures	
  and	
  political	
  orientations:	
  the	
  "Old	
  West"	
  economy,	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  extraction	
  of	
  commodities	
  from	
  the	
  vast	
  lands	
  of	
  the	
  West	
  and	
  the	
  "New	
  West"	
  economy,	
  based	
  on	
  consumption	
  of	
  these	
  landscapes	
  through	
  tourism	
  and	
  recreation.	
  This	
  framing	
  relies	
  on	
  a	
  clear	
  distinction	
  between	
  the	
  two	
  groups	
  of	
  people	
  and	
  the	
  two	
  economies.	
  Resource	
  economies	
  and	
  amenity-­‐based	
  rural-­‐
	
  	
  
	
   24	
  
residential	
  economies	
  are	
  often	
  expected	
  to	
  conflict,	
  yet	
  there	
  has	
  been	
  little	
  focused	
  examination	
  of	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  these	
  two	
  forms	
  of	
  rural	
  capitalism.	
  The	
  article	
  begins	
  with	
  a	
  brief	
  review	
  of	
  the	
  literature	
  on	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  and	
  Old	
  West,	
  paying	
  attention	
  to	
  how	
  individuals	
  and	
  groups	
  have	
  been	
  framed	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  migration,	
  land	
  management,	
  and	
  political	
  economies.	
  I	
  then	
  provide	
  an	
  overview	
  of	
  the	
  study	
  area	
  and	
  regional	
  context	
  before	
  examining	
  the	
  historical	
  development	
  of	
  agriculture	
  and	
  exurban	
  style	
  development	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  
Literature	
  Review	
  
New	
  West	
  and	
  Old	
  West	
  Economies	
  	
   The	
  rise	
  of	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  as	
  a	
  set	
  of	
  economic,	
  political,	
  and	
  cultural	
  transformations	
  coherently	
  distinct	
  from	
  the	
  Old	
  West	
  has	
  been	
  debated	
  for	
  at	
  least	
  two	
  decades.	
  Historians	
  have	
  long	
  pointed	
  to	
  the	
  continuities	
  of	
  the	
  West	
  in	
  contrast	
  to	
  characterizations,	
  which	
  emphasize	
  recent	
  changes	
  (Limerick	
  1987,	
  Taylor	
  2004,	
  Hyde	
  1998).	
  Robbins	
  et	
  al.	
  (2009)	
  point	
  out	
  that	
  the	
  idea	
  of	
  a	
  distinctly	
  New	
  West	
  may	
  not	
  hold	
  up	
  under	
  careful	
  scrutiny.	
  This	
  chapter	
  argues	
  that	
  if	
  we	
  look	
  carefully	
  into	
  the	
  history	
  of	
  the	
  American	
  West,	
  it	
  is	
  possible	
  to	
  see,	
  in	
  some	
  places,	
  the	
  existence	
  of	
  characteristics	
  associated	
  with	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  long	
  before	
  its	
  widespread	
  emergence	
  as	
  an	
  increasingly	
  dominant	
  force	
  on	
  the	
  Western	
  landscape.	
  From	
  the	
  first	
  decades	
  of	
  the	
  20th	
  century,	
  as	
  Jackson	
  County	
  grew,	
  exurban	
  style	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  and	
  tourism	
  developed	
  alongside	
  the	
  Old	
  West	
  economies,	
  timber	
  and	
  agriculture,	
  that	
  dominated	
  economic	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  Rapid	
  growth	
  in	
  rural	
  population	
  and	
  residential	
  housing	
  industry	
  during	
  this	
  period	
  were	
  
	
  	
  
	
   25	
  
linked	
  to	
  expansion	
  of	
  the	
  orchard	
  fruit	
  growing	
  industry.	
  The	
  passage	
  of	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  in	
  the	
  1970s,	
  curtailing	
  rural	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  in	
  the	
  region,	
  represented	
  a	
  distinct	
  shift	
  in	
  the	
  existing	
  environmental	
  management	
  regime	
  that	
  had	
  been	
  relatively	
  stable	
  for	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  decades.	
  	
  	
   Much	
  of	
  the	
  prior	
  research	
  on	
  exurbanization	
  and	
  amenity	
  migration	
  focuses	
  on	
  the	
  people	
  involved	
  and	
  their	
  characteristics	
  as	
  a	
  group	
  distinct	
  from	
  long	
  time	
  rural	
  residents.	
  A	
  number	
  of	
  studies	
  have	
  pointed	
  to	
  the	
  differing	
  cultural	
  and	
  environmental	
  values	
  that	
  recent	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migrants	
  have	
  brought	
  to	
  the	
  exurban	
  west	
  (Hines	
  2010,	
  Smith	
  and	
  Krannich,	
  2009).	
  Exurban	
  settlement	
  and	
  urban-­‐to-­‐rural	
  migration	
  have	
  been	
  associated	
  with	
  a	
  shift	
  in	
  values	
  around	
  land	
  management	
  from	
  productive	
  to	
  consumptive	
  views	
  of	
  the	
  landscape.	
  In	
  this	
  line	
  of	
  reasoning,	
  conflicts	
  associated	
  with	
  the	
  arrival	
  of	
  new	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migrants	
  are	
  at	
  least	
  partly	
  triggered	
  by	
  the	
  differences	
  in	
  values	
  between	
  newcomers	
  and	
  locals.	
  The	
  commonly	
  accepted	
  narrative	
  is	
  that	
  urban	
  migrants	
  bring	
  with	
  them	
  new	
  values	
  resulting	
  in	
  acrimonious	
  conflicts	
  over	
  land	
  use	
  and	
  environmental	
  regulation	
  (Haggerty	
  and	
  Travis	
  2006,	
  Jones	
  et	
  al.	
  2003,	
  Travis	
  2007).	
  	
  Whereas	
  long	
  time	
  residents	
  view	
  the	
  landscape	
  as	
  a	
  resource,	
  a	
  working	
  environment,	
  new	
  migrants	
  value	
  the	
  aesthetics	
  of	
  the	
  landscape,	
  the	
  picturesque	
  rivers,	
  mountains,	
  forests,	
  and	
  bucolic	
  Old	
  West	
  towns.	
  	
  Yet	
  research	
  findings	
  on	
  these	
  supposed	
  differences	
  have	
  been	
  inconsistent	
  (Nelson	
  2002,	
  Smith	
  and	
  Krannich	
  2009).	
  Assuming	
  that	
  new	
  arrivals	
  and	
  locals	
  consistently	
  represent	
  different	
  groups	
  culturally,	
  politically,	
  or	
  economically	
  often	
  relies	
  on	
  assumptions	
  about	
  who	
  long	
  time	
  locals	
  are.	
  Nelson	
  (2002)	
  suggests	
  that	
  
	
  	
  
	
   26	
  
negative	
  attitudes	
  towards	
  change	
  have	
  less	
  to	
  do	
  with	
  long	
  term	
  resident	
  versus	
  newcomer	
  status	
  than	
  with	
  economic	
  status.	
  Low-­‐income	
  residents	
  report	
  higher	
  levels	
  of	
  anxiety	
  about	
  changes,	
  perhaps	
  because	
  of	
  lack	
  of	
  economic	
  resources	
  and	
  support	
  services.	
  And	
  while	
  it	
  is	
  easy	
  to	
  imagine	
  that	
  cultural	
  differences	
  lead	
  to	
  disagreements	
  over	
  land	
  management,	
  a	
  cause	
  and	
  effect	
  relationship	
  cannot	
  be	
  assumed.	
  It	
  might	
  equally	
  be	
  argued	
  that	
  economic	
  conflicts	
  and	
  outcomes	
  result	
  in	
  the	
  adoption	
  of	
  conflicting	
  cultural	
  identities	
  (Robbins	
  et	
  al.	
  2009).	
  Indeed,	
  the	
  ideals	
  of	
  the	
  Old	
  West:	
  beauty,	
  freedom,	
  wide	
  open	
  spaces,	
  and	
  caring	
  communities	
  that	
  have	
  attracted	
  so	
  many	
  "amenity"	
  migrants	
  in	
  recent	
  decades,	
  may	
  represent	
  a	
  fiction	
  that	
  draws	
  in	
  long	
  time	
  residents	
  as	
  well,	
  making	
  them	
  nostalgic	
  for	
  a	
  past	
  that	
  never	
  existed	
  (Hyde	
  1998	
  and	
  Limerick	
  1987).	
  	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  avoid	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  conceptual	
  confusion	
  around	
  whether	
  new	
  arrivals	
  represent	
  a	
  distinctive	
  group	
  with	
  new	
  values,	
  this	
  chapter	
  focuses	
  on	
  the	
  economics	
  of	
  the	
  Old	
  and	
  New	
  Wests	
  and	
  competing	
  rural	
  capitalisms,	
  rather	
  than	
  questions	
  of	
  clashing	
  cultures	
  or	
  ideologies.	
  Walker	
  rightly	
  pointed	
  to	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  these	
  two	
  economies,	
  rather	
  than	
  focusing	
  his	
  analysis	
  on	
  a	
  clash	
  of	
  cultures:	
  "The	
  literature	
  of	
  the	
  'New	
  West'	
  that	
  frames	
  the	
  resulting	
  conflicts	
  as	
  clashes	
  of	
  cultures	
  or	
  ideologies	
  misses	
  the	
  point	
  that	
  these	
  conflicts	
  reflect	
  underlying	
  tensions	
  between	
  competing	
  capitalisms	
  that	
  commodify	
  nature	
  in	
  incompatible	
  ways"	
  (Walker	
  2003).	
  Yet	
  a	
  careful	
  review	
  of	
  the	
  various	
  industries	
  associated	
  with	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  and	
  the	
  Old	
  West	
  reveals	
  varying	
  levels	
  of	
  incompatibility	
  and	
  complementary.	
  Robbins	
  et	
  al.	
  (2009)	
  take	
  an	
  open	
  approach	
  to	
  understanding	
  the	
  relationships	
  between	
  various	
  forms	
  of	
  rural	
  capitalism	
  asking,	
  
	
  	
  
	
   27	
  
"what	
  is	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  extractive	
  development	
  and	
  amenity	
  economies	
  and	
  how	
  smoothly	
  can	
  they	
  be	
  combined?"	
  	
  A	
  broader	
  examination	
  of	
  the	
  relationships	
  between	
  resource-­‐based	
  industries	
  and	
  amenity	
  economies	
  in	
  different	
  times	
  and	
  places	
  might	
  reveal	
  a	
  complex	
  dynamic	
  in	
  which	
  compatibility	
  is	
  contingent	
  on	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  human	
  and	
  environmental	
  factors.	
  While	
  there	
  is	
  no	
  doubt	
  that	
  the	
  rural	
  West	
  has	
  experienced	
  significant	
  economic	
  and	
  demographic	
  change	
  in	
  the	
  last	
  fifty	
  years,	
  as	
  rural	
  restructuring	
  has	
  led	
  to	
  a	
  decline	
  of	
  Old	
  West	
  industries	
  in	
  many	
  locations,	
  the	
  emphasis	
  on	
  amenity	
  economies	
  as	
  a	
  new	
  phenomenon	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  resource	
  economies	
  as	
  "traditional"	
  obscures	
  the	
  complex	
  and	
  shifting	
  relationships	
  between	
  these	
  two	
  forms	
  of	
  rural	
  capitalism.	
  	
  
Amenity	
  Migration	
  and	
  Rural	
  Economies	
  The	
  growing	
  body	
  of	
  literature	
  on	
  amenity	
  migration	
  and	
  exurbanization	
  emphasizes	
  the	
  arrival	
  of	
  urban	
  migrants	
  in	
  previously	
  rural	
  areas	
  and	
  the	
  political,	
  economic,	
  and	
  ecological	
  impacts	
  of	
  their	
  relocation.	
  Amenity	
  migration	
  and	
  exurbanization	
  are	
  often	
  linked,	
  yet	
  each	
  is	
  also	
  used	
  to	
  describe	
  a	
  broad	
  range	
  of	
  migration	
  and	
  settlement	
  processes	
  and	
  patterns.	
  The	
  focus	
  in	
  the	
  literature	
  has,	
  so	
  far,	
  been	
  on	
  the	
  amenity	
  migrant	
  as	
  a	
  driver	
  of	
  economic	
  and	
  social	
  change.	
  	
  Abrams	
  et	
  al.	
  (2012,	
  270)	
  define	
  amenity	
  migration	
  as	
  "the	
  movement	
  of	
  largely	
  affluent	
  urban	
  or	
  suburban	
  populations	
  to	
  rural	
  areas	
  for	
  specific	
  lifestyle	
  amenities,	
  such	
  as	
  natural	
  scenery,	
  proximity	
  to	
  outdoor	
  recreation,	
  cultural	
  richness,	
  or	
  a	
  sense	
  of	
  rurality."	
  According	
  to	
  this	
  definition	
  then,	
  there	
  are	
  several	
  defining	
  characteristics	
  of	
  this	
  migrant	
  group:	
  they	
  are	
  at	
  least	
  in	
  general,	
  affluent;	
  they	
  formerly	
  resided	
  in	
  urban	
  or	
  suburban	
  areas;	
  and	
  they	
  enjoy	
  of	
  the	
  visual	
  
	
  	
  
	
   28	
  
aspects	
  of	
  the	
  landscape	
  along	
  with	
  recreational	
  experiences	
  it	
  can	
  provide.	
  	
  What	
  is	
  less	
  often	
  mentioned,	
  but	
  worth	
  noting	
  because	
  of	
  the	
  racial	
  politics	
  motivating	
  their	
  movement,	
  is	
  that	
  virtually	
  all	
  these	
  migrants	
  are	
  white.4	
  	
  While	
  there	
  is	
  archival	
  evidence	
  that	
  indicates	
  that	
  the	
  influx	
  of	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migrants	
  to	
  southern	
  Oregon	
  during	
  the	
  early	
  20th	
  century	
  fits	
  the	
  definition	
  of	
  amenity	
  migration	
  as	
  people	
  who	
  value	
  and	
  are	
  motivated	
  by	
  natural	
  amenities	
  and	
  who	
  migrate	
  into	
  rural	
  areas	
  with	
  considerable	
  economic	
  resources,	
  it	
  is	
  impossible	
  to	
  measure	
  the	
  attitudes	
  of	
  this	
  historical	
  group	
  directly.	
  My	
  focus,	
  rather,	
  is	
  on	
  the	
  role	
  taken	
  by	
  boosters	
  and	
  real	
  estate	
  developers	
  who	
  were	
  equally	
  fevered	
  in	
  their	
  attempts	
  to	
  sell	
  land	
  as	
  capitalist	
  investment	
  and	
  to	
  promote	
  an	
  idealized	
  rural	
  lifestyle.	
  	
  There	
  is	
  good	
  reason	
  to	
  assume	
  that	
  migrants	
  came	
  to	
  the	
  valley	
  both	
  to	
  make	
  money	
  by	
  growing	
  fruit	
  and	
  to	
  enjoy	
  the	
  many	
  amenities	
  promoted	
  to	
  them	
  by	
  developers.	
  Vaught	
  (1999,	
  53),	
  in	
  discussing	
  the	
  horticultural	
  boom	
  in	
  California	
  during	
  this	
  period,	
  argues	
  that	
  orchardists	
  in	
  particular	
  had	
  a	
  different	
  attitude	
  towards	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  the	
  city	
  and	
  the	
  countryside	
  than	
  other	
  rural	
  industrialists.	
  “Horticulture	
  was	
  a	
  way	
  of	
  life	
  and	
  a	
  business…A	
  specialty	
  crop	
  community,	
  they	
  firmly	
  believed,	
  was	
  a	
  virtuous	
  place	
  somewhere	
  between	
  the	
  isolated	
  and	
  self-­‐sufficient	
  Jeffersonian	
  rural	
  order	
  and	
  the	
  market-­‐dominated,	
  impersonal	
  industrial	
  city.	
  It	
  was	
  a	
  place	
  where	
  educated,	
  land-­‐owning	
  families	
  live	
  on	
  small,	
  orderly,	
  and	
  prosperous	
  orchards	
  or	
  vineyards	
  in	
  close	
  proximity	
  to	
  one	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  4.	
  While	
  amenity	
  migration,	
  like	
  suburbanization	
  produces	
  spaces	
  that	
  are	
  ideologically	
  constructed	
  as	
  white,	
  regions	
  experiencing	
  amenity	
  migration	
  are	
  also	
  associated	
  with	
  growing	
  Latino	
  populations	
  (Nelson	
  and	
  Nelson	
  2010).	
  
	
  	
  
	
   29	
  
another.	
  It	
  thus	
  fostered	
  neighborliness,	
  strong	
  local	
  social,	
  cultural,	
  and	
  political	
  institutions,	
  and	
  economic	
  progress,	
  all	
  in	
  an	
  environment	
  that	
  was	
  esthetically	
  pleasing	
  as	
  well.”	
  Mechling	
  (1999,	
  136)	
  describes	
  a	
  similar	
  early	
  promotion	
  strategy	
  in	
  Florida	
  and	
  Southern	
  California,	
  where	
  developers	
  and	
  promoters	
  marketed	
  orange	
  growing	
  specifically	
  to	
  wealthy	
  urban	
  and	
  suburban	
  businessmen	
  who	
  would	
  be	
  interested	
  in	
  country	
  clubs,	
  tennis-­‐courts,	
  and	
  golf	
  courses.	
  Gosnell	
  et	
  al.	
  (2009)	
  note	
  in	
  their	
  review	
  of	
  the	
  literature	
  on	
  amenity	
  migration	
  that	
  while	
  British	
  scholars	
  have	
  studied	
  urban-­‐to-­‐rural	
  migration	
  in	
  the	
  U.K.	
  since	
  the	
  early	
  19th	
  century,	
  U.S.	
  scholars	
  only	
  began	
  studying	
  the	
  phenomenon	
  in	
  the	
  1970s	
  and	
  have	
  focused	
  on	
  occurrences	
  of	
  this	
  pattern	
  since	
  the	
  1950s.	
  This	
  study	
  in	
  contrast,	
  examines	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migration	
  and	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  "rural	
  idyll"	
  in	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  industrial	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  early	
  20th	
  century.	
  By	
  looking	
  back	
  at	
  the	
  history	
  of	
  amenity	
  land	
  uses	
  in	
  the	
  American	
  West,	
  we	
  can	
  better	
  understand	
  the	
  complexity	
  of	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  what	
  have	
  been	
  conceptualized	
  as	
  two	
  separate	
  and	
  competing	
  economies	
  –	
  rural	
  resource	
  based	
  industries,	
  and	
  service-­‐based	
  industries	
  focused	
  around	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migration	
  and	
  tourism.	
  The	
  term	
  "exurbanite"	
  is	
  sometimes	
  used	
  interchangeably	
  with	
  amenity	
  migrant.	
  However	
  recent	
  literature	
  often	
  centers	
  on	
  exurbia	
  as	
  a	
  place	
  or	
  exurbanization	
  as	
  a	
  process	
  (Cadieux	
  and	
  Hurley	
  2009).	
  Exurbia	
  is	
  also	
  associated	
  with	
  rural	
  gentrification,	
  as	
  in	
  Spectorsky's	
  (1955)	
  original	
  characterizations	
  of	
  exurbanites	
  as	
  wealthy	
  urbanites	
  who	
  move	
  to	
  the	
  country	
  but	
  retain	
  their	
  cultural,	
  economic,	
  and	
  political	
  connections	
  to	
  their	
  urban	
  roots.	
  But	
  exactly	
  who	
  is	
  an	
  exurbanite	
  and	
  where	
  exurbia	
  is	
  located	
  remains	
  somewhat	
  unclear.	
  Exurban	
  
	
  	
  
	
   30	
  
settlement	
  is	
  generally	
  placed	
  outside	
  the	
  outer	
  suburban	
  zone	
  and	
  is	
  characterized	
  by	
  low-­‐density	
  settlement,	
  sometimes	
  defined	
  as	
  one	
  household	
  every	
  2	
  to	
  20	
  acres	
  (Theobald	
  2001).	
  This	
  pattern	
  has	
  also	
  sometimes	
  referred	
  to	
  as	
  rural	
  sprawl,	
  in	
  contrast	
  to	
  urban	
  sprawl,	
  because	
  it	
  is	
  characterized	
  by	
  a	
  low	
  density,	
  often	
  in	
  which	
  these	
  residences	
  are	
  intermixed	
  with	
  "rural"	
  land	
  uses	
  such	
  as	
  farming,	
  ranching,	
  and	
  logging	
  (Theobald	
  2003).	
  However	
  the	
  term	
  exurban	
  has	
  been	
  used	
  to	
  describe	
  a	
  wide	
  range	
  of	
  conditions	
  in	
  which	
  people	
  with	
  few	
  economic	
  ties	
  to	
  rural	
  economies	
  settle	
  outside	
  of	
  cities.	
  In	
  some	
  schemas	
  counties	
  are	
  classified	
  as	
  exurban	
  if	
  they	
  are	
  within	
  metropolitan	
  areas	
  but	
  most	
  of	
  their	
  population	
  lives	
  at	
  rural	
  densities	
  (Berube,	
  Katz,	
  and	
  Lang	
  2006).	
  Yet	
  efforts	
  to	
  use	
  particular	
  landscape	
  metrics	
  to	
  define	
  exurbia	
  are	
  only	
  of	
  limited	
  utility	
  since	
  none	
  of	
  these	
  metrics	
  are	
  able	
  to	
  capture	
  the	
  diversity	
  of	
  exurbanization	
  processes.	
  While	
  amenity	
  migrants	
  are	
  often	
  associated	
  with	
  exurbanization,	
  amenity	
  migrants	
  may	
  live	
  in	
  areas	
  officially	
  categorized	
  as	
  urban,	
  rural,	
  or	
  anywhere	
  in-­‐between.5	
  
Methods/Study	
  Area	
  
Research	
  Methodology	
  The	
  data	
  for	
  this	
  article	
  were	
  collected	
  largely	
  from	
  local	
  historical	
  archives	
  and	
  includes	
  primary	
  documents	
  from	
  the	
  period	
  such	
  as	
  local	
  newspapers,	
  promotional	
  materials	
  printed	
  by	
  local	
  business	
  leaders,	
  early	
  Sunset	
  magazines,	
  promotional	
  and	
  cadastral	
  maps,	
  and	
  oral	
  histories.	
  My	
  research	
  into	
  the	
  history	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  was	
  framed	
  within	
  the	
  context	
  of	
  a	
  broader	
  examination	
  of	
  contemporary	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  5.	
  Around	
  Medford,	
  amenity	
  migrants	
  commonly	
  live	
  within	
  the	
  city	
  limits,	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  in	
  small	
  towns,	
  and	
  intermixed	
  into	
  rural	
  areas.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   31	
  
land	
  use	
  management	
  that	
  involved	
  interviews	
  with	
  52	
  key	
  informants,	
  along	
  with	
  review	
  of	
  thousands	
  of	
  pages	
  of	
  planning	
  documents,	
  and	
  observation	
  of	
  more	
  than	
  a	
  dozen	
  public	
  hearings.	
  Interviews	
  with	
  landowners	
  and	
  farmers,	
  in	
  particular,	
  provided	
  insights	
  into	
  the	
  shifting	
  political	
  economies	
  of	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  
Study	
  Area	
  and	
  Contemporary	
  Context	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  southern	
  Oregon	
  (see	
  Figure	
  2),	
  is	
  a	
  predominately	
  mountainous,	
  forested	
  landscape.	
  Agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  is	
  concentrated	
  in	
  several	
  valleys	
  of	
  the	
  tributaries	
  of	
  the	
  Rogue	
  River,	
  the	
  largest	
  of	
  which	
  is	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley.	
  The	
  topography	
  of	
  the	
  county	
  developed	
  as	
  a	
  result	
  of	
  the	
  complex	
  interactions	
  of	
  mountain	
  building	
  and	
  weathering	
  by	
  glaciers	
  and	
  rivers.	
  To	
  the	
  south,	
  lies	
  the	
  Klamath	
  National	
  Forest	
  and	
  Oregon	
  Caves	
  National	
  Monument,	
  to	
  the	
  east	
  the	
  Cascades	
  and	
  Crater	
  Lake	
  National	
  Park,	
  to	
  the	
  west	
  and	
  north	
  the	
  Siskiyou	
  Mountains	
  and	
  the	
  Rogue	
  River	
  Siskiyou	
  National	
  Forest.	
  Land	
  in	
  Jackson	
  county	
  is	
  about	
  80%	
  forested,	
  with	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  itself	
  measuring	
  about	
  10-­‐15	
  miles	
  across	
  east	
  to	
  west	
  and	
  about	
  25	
  miles	
  north	
  to	
  south.	
  When	
  the	
  first	
  Europeans	
  settled	
  in	
  the	
  valley,	
  agriculture	
  and	
  forestry	
  largely	
  served	
  the	
  booming	
  gold	
  mining	
  economy,	
  but	
  over	
  time,	
  these	
  industries	
  replaced	
  mining	
  as	
  the	
  primary	
  economic	
  drivers	
  of	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  
Figure	
  2:	
  Jackson	
  County	
  
	
  	
  
	
   32	
  
Unlike	
  the	
  vast	
  Central	
  Valley	
  of	
  California,	
  or	
  even	
  the	
  smaller	
  Williamette	
  Valley	
  farther	
  north	
  in	
  Oregon,	
  only	
  a	
  small	
  portion	
  of	
  the	
  county	
  consists	
  of	
  rich	
  loam	
  soils.	
  Agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  county	
  is	
  also	
  limited	
  by	
  water	
  availability,	
  microclimate,	
  and	
  soil	
  type.	
  Much	
  of	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  consists	
  of	
  gentle	
  slopes	
  and	
  mixes	
  of	
  heavy	
  clay,	
  beds	
  of	
  rock,	
  and	
  gravel.	
  The	
  complex	
  topography	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  allows	
  unpredictable	
  spring	
  frosts	
  and	
  hail	
  storms	
  to	
  damage	
  crops	
  in	
  one	
  field	
  while	
  those	
  a	
  mile	
  or	
  two	
  down	
  the	
  road	
  remain	
  untouched.	
  The	
  dry	
  Mediterranean	
  climate	
  means	
  that	
  access	
  to	
  irrigation	
  water	
  is	
  a	
  key-­‐limiting	
  factor	
  in	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  agriculture.	
  	
  	
  The	
  vast	
  majority	
  of	
  the	
  population	
  of	
  the	
  county,	
  over	
  200,000,	
  lives	
  within	
  the	
  agriculturally	
  productive	
  valley.	
  The	
  Interstate-­‐5	
  corridor,	
  the	
  primary	
  north-­‐south	
  transportation	
  corridor	
  between	
  Oregon	
  and	
  California,	
  also	
  runs	
  through	
  this	
  valley.	
  Medford,	
  the	
  largest	
  city,	
  serves	
  as	
  the	
  hub	
  of	
  the	
  service	
  economy	
  of	
  a	
  vast	
  rural	
  region	
  stretching	
  over	
  much	
  of	
  Northern	
  California	
  and	
  Southern	
  Oregon,	
  primarily	
  focused	
  around	
  retail	
  and	
  healthcare.	
  Today,	
  these	
  regional	
  services,	
  along	
  with	
  tourism,	
  have	
  largely	
  eclipsed	
  forestry	
  and	
  agriculture	
  as	
  economic	
  forces.	
  A	
  proportionally	
  large	
  percentage	
  of	
  the	
  population	
  consists	
  of	
  retirees,	
  many	
  of	
  whom	
  have	
  moved	
  to	
  the	
  region	
  upon	
  retiring.	
  The	
  Ashland	
  Shakespeare	
  Festival	
  and	
  the	
  Britt	
  Music	
  Festival,	
  along	
  with	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  outdoor	
  recreational	
  activities	
  including	
  hiking,	
  skiing,	
  rafting	
  the	
  Rogue	
  River,	
  and	
  fly	
  fishing,	
  draw	
  tens	
  of	
  thousands	
  of	
  tourists	
  to	
  the	
  region	
  each	
  year.	
  	
  Up	
  until	
  World	
  War	
  II,	
  the	
  population	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  followed	
  a	
  boom-­‐bust	
  pattern	
  with	
  rapid	
  growth	
  in	
  some	
  decades	
  and	
  little	
  to	
  no	
  growth	
  in	
  others	
  
	
  	
  
	
   33	
  
(see	
  figure	
  3).	
  Growth	
  from	
  1900	
  to	
  1940	
  consisted	
  of	
  an	
  even	
  mixture	
  of	
  people	
  in	
  rural	
  areas	
  and	
  town	
  centers.	
  During	
  the	
  war,	
  an	
  army-­‐training	
  base,	
  Camp	
  White,	
  trained	
  more	
  than	
  40,000	
  soldiers	
  at	
  a	
  time.	
  The	
  infrastructure	
  of	
  Camp	
  White	
  supported	
  a	
  post-­‐war	
  boom	
  in	
  the	
  timber	
  industry	
  and	
  rapid	
  population	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  In	
  the	
  post	
  1945-­‐era,	
  urban	
  population	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  began	
  outstripping	
  rural	
  growth.	
  	
  In	
  1973,	
  Oregon	
  passed	
  Senate	
  Bill	
  100,	
  which	
  set	
  up	
  a	
  system	
  of	
  statewide	
  
	
  
Figure	
  3:	
  Population	
  growth	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  U.S.	
  Census	
  	
  	
  regulations	
  designed	
  to	
  limit	
  development	
  on	
  "high	
  value	
  farm	
  and	
  forest	
  land".	
  It	
  took	
  10	
  years,	
  however,	
  for	
  Jackson	
  County	
  to	
  create	
  and	
  put	
  into	
  place	
  a	
  comprehensive	
  plan	
  that	
  met	
  statewide	
  goals	
  and	
  the	
  1970s	
  marked	
  a	
  peak	
  in	
  population	
  growth	
  rate	
  in	
  the	
  valley.	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   34	
  
Since	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  was	
  implemented	
  through	
  a	
  countywide	
  plan	
  in	
  the	
  early	
  1980s,	
  rural	
  population	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  has	
  been	
  limited,	
  while	
  its	
  towns	
  and	
  cities	
  have	
  continued	
  their	
  rapid	
  growth	
  (see	
  figure	
  4).	
  Despite	
  careful	
  planning	
  over	
  the	
  last	
  thirty	
  years,	
  the	
  valley	
  floor	
  today	
  remains	
  a	
  mix	
  of	
  commercial	
  agriculture	
  and	
  large	
  areas	
  of	
  residential	
  development	
  outside	
  of	
  cities	
  at	
  both	
  suburban	
  and	
  exurban	
  densities.6	
  	
  
	
  
Figure	
  4:	
  Jackson	
  County	
  population	
  growth	
  since	
  1900.	
  Note	
  the	
  decline	
  in	
  
rural	
  population	
  after	
  1980	
  when	
  the	
  enforcement	
  of	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  
began	
  due	
  to	
  limits	
  on	
  the	
  creation	
  of	
  new	
  housing	
  in	
  rural	
  areas	
  and	
  
annexation	
  of	
  rural	
  zones	
  near	
  cities	
  into	
  urban	
  growth	
  boundaries.	
  Source:	
  
U.S.	
  Census.	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  6.	
  Suburban	
  densities	
  are	
  commonly	
  single	
  family	
  homes	
  on	
  1/4	
  to	
  1/2	
  acre	
  while	
  exurban	
  settlement	
  is	
  often	
  one	
  home	
  per	
  1	
  acre	
  to	
  20	
  acres.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   35	
  
Case	
  Study	
  
The	
  arrival	
  of	
  the	
  railroad	
  and	
  creation	
  of	
  an	
  orchard	
  industry	
  A	
  boom	
  and	
  bust	
  economy	
  has	
  dominated	
  Jackson	
  County	
  since	
  Europeans	
  first	
  settled	
  it	
  in	
  the	
  1850s.	
  A	
  gold	
  rush	
  began	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  only	
  a	
  few	
  years	
  after	
  gold	
  was	
  discovered	
  in	
  California.	
  What	
  marked	
  these	
  early	
  years	
  was	
  a	
  willingness	
  by	
  settlers	
  to	
  make	
  use	
  of	
  this	
  new	
  territory	
  in	
  whatever	
  ways	
  would	
  net	
  them	
  a	
  hefty	
  income.	
  Many	
  arrived	
  with	
  the	
  intention	
  of	
  making	
  their	
  fortunes	
  mining,	
  but	
  quickly	
  realized	
  that	
  a	
  profit	
  could	
  also	
  be	
  made	
  in	
  supplying	
  goods	
  and	
  services	
  to	
  the	
  growing	
  camps	
  and	
  towns.	
  The	
  first	
  white	
  farmers	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  claimed	
  the	
  valley	
  bottomlands	
  where	
  soils	
  were	
  rich	
  and	
  there	
  was	
  access	
  to	
  stream	
  water.	
  Markets	
  for	
  agricultural	
  products	
  in	
  the	
  isolated	
  valley	
  were	
  limited	
  to	
  supplying	
  fresh	
  fruits	
  and	
  vegetables	
  to	
  nearby	
  mining	
  camps	
  and	
  growing	
  wheat,	
  which	
  could	
  be	
  shipped	
  over	
  long	
  distances.	
  	
  Farming	
  was	
  limited	
  by	
  labor	
  shortages,	
  lack	
  of	
  irrigation,	
  and	
  the	
  isolated	
  location	
  of	
  the	
  valley,	
  far	
  from	
  urban	
  markets.	
  Wheat	
  growing	
  also	
  had	
  the	
  advantage	
  of	
  being	
  relatively	
  mechanized,	
  which	
  allowed	
  farmers	
  to	
  make	
  relatively	
  large	
  land	
  claims.	
  According	
  to	
  the	
  1880	
  census,	
  average	
  farm	
  size	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  was	
  332	
  acres.	
  Thirty	
  years	
  after	
  the	
  first	
  land	
  claims	
  were	
  made	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  the	
  arrival	
  of	
  the	
  railroad	
  in	
  the	
  1880s	
  set	
  in	
  motion	
  a	
  major	
  social	
  and	
  ecological	
  transformation	
  in	
  the	
  county,	
  transforming	
  it	
  from	
  its	
  frontier	
  state.	
  A	
  rail	
  line	
  connecting	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  to	
  Portland	
  	
  facilitated	
  transport	
  of	
  both	
  commodities	
  and	
  migrants	
  into	
  and	
  out	
  of	
  the	
  region.	
  The	
  recent	
  invention	
  of	
  the	
  refrigerated	
  rail	
  
	
  	
  
	
   36	
  
car	
  allowed	
  the	
  transportation	
  of	
  perishable	
  goods	
  to	
  major	
  urban	
  markets	
  across	
  the	
  country,	
  opening	
  the	
  region	
  to	
  new	
  forms	
  of	
  investment	
  and	
  settlement.	
  	
  	
   The	
  1890s,	
  and	
  the	
  newly	
  completed	
  Siskiyou	
  rail	
  line	
  connecting	
  Jackson	
  County	
  to	
  Sacramento	
  opened	
  the	
  valley	
  to	
  the	
  Transcontinental	
  Rail	
  Line	
  and	
  markets	
  in	
  the	
  eastern	
  U.S.	
  Farmers	
  discovered	
  that	
  tree	
  fruit	
  could	
  be	
  profitably	
  grown	
  and	
  shipped	
  to	
  cities	
  in	
  the	
  east,	
  and	
  the	
  arrival	
  of	
  thousands	
  of	
  rail	
  passengers,	
  many	
  of	
  whom	
  eventually	
  became	
  new	
  residents.	
  The	
  first	
  small	
  shipments	
  of	
  apples	
  and	
  pears	
  left	
  the	
  region	
  for	
  California	
  in	
  early	
  1888,	
  just	
  a	
  few	
  weeks	
  after	
  the	
  line	
  between	
  Oregon	
  and	
  California	
  was	
  complete.7	
  The	
  success	
  of	
  the	
  first	
  fruit	
  shipments	
  along	
  with	
  a	
  widespread	
  depression	
  in	
  global	
  wheat	
  prices	
  led	
  to	
  rapid	
  growth	
  in	
  orchards	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  Growth	
  in	
  the	
  fruit	
  industry	
  prompted	
  massive	
  land	
  speculation	
  in	
  the	
  first	
  decades	
  of	
  the	
  20th	
  century	
  and	
  the	
  rapid	
  parcelization	
  of	
  agricultural	
  lands	
  in	
  the	
  valley.	
  By	
  1940,	
  average	
  farm	
  size	
  was	
  112	
  acres,	
  somewhat	
  smaller	
  than	
  the	
  most	
  recent	
  averages	
  according	
  to	
  the	
  2007	
  Agriculture	
  Census.	
  This	
  transformation	
  of	
  the	
  landscape	
  and	
  the	
  regional	
  economy	
  could	
  not	
  have	
  taken	
  place	
  without	
  a	
  massive	
  influx	
  of	
  outside	
  capital	
  and	
  migrants	
  into	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  
Capital	
  and	
  Labor	
  for	
  Fruit	
  In	
  contrast	
  to	
  wheat	
  farming,	
  the	
  growing	
  of	
  tree	
  fruits	
  is	
  capital	
  and	
  labor	
  intensive.	
  	
  Orchard	
  trees	
  take	
  8-­‐10	
  years	
  to	
  come	
  into	
  full	
  harvest	
  and	
  cannot	
  be	
  grown	
  from	
  seed.	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  grow	
  well,	
  fruiting	
  tops	
  must	
  be	
  grafted	
  onto	
  vigorous	
  rootstocks.	
  Then	
  the	
  trees	
  must	
  be	
  nurtured	
  and	
  pruned	
  during	
  the	
  intervening	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  7.	
  Oregon	
  Sentinel	
  Jan	
  5	
  1888:	
  pg	
  1.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   37	
  
years.	
  For	
  these	
  fruits	
  to	
  be	
  marketed	
  in	
  major	
  urban	
  centers	
  thousands	
  of	
  miles	
  away,	
  the	
  delicate	
  fruit	
  must	
  be	
  carefully	
  packaged	
  and	
  shipped.	
  Fruit	
  growing	
  favored	
  those	
  who	
  had	
  sufficient	
  capital	
  to	
  pay	
  not	
  only	
  for	
  land,	
  but	
  also	
  for	
  seedling	
  trees,	
  irrigation	
  equipment,	
  and	
  a	
  packinghouse.	
  Fruit	
  farmers	
  also	
  had	
  to	
  have	
  some	
  other	
  source	
  of	
  income	
  that	
  would	
  support	
  them	
  during	
  the	
  decade	
  that	
  they	
  were	
  waiting	
  for	
  their	
  trees	
  to	
  produce.	
  Fruit	
  farming	
  also	
  required	
  much	
  larger	
  numbers	
  of	
  labor	
  hours	
  per	
  acre	
  than	
  wheat	
  production.	
  Because	
  the	
  need	
  for	
  labor	
  in	
  farming	
  is	
  highly	
  seasonal,	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  be	
  successful	
  a	
  farmer	
  needed	
  labor	
  to	
  be	
  available	
  at	
  the	
  right	
  times.	
  As	
  the	
  fruit	
  industry	
  grew,	
  so	
  too	
  did	
  its	
  need	
  for	
  labor,	
  leading	
  to	
  an	
  urgent	
  need	
  to	
  attract	
  additional	
  workers	
  to	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  	
  The	
  early	
  decades	
  of	
  the	
  20th	
  century	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  are	
  described	
  by	
  local	
  historians	
  as	
  the	
  "Orchard	
  Boom."	
  The	
  period	
  was	
  characterized	
  by	
  rapid	
  growth	
  in	
  both	
  population	
  and	
  in	
  the	
  fruit	
  industry.	
  Cheap	
  land	
  and	
  the	
  prospect	
  of	
  a	
  stable,	
  long-­‐term	
  investment	
  drew	
  many	
  easterners	
  to	
  invest	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley.	
  	
  The	
  demographic	
  characteristics	
  of	
  these	
  easterners	
  were	
  in	
  many	
  ways	
  similar	
  to	
  those	
  of	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migrants	
  today.	
  In	
  some	
  cases	
  growers	
  were	
  wealthy	
  investors	
  from	
  Portland,	
  San	
  Francisco,	
  Seattle,	
  or	
  Chicago,	
  looking	
  for	
  a	
  summer	
  home	
  where	
  they	
  could	
  also	
  play	
  at	
  being	
  a	
  gentlemen	
  farmer.	
  Other	
  new	
  arrivals	
  included	
  older	
  professionals	
  looking	
  for	
  a	
  rural	
  lifestyle	
  and	
  young	
  college	
  graduates	
  supported	
  by	
  income	
  from	
  family	
  members	
  in	
  urban	
  centers	
  in	
  the	
  east.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   38	
  
Early	
  20th	
  Century	
  Real	
  Estate	
  Speculation	
  and	
  Tourism	
  As	
  noted,	
  the	
  arrival	
  of	
  the	
  railroad	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  created	
  a	
  market	
  for	
  fruit	
  from	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  but	
  it	
  also	
  greatly	
  increased	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  visitors	
  to	
  the	
  area,	
  opened	
  up	
  the	
  region	
  to	
  its	
  first	
  wave	
  of	
  tourism,	
  and	
  encouraged	
  population	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  The	
  Southern	
  Pacific	
  railroad	
  conducted	
  widespread	
  promotion	
  of	
  rail	
  vacations	
  and	
  settlement	
  in	
  the	
  West	
  during	
  this	
  period.	
  	
  Thousands	
  of	
  people	
  passed	
  through	
  the	
  region	
  by	
  train	
  every	
  year	
  while	
  traveling	
  between	
  Portland	
  and	
  Sacramento.	
  Many	
  local	
  leaders	
  and	
  businessmen	
  were	
  eager	
  to	
  promote	
  the	
  region	
  for	
  tourism.8	
  The	
  establishment	
  of	
  Crater	
  Lake	
  National	
  Park	
  in	
  1902	
  first	
  put	
  the	
  region	
  on	
  the	
  tourist	
  map.	
  During	
  the	
  earliest	
  years	
  of	
  the	
  park,	
  the	
  road	
  up	
  to	
  the	
  lake	
  was	
  slow	
  and	
  rough,	
  limiting	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  visitors.9	
  The	
  trip	
  from	
  Medford	
  was	
  83	
  miles	
  and	
  took	
  about	
  10	
  hours	
  by	
  car10	
  in	
  1910.	
  In	
  1912,	
  the	
  Park	
  Service	
  estimated	
  5770	
  tourists	
  visited	
  the	
  park11.	
  But	
  over	
  the	
  decade,	
  as	
  travel	
  and	
  facilities	
  improved,	
  visitation	
  rose	
  to	
  more	
  than	
  16,000	
  by	
  1919.12	
  	
  Picturesque	
  evergreen	
  forests	
  and	
  mountain	
  streams	
  also	
  surrounded	
  the	
  valley,	
  perfect	
  for	
  hunting	
  and	
  trout	
  fishing.	
  Klamath	
  National	
  Forest	
  to	
  the	
  south,	
  the	
  Rogue-­‐Siskiyou	
  National	
  Forest	
  to	
  the	
  West,	
  and	
  Umpqua	
  National	
  Forest	
  to	
  the	
  North	
  were	
  all	
  established	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  8.	
  Medford	
  Tribune,	
  Aug.	
  6,	
  1911:	
  pg	
  1.	
  	
  9.	
  	
  Arant	
  estimated	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  visitors	
  to	
  Crater	
  Lake	
  in	
  1905	
  was	
  between	
  1200-­‐1400.	
  	
  10.	
  Medford	
  Tribune,	
  Aug.	
  6,	
  1911:	
  pg	
  1.	
  	
  11.	
  Special	
  Population	
  Report;	
  Crater	
  National	
  Forest	
  Special	
  Population	
  Report	
  1913;	
  Rogue	
  River	
  National	
  Forest	
  Historical	
  Records	
  Collection	
  :	
  A-­‐6	
  	
  12.	
  Visitation	
  and	
  Concessions	
  in	
  Crater	
  Lake	
  NP:	
  1916-­‐present.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   39	
  
between	
  1907	
  and	
  1908.	
  Early	
  magazine	
  and	
  newspaper	
  articles	
  frequently	
  featured	
  locals	
  and	
  visitors	
  enjoying	
  the	
  fresh	
  air,	
  hiking,	
  skiing,	
  hunting,	
  and	
  fishing	
  (See	
  figure	
  5).	
  	
  	
  	
  Many	
  boosters	
  also	
  had	
  their	
  eyes	
  on	
  promoting	
  the	
  health	
  giving	
  properties	
  of	
  the	
  region's	
  many	
  mineral	
  springs.	
  Ashland,	
  at	
  the	
  southern	
  end	
  of	
  the	
  valley,	
  promoted	
  a	
  European	
  style	
  health	
  spa	
  based	
  around	
  the	
  health-­‐giving	
  properties	
  of	
  the	
  sulfurous	
  waters	
  of	
  Lilitha	
  Springs.13	
  	
  In	
  1903	
  a	
  promotional	
  piece	
  in	
  a	
  Portland	
  paper	
  reported	
  that	
  Ashland	
  already	
  hosted	
  an	
  extra	
  1000	
  visitors	
  over	
  the	
  summer	
  looking	
  to	
  take	
  the	
  waters,14	
  a	
  significant	
  number	
  for	
  a	
  town	
  whose	
  population	
  was	
  only	
  2,634	
  in	
  1900.	
  The	
  city	
  government	
  passed	
  a	
  bond	
  for	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  the	
  springs	
  into	
  a	
  full	
  resort.	
  Although	
  the	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  13.	
  "Building	
  a	
  City	
  on	
  Health."	
  Holt,	
  Emerson.	
  February	
  1915.	
  Sunset	
  Magazine,	
  Vol.	
  34:2,	
  pp.	
  356,	
  358.	
  	
  14.	
  The	
  Morning	
  Oregonian,	
  April	
  4,	
  2003.	
  
Figure	
  5:	
  A	
  1909	
  promotional	
  brochure	
  
including	
  prominent	
  advertising	
  of	
  the	
  many	
  
opportunities	
  for	
  recreation	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  
Valley.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   40	
  
plan	
  was	
  never	
  realized	
  because	
  of	
  political	
  wrangling	
  and	
  mismanagement,	
  the	
  city	
  did	
  build	
  a	
  large	
  park	
  around	
  the	
  springs	
  and	
  began	
  hosting	
  summer	
  theatre	
  productions.15	
  	
  It	
  wasn't	
  until	
  the	
  1960s	
  that	
  the	
  early	
  city	
  leaders'	
  vision	
  of	
  a	
  tourism-­‐based	
  economy	
  began	
  to	
  reach	
  fruition.	
  However	
  the	
  process	
  was	
  one	
  of	
  slow	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  tourist	
  sector	
  over	
  many	
  years	
  rather	
  than	
  a	
  sudden	
  transformation	
  to	
  a	
  tourist	
  centered	
  economy	
  in	
  the	
  post	
  WWII	
  era.	
  	
  While	
  revenue	
  from	
  tourism	
  was	
  certainly	
  a	
  small	
  portion	
  of	
  the	
  overall	
  economy,	
  visitors	
  and	
  promotional	
  materials	
  had	
  a	
  large	
  impact	
  on	
  the	
  growing	
  farm	
  sector.	
  Many	
  who	
  happened	
  to	
  stop	
  in	
  Medford	
  on	
  their	
  train	
  trip,	
  later	
  decided	
  to	
  buy	
  land	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  Others	
  were	
  directly	
  attracted	
  by	
  reports	
  of	
  opportunities	
  for	
  profitable	
  farming	
  and	
  a	
  pastoral	
  lifestyle	
  in	
  national	
  newspapers	
  and	
  Sunset	
  magazine.	
  New	
  arrivals	
  included	
  settlers	
  with	
  horticultural	
  experience	
  and	
  expertise,	
  while	
  many	
  others	
  were	
  urban	
  businessmen,	
  professionals,	
  and	
  recent	
  college	
  graduates	
  with	
  no	
  agricultural	
  background.	
  
Selling	
  the	
  Dream	
  of	
  the	
  Gentleman	
  Farmer	
  Promotional	
  materials	
  and	
  activities	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  weren't	
  limited	
  to	
  promoting	
  tourism	
  and	
  recreation;	
  such	
  amenities	
  where	
  just	
  a	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  gentile	
  rural	
  lifestyle	
  offered	
  to	
  potential	
  settlers	
  by	
  boosters	
  and	
  developers.	
  The	
  Medford	
  Commercial	
  Club,	
  a	
  local	
  booster	
  organization,	
  built	
  an	
  exhibition	
  at	
  the	
  Medford	
  rail	
  station	
  showing	
  the	
  bounty	
  of	
  the	
  valley,	
  both	
  promoting	
  fruit	
  from	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  15.	
  The	
  summer	
  Chautauqua	
  productions	
  eventually	
  led	
  to	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  the	
  now	
  famous	
  Oregon	
  Shakespeare	
  Festival,	
  that	
  runs	
  practically	
  year	
  round	
  in	
  Ashland	
  and	
  attracts	
  approximately	
  almost	
  90,000	
  visitors	
  a	
  year	
  (Oregon	
  Shakespeare	
  Festival,	
  State	
  and	
  Local	
  Economic	
  Impact	
  –	
  2012).	
  
	
  	
  
	
   41	
  
to	
  tourists	
  and	
  promoting	
  the	
  region	
  as	
  a	
  pastoral	
  paradise	
  for	
  homebuyers	
  (see	
  figure	
  6).	
  Sunset	
  magazine,	
  owned	
  by	
  Southern	
  Pacific,	
  also	
  promoted	
  the	
  valley	
  through	
  multipage	
  inserts.	
  In	
  these	
  publications,	
  the	
  beauty	
  of	
  the	
  valley,	
  its	
  pleasant	
  climate,	
  and	
  many	
  natural	
  and	
  cultural	
  amenities	
  prominently	
  featured	
  along	
  with	
  the	
  supposed	
  ease	
  of	
  successful	
  fruit	
  growing.	
  The	
  promotion	
  of	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  produced	
  a	
  population	
  boom	
  as	
  urban	
  migrants	
  flocked	
  to	
  the	
  area.	
  	
  During	
  the	
  first	
  decade	
  of	
  the	
  20th	
  century	
  the	
  population	
  of	
  Medford	
  grew	
  from	
  1,791	
  to	
  8,840	
  (U.S.	
  Census).	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   By	
  1893,	
  real	
  estate	
  speculation	
  and	
  the	
  subdivision	
  of	
  large	
  farms	
  had	
  begun	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley.	
  	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  first	
  recorded	
  examples	
  of	
  a	
  farm	
  subdivided	
  into	
  small	
  parcels,	
  the	
  214	
  acre	
  Nickell	
  farm,	
  was	
  subdivided	
  into	
  one-­‐acre	
  tracts	
  with	
  30	
  acres	
  set	
  aside	
  for	
  streets.	
  	
  These	
  were	
  sold	
  to	
  railroad	
  employees	
  and	
  tourists	
  enchanted	
  by	
  their	
  travels	
  through	
  the	
  valley.	
  	
  Such	
  parcels	
  were	
  promoted	
  to	
  potential	
  buyers	
  both	
  as	
  homes	
  and	
  as	
  potential	
  sources	
  of	
  income	
  and	
  secure	
  investments.	
  	
  	
  
Figure	
  6:	
  A	
  promotional	
  brochure	
  
showing	
  the	
  many	
  excellent	
  orchard	
  
homes	
  in	
  the	
  valley.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   42	
  
Land	
  planted	
  in	
  bearing	
  orchards	
  fetched	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  highest	
  prices	
  in	
  all	
  of	
  Oregon	
  at	
  the	
  height	
  of	
  the	
  boom.	
  	
  In	
  1909,	
  mature	
  orchards	
  were	
  selling	
  for	
  $2,300	
  an	
  acre,	
  while	
  unplanted	
  land	
  sold	
  for	
  $150-­‐250	
  an	
  acre	
  (Cordy	
  1977).	
  The	
  high	
  prices	
  being	
  obtained	
  in	
  eastern	
  markets	
  for	
  fruit	
  from	
  the	
  region16	
  fueled	
  a	
  speculative	
  bubble	
  for	
  land	
  planted	
  in	
  orchards,	
  but	
  the	
  high	
  prices	
  obtained	
  for	
  orchard	
  lands	
  also	
  reflected	
  both	
  the	
  capital	
  investment	
  required	
  to	
  bring	
  the	
  land	
  to	
  bearing	
  and	
  their	
  potential	
  for	
  future	
  earnings.	
  	
  Orchard	
  development	
  required	
  not	
  only	
  an	
  investment	
  in	
  planting,	
  but	
  also	
  labor	
  to	
  nurture	
  trees	
  to	
  a	
  bearing	
  age.	
  Once	
  an	
  orchard	
  had	
  been	
  grown	
  to	
  maturity	
  it	
  could	
  be	
  expected	
  to	
  bear	
  fruit	
  for	
  forty	
  or	
  more	
  years.	
  	
  As	
  the	
  boom	
  continued,	
  real	
  estate	
  speculation	
  and	
  subdivision	
  became	
  a	
  much	
  simpler	
  way	
  to	
  make	
  money	
  than	
  waiting	
  for	
  a	
  fruit	
  harvest.	
  This	
  real	
  estate	
  boom	
  relied	
  on	
  the	
  idea	
  that	
  a	
  family	
  could	
  make	
  a	
  good	
  living	
  off	
  of	
  a	
  small	
  acreage	
  of	
  fruit	
  trees	
  and	
  this	
  vision	
  of	
  the	
  small	
  independent	
  grower	
  was	
  widely	
  promoted	
  by	
  real	
  estate	
  developers.	
  Once	
  lands	
  suitable	
  for	
  orchards	
  became	
  scarce,	
  speculators	
  had	
  no	
  compunctions	
  about	
  buying	
  up	
  rocky	
  lands	
  with	
  lean	
  soils	
  in	
  the	
  northeast	
  corner	
  of	
  the	
  valley	
  to	
  sell	
  as	
  orchard	
  homes	
  though	
  they	
  were	
  clearly	
  not	
  suitable	
  and	
  impossible	
  to	
  irrigate.	
  In	
  some	
  places	
  real	
  estate	
  companies	
  used	
  dynamite	
  to	
  create	
  holes	
  large	
  enough	
  to	
  plant	
  trees	
  in	
  the	
  cement-­‐like	
  soil.	
  	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  most	
  well	
  known	
  developers	
  was	
  John	
  Westerlund,	
  a	
  Chicago	
  real	
  estate	
  dealer,	
  who	
  founded	
  in	
  1903	
  the	
  Western	
  Oregon	
  Orchard	
  Company	
  and	
  began	
  speculation	
  on	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  orchard	
  lands.	
  	
  While	
  the	
  company	
  name	
  implied	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  16.	
  The	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  newspaper,	
  The	
  Mail	
  Tribune,	
  reported	
  in	
  1907	
  that	
  pears	
  were	
  "smashing	
  all	
  records,"	
  and	
  on	
  October	
  12,	
  1907	
  reported	
  that	
  a	
  box	
  of	
  pears	
  was	
  selling	
  for	
  $8.40.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   43	
  
a	
  connection	
  to	
  orchards,	
  Westerlund	
  was	
  selling	
  the	
  idea	
  of	
  the	
  independent	
  gentleman	
  farmer.	
  	
  Newspapers	
  from	
  the	
  period	
  were	
  filled	
  with	
  advertising	
  from	
  companies	
  such	
  as	
  Westerlund's	
  offering	
  small	
  orchard	
  parcels	
  for	
  sale,	
  often	
  sight	
  unseen.	
  In	
  some	
  cases	
  buyers	
  were	
  encouraged	
  to	
  send	
  money	
  to	
  the	
  company	
  and	
  in	
  exchange	
  their	
  orchard	
  would	
  be	
  cared	
  for	
  until	
  it	
  matured17	
  at	
  which	
  point	
  the	
  buyer	
  could	
  presumably	
  move	
  out	
  to	
  Oregon,	
  build	
  their	
  house	
  on	
  the	
  land,	
  and	
  live	
  comfortably	
  off	
  the	
  income	
  the	
  orchard	
  provided.	
  In	
  some	
  cases,	
  it	
  wasn't	
  until	
  the	
  buyers	
  started	
  showing	
  up	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  that	
  it	
  became	
  clear	
  that	
  large	
  portions	
  of	
  such	
  orchard	
  subdivisions	
  had	
  not	
  been	
  planted	
  and	
  were	
  unsuitable	
  for	
  fruit	
  production.	
  	
  
Gentlemen	
  Farmers	
  Small	
  and	
  Large	
  In	
  almost	
  every	
  section	
  of	
  the	
  country	
  where	
  the	
  fruit	
  industry	
  has	
  become	
  of	
  commercial	
  importance,	
  there	
  have	
  been	
  at	
  the	
  outset,	
  a	
  handful	
  of	
  men	
  engaged	
  as	
  a	
  means	
  of	
  gaining	
  a	
  livelihood.	
  The	
  quality	
  of	
  their	
  product	
  has	
  served	
  as	
  an	
  indication	
  of	
  the	
  adaptability	
  of	
  such	
  regions	
  for	
  more	
  extensive	
  enterprise	
  in	
  that	
  line.	
  In	
  all	
  these	
  places,	
  the	
  great	
  majority	
  of	
  the	
  farmers	
  have	
  been	
  engaged	
  on	
  other	
  lines	
  of	
  production,	
  with	
  more	
  or	
  less	
  of	
  an	
  orchard	
  as	
  a	
  side	
  issue.	
  -­‐	
  Editorial	
  urging	
  fruit	
  growers	
  to	
  organize	
  a	
  growers	
  
association	
  and	
  cooperate	
  in	
  producing	
  the	
  best	
  fruit.	
  Coos	
  Bay	
  Times	
  August	
  6,	
  
1910:	
  pg	
  3.	
  	
  In	
  1893	
  Frederick	
  Jackson	
  Turner	
  gave	
  his	
  famous	
  speech	
  on	
  the	
  closing	
  of	
  the	
  American	
  frontier.	
  In	
  some	
  ways,	
  that	
  speech	
  marked	
  the	
  line	
  between	
  living	
  in	
  the	
  "Old	
  West"	
  and	
  romanticizing	
  it	
  (Limerick	
  1995).	
  By	
  1910,	
  when	
  the	
  boom	
  in	
  orchard	
  subdivision	
  was	
  reaching	
  its	
  height,	
  an	
  increasingly	
  urbanized	
  America	
  was	
  already	
  full	
  of	
  nostalgia	
  for	
  farm	
  living.	
  The	
  orchard	
  boom	
  attracted	
  many	
  of	
  both	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  17.	
  Medford	
  Mail	
  Tribune,	
  March	
  6,	
  1910:	
  pg	
  12.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   44	
  
wealth	
  and	
  modest	
  means	
  with	
  little	
  to	
  no	
  experience	
  with	
  agriculture,	
  but	
  full	
  of	
  the	
  dream	
  of	
  the	
  gentleman	
  farmer.	
  	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  most	
  prominent	
  and	
  influential	
  new	
  arrivals	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  was	
  the	
  Palmer	
  family,	
  the	
  millionaire	
  owners	
  of	
  the	
  famed	
  Palmer	
  House	
  hotel	
  in	
  Chicago.18	
  Mrs.	
  Palmer	
  and	
  her	
  sons	
  promoted	
  the	
  area	
  to	
  other	
  wealthy	
  Chicagoans,	
  and	
  in	
  1911	
  the	
  Chicago	
  Record	
  Herald	
  reported	
  on	
  a	
  "millionaire	
  colony"	
  in	
  Medford.	
  Other	
  millionaire	
  investors	
  came	
  from	
  Seattle.	
  	
  Reginald	
  Parsons,	
  prominent	
  financier	
  and	
  philanthropist,	
  bought	
  the	
  HillCrest	
  Orchard	
  in	
  1908	
  as	
  a	
  summer	
  home	
  and	
  investment	
  after	
  hearing	
  about	
  the	
  profitability	
  of	
  fruit	
  growing	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  from	
  business	
  associates	
  in	
  Seattle.	
  Wealthy	
  eastern	
  families	
  also	
  sent	
  idle	
  young	
  men	
  to	
  the	
  valley	
  to	
  make	
  their	
  fortunes	
  as	
  horticulturalists.	
  	
  Some	
  of	
  these	
  "remittance	
  men"	
  were	
  Ivy	
  League	
  graduates	
  who	
  received	
  monthly	
  income	
  from	
  their	
  wealthy	
  families	
  on	
  the	
  East	
  Coast.19	
  	
  
Fruit	
  Growing	
  and	
  Parcelization	
  The	
  census	
  of	
  1920	
  ought	
  to	
  show	
  a	
  population	
  of	
  150,000	
  for	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  Its	
  area	
  and	
  resources	
  will	
  amply	
  support	
  many	
  times	
  this	
  number	
  of	
  people.	
  The	
  entire	
  Rogue	
  River	
  valley	
  should	
  be	
  an	
  immense,	
  continuous	
  orchard,	
  with	
  a	
  family	
  upon	
  every	
  ten	
  acres.	
  Thousands	
  of	
  men	
  should	
  be	
  employed	
  manufacturing	
  lumber,	
  quarrying	
  granite	
  and	
  marble,	
  manufacturing	
  lime	
  and	
  cement,	
  and	
  thousands	
  more	
  in	
  mining.	
  -­‐	
  Editorial	
  
article	
  advocating	
  for	
  growth,	
  Medford	
  mail	
  Tribune,	
  December	
  7,	
  1910:	
  pg	
  4.	
  	
  The	
  full	
  impact	
  of	
  subdivision	
  on	
  this	
  region	
  in	
  this	
  early	
  period	
  is	
  difficult	
  to	
  estimate.	
  However,	
  some	
  sense	
  of	
  its	
  impact	
  can	
  be	
  made	
  by	
  examining	
  the	
  agricultural	
  census.	
  According	
  to	
  the	
  U.S.	
  Census	
  between	
  1880	
  and	
  1930,	
  the	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  18.	
  Medford	
  Tribune	
  January	
  1,	
  1913:	
  pg	
  3.	
  	
  19.	
  Medford	
  Mail	
  Tribune	
  September	
  13,	
  1910:	
  pg	
  8.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   45	
  
population	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  grew	
  from	
  8,154	
  to	
  32,918.	
  During	
  this	
  period,	
  there	
  was	
  massive	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  small	
  and	
  medium	
  sized	
  farms	
  in	
  the	
  region,	
  with	
  the	
  most	
  rapid	
  growth	
  happening	
  in	
  farms	
  under	
  50	
  acres	
  in	
  size.	
  In	
  1880,	
  there	
  were	
  30	
  farms	
  of	
  less	
  than	
  50	
  acres.	
  By	
  1930,	
  there	
  were	
  1066	
  farms	
  of	
  less	
  than	
  50	
  acres,	
  including	
  618	
  farms	
  under	
  20	
  acres	
  (see	
  figure	
  7).	
  Obviously,	
  farm	
  size	
  is	
  not	
  a	
  direct	
  indication	
  of	
  individual	
  landowner's	
  orientation	
  towards	
  land	
  management,	
  but	
  the	
  growth	
  in	
  small	
  and	
  very	
  small	
  farms	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  is	
  significant	
  for	
  two	
  reasons.	
  First,	
  industry	
  experts	
  estimated	
  that	
  even	
  during	
  that	
  early	
  period,	
  a	
  farmer	
  would	
  have	
  needed	
  at	
  least	
  40	
  acres	
  to	
  earn	
  enough	
  to	
  support	
  one	
  household,20	
  so	
  regardless	
  of	
  intention,	
  it	
  is	
  likely	
  that	
  most	
  of	
  these	
  small	
  farms	
  relied	
  on	
  additional	
  sources	
  of	
  income	
  to	
  supplement	
  farm	
  earnings.	
  Second,	
  parcelization	
  and	
  the	
  mixing	
  of	
  farming	
  and	
  "hobby	
  farm"	
  populations	
  are	
  major	
  concerns	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  exurban	
  development	
  today	
  and	
  both	
  were	
  clearly	
  present	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  by	
  1930.	
  Recall	
  that	
  a	
  parcel	
  size	
  between	
  1	
  and	
  20	
  acres	
  per	
  residence	
  is	
  one	
  common	
  measurement	
  of	
  an	
  exurban	
  settlement	
  pattern	
  (Theobald	
  2003).	
  
Benefits	
  of	
  "Hobby	
  Farmers"	
  for	
  the	
  Industry	
  	
  The	
  arrival	
  of	
  these	
  aspiring	
  farmers	
  had	
  several	
  positive	
  impacts	
  for	
  the	
  fruit	
  growing	
  industry.	
  	
  First,	
  they	
  provided	
  an	
  influx	
  of	
  capital	
  investment	
  that	
  poured	
  into	
  planting	
  and	
  nurturing	
  orchards	
  to	
  maturity.	
  Most	
  growers,	
  both	
  wealthy	
  and	
  those	
  of	
  modest	
  means,	
  over	
  time	
  discovered	
  that	
  making	
  a	
  profit	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  20.	
  While	
  farm	
  size	
  is	
  often	
  used	
  to	
  estimate	
  income	
  and	
  indicate	
  farm	
  type,	
  earnings	
  per	
  acre	
  vary	
  widely	
  depending	
  on	
  the	
  crop	
  grown.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   46	
  
growing	
  fruit	
  was	
  more	
  complicated	
  than	
  the	
  boosters	
  and	
  promotional	
  materials	
  made	
  it	
  out	
  to	
  be.	
  Successful	
  growers	
  needed	
  horticultural	
  skills,	
  knowledge	
  of	
  marketing,	
  business	
  savvy,	
  and	
  enough	
  capital	
  or	
  outside	
  income	
  to	
  get	
  them	
  through	
  years	
  when	
  drought	
  or	
  late	
  frosts	
  ruined	
  crops.	
  While	
  the	
  most	
  well	
  managed	
  orchards	
  on	
  the	
  best	
  land	
  could	
  make	
  a	
  significant	
  profit,	
  particularly	
  in	
  good	
  years,	
  many	
  orchardists	
  struggled.	
  The	
  bankruptcy	
  of	
  less	
  savvy	
  growers	
  provided	
  opportunities	
  for	
  successful	
  growers	
  to	
  buy	
  land	
  with	
  mature	
  trees	
  from	
  the	
  bank	
  or	
  creditors	
  for	
  much	
  less	
  than	
  it	
  would	
  have	
  cost	
  to	
  develop	
  a	
  new	
  parcel21.	
  	
  	
  
	
  
Figure	
  7:	
  Jackson	
  County	
  farm	
  sizes	
  over	
  time.	
  	
   Second,	
  the	
  many	
  small	
  growers	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  also	
  provided	
  a	
  ready	
  source	
  of	
  labor	
  to	
  large	
  orchards	
  for	
  harvest	
  and	
  processing.	
  Some	
  estimated	
  that	
  a	
  grower	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  21.	
  The	
  Democratic	
  Times	
  of	
  Jacksonville,	
  July	
  14,	
  1898,	
  pg	
  4	
  reported	
  one	
  of	
  these	
  sheriff	
  sales,	
  in	
  which	
  the	
  214	
  acres	
  of	
  orchard	
  land	
  belonging	
  to	
  the	
  Orchard	
  Home	
  Association	
  was	
  sold	
  to	
  the	
  Portland	
  Trust	
  Co.	
  for	
  $5500.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   47	
  
would	
  have	
  needed	
  an	
  orchard	
  of	
  at	
  least	
  forty	
  acres	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  make	
  a	
  living	
  solely	
  as	
  a	
  farmer.22	
  Since	
  a	
  large	
  number	
  had	
  parcels	
  less	
  than	
  that,	
  they	
  and	
  their	
  families	
  instead	
  patched	
  together	
  a	
  living	
  from	
  a	
  mix	
  of	
  industries,	
  providing	
  labor	
  on	
  large	
  farms,	
  in	
  fruit-­‐packinghouses,	
  in	
  mining,	
  and	
  in	
  lumber.	
  Women	
  in	
  particular	
  were	
  thought	
  to	
  make	
  the	
  best	
  packers,	
  while	
  young	
  people	
  were	
  commonly	
  enlisted	
  to	
  help	
  with	
  the	
  harvest,	
  often	
  involving	
  the	
  entire	
  family	
  in	
  the	
  fruit	
  growing	
  industry.	
  	
  	
  Finally,	
  while	
  small	
  growers	
  provided	
  labor	
  for	
  the	
  industry,	
  wealthy	
  large	
  growers	
  with	
  summer	
  homes	
  on	
  their	
  orchards	
  provided	
  the	
  capital	
  for	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  the	
  infrastructure	
  needed	
  by	
  the	
  growing	
  industry.	
  These	
  industrialists	
  had	
  the	
  capital	
  to	
  expend	
  on	
  packinghouses,	
  and	
  rail	
  cars.	
  Their	
  most	
  important	
  contribution,	
  however,	
  was	
  investment	
  in	
  the	
  building	
  of	
  the	
  many	
  irrigation	
  canals	
  that	
  eventually	
  covered	
  the	
  valley.	
  Irrigation	
  proved	
  key	
  to	
  the	
  continued	
  success	
  of	
  fruit	
  growing	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  Because	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  only	
  received	
  on	
  average	
  20	
  inches	
  of	
  rain	
  per	
  year,	
  irrigation	
  in	
  drought	
  years	
  was	
  essential.23	
  Large	
  investments	
  were	
  required	
  to	
  build	
  these	
  canals,	
  which	
  then	
  returned	
  profits	
  through	
  subdivision	
  of	
  newly	
  irrigated	
  lands	
  and	
  the	
  selling	
  of	
  water	
  and	
  land	
  to	
  growers24.	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  22.	
  Culbertson,	
  Paul.	
  Oral	
  History	
  Interview.	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  Historical	
  Society,	
  Feb.	
  24,	
  1981.	
  	
  23.	
  Medford	
  Tribune	
  March	
  12,	
  1913:	
  pg	
  4.	
  	
  24.	
  The	
  first	
  irrigation	
  project	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  the	
  Fish	
  Lake	
  Water	
  Company,	
  was	
  privately	
  financed.	
  In	
  1910	
  Pat	
  Welch,	
  a	
  wealthy	
  contractor	
  from	
  Spokane	
  Washington,	
  bought	
  the	
  company	
  and	
  began	
  promoting	
  and	
  selling	
  irrigated	
  small	
  parcels	
  to	
  aspiring	
  fruit	
  growers.	
  –	
  Medford	
  Mail	
  Tribune,	
  January	
  2,	
  1910.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   48	
  
Discussion	
  
Remittance	
  Men,	
  Hobby	
  Farmers,	
  and	
  Other	
  Urban	
  Outsiders	
  The	
  district	
  will	
  not	
  be	
  the	
  home	
  of	
  the	
  workman	
  who	
  spends	
  his	
  days	
  in	
  smoke-­‐begrimed	
  and	
  dirty	
  factory	
  buildings,	
  living	
  in	
  unhealthy	
  tenements	
  with	
  hundreds	
  of	
  his	
  fellows,	
  and	
  barely	
  earning	
  just	
  enough	
  to	
  live,	
  but	
  the	
  home	
  of	
  prosperous	
  and	
  happy	
  men	
  and	
  women,	
  who	
  work	
  in	
  the	
  sunshine,	
  live	
  in	
  modern	
  bungalows,	
  making	
  their	
  living	
  from	
  the	
  orchards	
  which	
  they	
  own.	
  -­‐Rogue	
  River	
  Valley	
  Canal	
  Co.	
  Advertisement,	
  Medford	
  Tribune	
  January	
  4,	
  
1911.	
  	
  During	
  the	
  years	
  between	
  1870	
  and	
  1920,	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  people	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.	
  who	
  lived	
  in	
  cities	
  grew	
  from	
  10	
  million	
  to	
  54	
  million.	
  The	
  Progressive	
  Movement	
  that	
  was	
  actively	
  lobbying	
  to	
  improve	
  the	
  health	
  and	
  safety	
  of	
  America's	
  cities	
  and	
  suburbanization	
  was	
  well	
  underway	
  (Hayden	
  2004).	
  The	
  dream	
  of	
  a	
  healthier,	
  more	
  wholesome	
  life	
  available	
  in	
  the	
  West	
  had	
  already	
  become	
  firmly	
  established	
  in	
  the	
  minds	
  of	
  Americans	
  (Limerick,	
  Cowell,	
  and	
  Collinge	
  2009).	
  Many	
  new	
  arrivals	
  to	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  were	
  enchanted	
  by	
  the	
  marketing	
  promises	
  on	
  the	
  pages	
  of	
  Sunset	
  Magazine	
  and	
  reports	
  of	
  an	
  easy	
  country	
  life	
  among	
  the	
  apple	
  and	
  pear	
  trees.	
  	
  Yet,	
  during	
  this	
  period,	
  there	
  is	
  no	
  evidence	
  that	
  the	
  preponderance	
  of	
  what	
  might	
  now	
  be	
  called	
  hobby	
  farmers	
  or	
  exurbanites	
  had	
  a	
  significant	
  negative	
  impact	
  on	
  the	
  growth	
  of	
  the	
  fruit	
  growing	
  industry	
  in	
  the	
  valley.	
  While	
  there	
  were	
  undoubtedly	
  tensions	
  among	
  growers,	
  these	
  seem	
  to	
  have	
  been	
  based	
  largely	
  on	
  class	
  differences	
  and	
  the	
  stresses	
  of	
  an	
  industry	
  in	
  which	
  a	
  mix	
  of	
  cooperation	
  and	
  competition,	
  or	
  "co-­‐opetition",	
  as	
  Larsen	
  and	
  Hutton	
  (2011)	
  describe,	
  was	
  inevitable.	
  Fruit	
  growers	
  were	
  in	
  competition	
  with	
  each	
  other	
  but	
  were	
  often	
  forced	
  to	
  cooperate	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  successfully	
  process	
  and	
  market	
  their	
  products.	
  Additionally,	
  poor	
  orchard	
  care	
  allowed	
  pests	
  and	
  diseases	
  to	
  spread	
  to	
  neighboring	
  
	
  	
  
	
   49	
  
orchards,	
  so	
  growers	
  made	
  education	
  a	
  key	
  priority	
  in	
  the	
  industry.	
  Real	
  estate	
  development	
  and	
  speculation	
  represented	
  a	
  competitive	
  pressure	
  on	
  land	
  while	
  at	
  the	
  same	
  time	
  providing	
  labor	
  and	
  capital	
  for	
  the	
  expanding	
  industry.	
  	
  
Farmers	
  as	
  Land	
  Owners	
  The	
  speculative	
  buying	
  and	
  selling	
  of	
  land	
  has	
  been	
  an	
  integral	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  economy	
  of	
  southern	
  Oregon	
  since	
  Euro-­‐American	
  settlement	
  began	
  in	
  the	
  1850s.	
  In	
  this	
  context,	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  statewide	
  land-­‐use	
  regulation	
  in	
  1973	
  represented	
  a	
  disruption	
  of	
  existing	
  environmental	
  management	
  regime	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  under	
  which	
  farming,	
  mining,	
  and	
  forestry	
  had	
  coexisted	
  with	
  tourism	
  and	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  for	
  many	
  years.	
  	
  Oregon's	
  statewide	
  regulations	
  strongly	
  restrict	
  parcelization	
  and	
  the	
  building	
  of	
  new	
  residences	
  in	
  farming	
  zones.	
  This	
  has	
  caused	
  vocal	
  resistance	
  in	
  the	
  region,	
  particularly	
  among	
  many	
  fruit	
  growers,25	
  the	
  very	
  group	
  the	
  laws	
  were,	
  in	
  principle,	
  designed	
  to	
  protect.	
  	
  This	
  has	
  often	
  been	
  dismissed	
  as	
  greed	
  by	
  supporters	
  of	
  statewide	
  regulation	
  or	
  an	
  illogical	
  belief	
  in	
  private	
  property	
  rights.	
  However	
  this	
  attitude	
  ignores	
  the	
  dual	
  role	
  that	
  farmers	
  hold	
  as	
  land	
  owners	
  and	
  an	
  overlooking	
  of	
  the	
  economic	
  realities	
  of	
  farming.	
  For	
  many	
  farmers,	
  the	
  land	
  itself	
  represents	
  an	
  investment	
  with	
  the	
  potential	
  for	
  appreciation.	
  "The	
  appreciation	
  of	
  the	
  land	
  was	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  reason	
  for	
  being	
  in	
  agriculture-­‐-­‐because	
  if	
  agriculture	
  didn't	
  make	
  any	
  money,	
  at	
  least	
  the	
  land	
  values	
  would	
  be	
  there.	
  	
  So	
  you	
  could	
  sell	
  and	
  retire.	
  	
  Now	
  you	
  can	
  sell	
  and	
  go	
  starve	
  to	
  death,	
  live	
  on	
  Social	
  Security.	
  	
  It's	
  terrible	
  now.	
  	
  We've	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  25.	
  Fruit	
  growers	
  are	
  by	
  no	
  means	
  united	
  in	
  opposition	
  to	
  statewide	
  planning.	
  Many	
  have	
  concerns	
  about	
  specific	
  elements	
  of	
  the	
  regulations	
  that	
  they	
  believe	
  limit	
  their	
  ability	
  to	
  be	
  economically	
  successful,	
  but	
  express	
  strong	
  support	
  for	
  farmland	
  conservation.	
  Some	
  believe	
  current	
  planning	
  regulations	
  are	
  not	
  protective	
  enough.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   50	
  
been	
  able-­‐-­‐	
  because	
  of	
  our	
  marketing	
  and	
  culture-­‐-­‐	
  we've	
  been	
  able	
  to	
  survive.	
  	
  It	
  certainly	
  hasn't	
  been	
  easy.26"	
  	
  By	
  limiting	
  development	
  on	
  agricultural	
  lands,	
  statewide	
  planning	
  holds	
  down	
  agricultural	
  land	
  values,	
  which	
  potentially	
  makes	
  it	
  easier	
  for	
  new	
  farmers	
  to	
  buy	
  land,	
  however	
  this	
  does	
  not,	
  in	
  itself,	
  solve	
  the	
  problem	
  of	
  farm	
  succession.	
  Even	
  farmers	
  like	
  the	
  one	
  quoted	
  above,	
  who	
  has	
  a	
  son	
  who	
  wants	
  to	
  continue	
  farming,	
  expressed	
  the	
  difficulty	
  of	
  financing	
  retirement	
  or	
  increasing	
  farm	
  income	
  to	
  accommodate	
  the	
  transition	
  between	
  generations	
  without	
  either	
  selling	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  farm	
  for	
  development	
  or	
  building	
  additional	
  residences	
  on	
  the	
  farm,	
  both	
  of	
  which	
  are	
  limited	
  by	
  Oregon's	
  land	
  use	
  regulations.	
  Growers	
  relied	
  on	
  the	
  ability	
  to	
  sell	
  less	
  productive	
  land	
  for	
  development	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  finance	
  capital	
  improvements,	
  replanting	
  of	
  aging	
  orchards,	
  the	
  creation	
  of	
  a	
  comfortable	
  retirement	
  fund,	
  or	
  to	
  facilitate	
  the	
  transfer	
  of	
  the	
  business	
  to	
  a	
  new	
  generation.	
  	
  
How	
  New	
  is	
  the	
  New	
  West?	
  The	
  story	
  of	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  over	
  that	
  last	
  fifty	
  years	
  could	
  be	
  told	
  like	
  the	
  stories	
  of	
  so	
  many	
  other	
  rural	
  communities	
  in	
  the	
  American	
  West,	
  as	
  a	
  transition	
  from	
  an	
  economy	
  based	
  on	
  extractive	
  industries	
  to	
  one	
  focused	
  around	
  service,	
  retail,	
  and	
  health	
  care	
  industries.	
  This	
  story	
  of	
  the	
  transition	
  between	
  the	
  Old	
  West	
  economy	
  and	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  has	
  been	
  told	
  numerous	
  times	
  (Hines	
  2010,	
  Ghose	
  2004,	
  Travis	
  2007,	
  Travis	
  1997).	
  The	
  small	
  town	
  of	
  Jacksonville,	
  now	
  thoroughly	
  tourist	
  in	
  its	
  orientation,	
  started	
  out	
  as	
  a	
  gold	
  rush	
  town	
  and	
  its	
  economy	
  languished	
  for	
  much	
  of	
  the	
  20th	
  century.	
  Now	
  dilapidated	
  19th	
  century	
  architecture	
  has	
  been	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  26.	
  Interview	
  with	
  independent	
  fruit	
  grower,	
  2011.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   51	
  
revisioned	
  for	
  the	
  21st	
  century	
  amenity	
  economy.	
  The	
  nearby	
  town	
  of	
  Ashland	
  is	
  also	
  thoroughly	
  reliant	
  on	
  a	
  New	
  West	
  consumptive	
  economy,	
  largely	
  built	
  around	
  a	
  theatre	
  festival	
  that	
  runs	
  through	
  most	
  of	
  the	
  year,	
  supplemented	
  by	
  outdoor	
  recreation	
  including	
  a	
  small	
  ski	
  resort.	
  But	
  Ashland's	
  attempts	
  to	
  build	
  an	
  economy	
  around	
  tourism	
  and	
  recreation	
  began	
  not	
  in	
  the	
  1960s	
  or	
  1970s,	
  but	
  in	
  the	
  early	
  the	
  20th	
  century	
  with	
  dreams	
  of	
  a	
  health	
  spa,	
  the	
  establishment	
  of	
  Lithia	
  Park,	
  and	
  summer	
  Chautauqua	
  theater	
  productions.	
  Other	
  towns	
  have	
  begun	
  taking	
  advantage	
  of	
  recent	
  growth	
  in	
  tourism	
  and	
  exurban	
  migration	
  while	
  contrarily	
  continuing	
  to	
  hold	
  up	
  the	
  mythology	
  of	
  their	
  "Old	
  West"	
  roots.	
  	
  	
   In	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley,	
  both	
  new	
  arrivals	
  and	
  long	
  time	
  residents	
  are	
  invested	
  in	
  nostalgia	
  for	
  the	
  Old	
  West.	
  The	
  literature	
  on	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  has	
  been	
  focused	
  on	
  a	
  specific	
  type	
  of	
  place	
  with	
  a	
  distinct	
  history,	
  in	
  which	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  amenity-­‐based	
  economies	
  has	
  been	
  relatively	
  recent	
  and	
  sudden,	
  because	
  such	
  places	
  have	
  the	
  propensity	
  to	
  produce	
  conflict.	
  In	
  contrast	
  the	
  history	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  provides	
  a	
  picture	
  of	
  a	
  different	
  historical	
  trajectory	
  in	
  which	
  rural	
  real	
  estate	
  and	
  tourism	
  developed	
  slowly	
  alongside	
  a	
  form	
  of	
  agriculture	
  more	
  compatible	
  with	
  their	
  development	
  then	
  ranching	
  or	
  mining.	
  This	
  points	
  to	
  the	
  potential	
  variety	
  of	
  relationships	
  between	
  New	
  West	
  and	
  Old	
  West	
  economies,	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  specific	
  characteristics	
  of	
  both.	
  Hines	
  (2010)	
  describes	
  the	
  creation	
  of	
  a	
  "New	
  West	
  Archipelago,"	
  islands	
  of	
  post-­‐industrial	
  space	
  in	
  an	
  industrial	
  sea.	
  However	
  it	
  would	
  be	
  instructive	
  to	
  examine	
  the	
  diversity	
  of	
  relationships	
  between	
  extractive	
  industries	
  and	
  consumptive	
  ones	
  rather	
  than	
  focusing	
  only	
  on	
  the	
  distinctive	
  
	
  	
  
	
   52	
  
characteristics	
  of	
  such	
  islands.	
  Otherwise	
  we	
  risk	
  assuming	
  that	
  these	
  islands	
  are	
  surrounded	
  by	
  an	
  undifferentiated	
  sea	
  of	
  static,	
  unchanging	
  industrial	
  landscape.	
  	
  
Conclusion	
  In	
  this	
  article	
  I	
  have	
  emphasized	
  the	
  way	
  that	
  the	
  Rogue	
  valley	
  and	
  surrounding	
  region	
  were	
  marketed	
  for	
  their	
  many	
  amenities,	
  in	
  addition	
  to	
  their	
  potential	
  to	
  produce	
  financial	
  gain.	
  To	
  understand	
  the	
  drivers	
  of	
  exurban	
  sprawl	
  and	
  social	
  and	
  environmental	
  impacts	
  that	
  increased	
  amenity	
  based	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  has	
  world-­‐wide,	
  the	
  researcher	
  must	
  move	
  beyond	
  an	
  emphasis	
  only	
  on	
  "amenity	
  migrants"	
  as	
  individual	
  actors,	
  to	
  understand	
  real	
  estate	
  development	
  and	
  associated	
  activities	
  as	
  an	
  industry	
  with	
  connections	
  to	
  and	
  conflicts	
  with	
  other	
  rural	
  industries.	
  Discussions	
  of	
  individual	
  landowners	
  have	
  drawn	
  my	
  attention	
  to	
  the	
  flexibility	
  of	
  livelihood	
  strategies	
  and	
  the	
  complexity	
  of	
  motivations	
  for	
  settling	
  in	
  the	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  	
  An	
  examination	
  of	
  this	
  historical	
  case	
  opens	
  up	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  questions,	
  which	
  have	
  yet	
  to	
  be	
  thoroughly	
  examined	
  in	
  the	
  literature	
  on	
  the	
  political	
  ecology	
  of	
  exurbia.	
  What	
  has	
  been	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  amenity	
  economies	
  and	
  resource	
  based	
  production	
  in	
  different	
  times	
  and	
  places?	
  Under	
  what	
  conditions	
  do	
  these	
  industries	
  produce	
  conflict?	
  Thus	
  far,	
  little	
  work	
  has	
  focused	
  on	
  a	
  sustained	
  examination	
  of	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  tourism	
  and	
  the	
  real	
  estate	
  industry	
  in	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  resource-­‐based	
  industries	
  prior	
  to	
  the	
  recent	
  expansion	
  of	
  exurban	
  development.	
  For	
  example,	
  little	
  has	
  been	
  written	
  so	
  far	
  about	
  the	
  history	
  of	
  Dude	
  Ranching	
  (Borne	
  1983).	
  How	
  large	
  a	
  role	
  did	
  this	
  traditional	
  amenity	
  based	
  industry	
  play	
  in	
  rural	
  areas	
  and	
  how	
  was	
  it	
  related	
  to	
  production	
  oriented	
  ranching?	
  
	
  	
  
	
   53	
  
What	
  is	
  striking	
  about	
  this	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  case	
  study	
  is	
  the	
  specific	
  combination	
  of	
  soil	
  and	
  climate	
  conditions,	
  and	
  geography	
  that	
  facilitated	
  the	
  joint	
  growth	
  of	
  fruit	
  cultivation	
  and	
  real	
  estate	
  development.	
  Successful	
  commercial	
  orchard	
  growing	
  is	
  an	
  industry	
  reliant	
  on	
  particular	
  microclimate	
  conditions	
  to	
  be	
  successful	
  and	
  orchards	
  lands	
  are	
  certainly	
  not	
  a	
  widespread	
  land	
  use	
  in	
  the	
  Western	
  U.S.	
  Jackson	
  County	
  was	
  situated	
  on	
  a	
  major	
  transportation	
  corridor	
  for	
  many	
  years,	
  which	
  meant	
  that	
  while	
  it	
  was	
  located	
  far	
  from	
  any	
  major	
  population	
  centers,	
  it	
  received	
  an	
  ongoing	
  stream	
  of	
  visitors,	
  facilitating	
  the	
  growth	
  of	
  tourism	
  and	
  real	
  estate	
  development.	
  An	
  interesting	
  comparison	
  could	
  be	
  made	
  to	
  other	
  western	
  regions	
  dominated	
  by	
  orchard	
  landscapes,	
  for	
  example	
  Orange	
  County	
  and	
  Santa	
  Clara	
  County	
  in	
  California,	
  Hood	
  River	
  County	
  in	
  Oregon,	
  or	
  Yakima	
  County	
  in	
  Washington	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  better	
  understand	
  the	
  interactions	
  between	
  orchards,	
  tourism,	
  and	
  parcelization.	
  	
  Shifting	
  the	
  focus	
  from	
  analyzing	
  exurbanites	
  as	
  consumers,	
  to	
  the	
  production	
  of	
  amenity	
  landscapes	
  through	
  the	
  real	
  estate	
  industry,	
  puts	
  exurban	
  development	
  in	
  a	
  different	
  light.	
  Yet	
  few	
  studies	
  to	
  date	
  have	
  focused	
  on	
  the	
  ways	
  that	
  exurban	
  development	
  is	
  driven	
  by	
  particular	
  capitalist	
  industries:27	
  tourism,	
  real	
  estate,	
  health	
  care,	
  and	
  other	
  service	
  industries.	
  Viewing	
  amenity	
  based	
  industries	
  as	
  potentially	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  "traditional"	
  industries	
  associated	
  with	
  the	
  American	
  West	
  since	
  Euro-­‐American	
  settlement	
  also	
  moves	
  us	
  from	
  discourses	
  of	
  newcomers	
  versus	
  locals	
  or	
  Old	
  West	
  versus	
  New	
  West	
  economies	
  to	
  an	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  27.	
  One	
  exception	
  is	
  (Robbins,	
  Martin,	
  and	
  Gilbertz.	
  2011)	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   54	
  
acknowledgement	
  of	
  the	
  complex	
  and	
  shifting	
  economic	
  relationships	
  that	
  continue	
  to	
  drive	
  land	
  use	
  change	
  in	
  the	
  western	
  U.S.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   55	
  
	
  	
  
CHAPTER	
  IV	
  
EXTENDED	
  URBANIZATION	
  AND	
  RURAL	
  IMAGINARIES:	
  USING	
  
LEFEBVRE'S	
  THEORY	
  OF	
  PLANETARY	
  URBANIZATION	
  TO	
  
UNDERSTAND	
  EXURBIA	
  	
   It	
  is	
  a	
  truism	
  to	
  state	
  that	
  for	
  the	
  first	
  time	
  in	
  history,	
  we	
  live	
  in	
  an	
  urban	
  age,	
  in	
  which	
  more	
  than	
  50%	
  of	
  the	
  world's	
  population	
  lives	
  in	
  urban	
  areas.	
  Despite	
  the	
  obvious	
  social	
  and	
  environmental	
  impacts	
  of	
  rapid	
  urbanization	
  around	
  the	
  globe,	
  defining	
  what	
  it	
  means	
  to	
  live	
  in	
  an	
  "urban	
  age”	
  remains	
  unclear.	
  Large	
  percentages	
  of	
  the	
  urban	
  population	
  live	
  in	
  spaces	
  still	
  often	
  overlooked	
  by	
  urban	
  geography:	
  in	
  sprawling	
  suburbs,	
  edge	
  cities,	
  exurbs,	
  informal	
  settlements,	
  small	
  cities	
  and	
  towns.	
  	
  	
   This	
  paper	
  examines	
  a	
  case	
  study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  Oregon	
  where	
  this	
  ambiguity	
  around	
  urbanization	
  has	
  significantly	
  complicated	
  attempts	
  to	
  limit	
  the	
  impacts	
  of	
  population	
  growth	
  and	
  urbanization.	
  Two	
  contradictions	
  in	
  this	
  case	
  focused	
  my	
  attention	
  on	
  ideas	
  of	
  "the	
  urban"	
  and	
  led	
  me	
  to	
  planetary	
  urbanization	
  as	
  a	
  way	
  to	
  re-­‐conceptualize	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  space.	
  First,	
  an	
  urbanization	
  process	
  driven	
  by	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migration.	
  Second,	
  a	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  process	
  dominated	
  by	
  competition	
  between	
  cities	
  for	
  urban	
  growth	
  and	
  development,	
  while	
  the	
  agencies	
  and	
  the	
  individuals	
  involved	
  continue	
  to	
  cling	
  to	
  and	
  promote	
  rural	
  imaginaries	
  of	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  	
   I	
  incorporate	
  the	
  theory	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  into	
  a	
  political	
  ecology	
  framework	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  analyze	
  the	
  politics	
  of	
  urbanization	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  Global	
  
	
  	
  
	
   56	
  
urbanization,	
  as	
  described	
  by	
  Lefebvre	
  (2003),	
  involves	
  two	
  moments	
  or	
  aspects	
  of	
  urbanization,	
  concentration	
  and	
  extension.	
  Brenner	
  and	
  Schmidt	
  (2013)	
  theorize	
  that	
  while	
  most	
  of	
  urban	
  studies	
  research	
  has	
  focused	
  on	
  concentration,	
  extension	
  has	
  overtaken	
  concentration	
  and	
  is	
  now	
  the	
  dominant	
  force	
  within	
  the	
  process	
  of	
  urbanization.	
  In	
  this	
  paper	
  I	
  use	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  (i.e.,	
  extension)	
  to	
  explain	
  the	
  complex	
  and	
  contradictory	
  aspects	
  of	
  urbanization	
  in	
  my	
  case	
  study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  Oregon.	
  I	
  begin	
  the	
  paper	
  with	
  a	
  review	
  of	
  the	
  theory	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  as	
  originally	
  theorized	
  by	
  Lefebvre	
  and	
  its	
  applicability	
  to	
  political	
  ecology.	
  	
  I	
  then	
  proceed	
  to	
  analyze	
  my	
  case	
  study	
  through	
  the	
  lens	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  focusing	
  on	
  the	
  contradictions	
  between	
  the	
  increasingly	
  urbanized	
  society	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  the	
  persistent	
  role	
  of	
  "rural	
  imaginaries."	
  
Theoretical	
  Framework	
  “The	
  city	
  is	
  everywhere	
  and	
  in	
  everything."	
  If	
  the	
  urbanized	
  world	
  now	
  is	
  a	
  chain	
  of	
  metropolitan	
  areas	
  connected	
  by	
  places/corridors	
  of	
  communication	
  (airports	
  and	
  airways,	
  stations	
  and	
  railways,	
  parking	
  lots	
  and	
  motorways,	
  teleports	
  and	
  information	
  highways),	
  then	
  what	
  is	
  not	
  the	
  urban?	
  Is	
  it	
  the	
  town,	
  the	
  village,	
  the	
  countryside?	
  Maybe,	
  but	
  only	
  to	
  a	
  limited	
  degree.	
  The	
  footprints	
  of	
  the	
  city	
  are	
  all	
  over	
  these	
  places,	
  in	
  the	
  form	
  of	
  city	
  commuters,	
  tourists,	
  teleworking,	
  the	
  media,	
  and	
  the	
  urbanization	
  of	
  lifestyles.	
  The	
  traditional	
  divide	
  between	
  the	
  city	
  and	
  the	
  countryside	
  has	
  been	
  perforated.	
  -­‐	
  
Ash	
  Amin	
  and	
  Nigel	
  Thrift	
  (2002)	
  	
  	
   Research	
  on	
  exurbanization,	
  amenity	
  migration,	
  and	
  resource	
  conflicts	
  has	
  largely	
  relied	
  on	
  an	
  apparently	
  clear	
  cultural	
  and	
  economic	
  divide	
  between	
  the	
  urban	
  and	
  the	
  rural.	
  The	
  theorization	
  of	
  a	
  global	
  urban	
  society	
  would	
  erase	
  this	
  divide,	
  covering	
  the	
  globe	
  in	
  an	
  uneven	
  fabric	
  of	
  urbanization,	
  seeming	
  to	
  indicate	
  the	
  gradual	
  disappearance	
  of	
  the	
  rural.	
  So	
  far,	
  work	
  on	
  global	
  urbanization	
  has	
  
	
  	
  
	
   57	
  
appeared	
  to	
  ignore	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  the	
  rural,	
  focused	
  as	
  it	
  is	
  on	
  the	
  impacts	
  of	
  urbanization.	
  However,	
  a	
  closer	
  examination	
  of	
  work	
  on	
  global	
  urbanization,	
  in	
  particular	
  as	
  originally	
  proposed	
  by	
  Lefebvre,	
  reveals	
  a	
  continuing	
  role	
  for	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  the	
  rural	
  in	
  this	
  global	
  urban	
  society.	
  By	
  returning	
  to	
  Lefebvre's	
  writings	
  on	
  urbanization,	
  I	
  propose	
  a	
  new	
  theorization	
  of	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  the	
  rural	
  within	
  the	
  fabric	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization.	
  I	
  argue	
  that	
  recognition	
  of	
  Lefebvre's	
  theory	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  actually	
  reconnects	
  the	
  work	
  of	
  rural	
  and	
  urban	
  political	
  ecologists	
  in	
  productive	
  ways	
  by	
  pointing	
  to	
  the	
  growing	
  extent	
  and	
  significance	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  processes	
  in	
  the	
  metabolism	
  of	
  global	
  urban	
  society.	
  It	
  is	
  a	
  concern	
  for	
  the	
  impacts	
  of	
  this	
  metabolism—the	
  shifting	
  flows	
  of	
  resources,	
  people,	
  and	
  knowledge	
  that	
  make	
  up	
  extended	
  urbanization—which	
  links	
  the	
  work	
  of	
  urban	
  political	
  ecology	
  and	
  exurban	
  political	
  ecology	
  despite	
  their	
  somewhat	
  disparate	
  approaches	
  (Gustafson	
  et	
  al.	
  2014).	
  Even	
  as	
  political	
  and	
  economic	
  power	
  is	
  increasingly	
  centered	
  on	
  urban	
  life	
  and	
  urbanization	
  processes,	
  the	
  image	
  of	
  "the	
  rural"	
  becomes	
  an	
  ever-­‐increasing	
  point	
  of	
  contention	
  in	
  struggles	
  over	
  land	
  use	
  governance.	
  
Conceptualizing	
  Global	
  Urbanization	
  	
   Efforts	
  to	
  clearly	
  delineate	
  urban	
  settlement	
  types	
  and	
  urbanization	
  processes	
  have	
  become	
  increasingly	
  conceptually	
  confused.	
  A	
  number	
  of	
  scholars	
  (Hoggart	
  1990)	
  have	
  proposed	
  abandoning	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  dichotomy	
  as	
  an	
  empty	
  signifier,	
  yet	
  discourses	
  around	
  these	
  two	
  poles	
  continue	
  to	
  have	
  broad	
  influence	
  in	
  policy	
  and	
  political	
  debates.	
  In	
  the	
  U.S.,	
  even	
  as	
  cities	
  have	
  exploded	
  into	
  a	
  mix	
  of	
  sprawling	
  settlement	
  types,	
  partisan	
  political	
  discourse	
  has	
  increasingly	
  divided	
  the	
  country	
  
	
  	
  
	
   58	
  
into	
  "red	
  and	
  blue"	
  regions,	
  largely	
  around	
  a	
  supposed	
  urban-­‐rural	
  economic	
  and	
  political	
  split.	
  Sustainable	
  urbanism	
  has	
  become	
  a	
  major	
  buzzword	
  for	
  environmentalists	
  and	
  planners	
  while	
  sprawling	
  growth	
  has	
  continued	
  to	
  threaten	
  the	
  ability	
  of	
  urbanizing	
  regions	
  to	
  make	
  efficient	
  use	
  of	
  land	
  and	
  resources.	
  	
  	
   Global	
  urbanization,	
  which	
  Brenner	
  (2013)	
  defines	
  as	
  "the	
  perpetual	
  churning	
  of	
  sociospatial	
  formations	
  under	
  capitalism	
  rather	
  than	
  presupposing	
  their	
  stabilization	
  within	
  built	
  environments,	
  jurisdictional	
  envelopes,	
  or	
  ecological	
  landscapes",	
  provides	
  a	
  framework	
  for	
  examining	
  the	
  impacts	
  of	
  urbanization	
  processes	
  across	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  settlement	
  types.	
  Brenner's	
  conceptualization	
  of	
  urbanization	
  emerges	
  from	
  Lefebvre	
  (2003),	
  who	
  describes	
  two	
  moments	
  within	
  the	
  urbanization	
  process:	
  implosion	
  and	
  explosion,	
  or	
  what	
  Brenner	
  calls	
  
concentrated	
  urbanization	
  and	
  extended	
  urbanization.	
  In	
  1970,	
  Lefebvre	
  presciently	
  theorized	
  the	
  emergence	
  of	
  a	
  global	
  urban	
  society.	
  He	
  describes	
  an	
  urban	
  society	
  as	
  "the	
  society	
  that	
  results	
  from	
  industrialization,	
  which	
  is	
  a	
  process	
  of	
  domination	
  that	
  absorbs	
  agricultural	
  production."	
  The	
  dominance	
  of	
  the	
  city	
  over	
  the	
  country	
  is	
  so	
  complete	
  that	
  in	
  Lefebvre's	
  words,	
  "a	
  vacation	
  home,	
  a	
  highway,	
  a	
  supermarket	
  in	
  the	
  countryside	
  are	
  all	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  urban	
  fabric."	
  	
  	
   The	
  development	
  of	
  densely	
  populated	
  central	
  cities,	
  that	
  is	
  concentrated	
  
urbanization,	
  has	
  been	
  the	
  central	
  focus	
  of	
  urban	
  studies.	
  However,	
  Brenner	
  (2013)	
  contends	
  that	
  the	
  processes	
  of	
  urbanization	
  have	
  shifted	
  in	
  the	
  last	
  30-­‐40	
  years	
  and	
  now	
  processes	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  have	
  overtaken	
  and	
  surpassed	
  those	
  of	
  concentrated	
  urbanization.	
  (See	
  Appendix	
  A	
  for	
  maps	
  showing	
  U.S.	
  Census	
  definitions	
  of	
  urban	
  space	
  by	
  county	
  since	
  1950.	
  These	
  maps	
  show	
  the	
  literal	
  
	
  	
  
	
   59	
  
expansion	
  of	
  urban	
  space	
  as	
  growth,	
  particularly	
  in	
  the	
  American	
  West	
  creates	
  new	
  metropolitan	
  areas.)	
  Brenner	
  defines	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  as	
  the	
  processes	
  of	
  transformation	
  that	
  support	
  and	
  produce	
  urban	
  development.	
  In	
  this	
  line	
  of	
  theorizing,	
  it	
  is	
  no	
  longer	
  useful	
  to	
  define	
  particular	
  spaces	
  as	
  either	
  urban	
  or	
  rural.	
  Particular	
  spaces	
  are	
  no	
  longer	
  outside	
  the	
  urban	
  realm	
  of	
  influence	
  since	
  urban	
  processes	
  are	
  impacting	
  the	
  entire	
  globe,	
  producing	
  vast	
  areas	
  covered	
  in	
  pollution,	
  transportation	
  networks,	
  and	
  resource	
  extraction	
  to	
  support	
  urban	
  centers.	
  	
  
Extended	
  Urbanization	
  and	
  Political	
  Ecology	
  	
   The	
  concept	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  then	
  has	
  significant	
  implications	
  for	
  political	
  ecologists	
  and	
  brings	
  up	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  conceptual	
  questions,	
  particularly:	
  
Should	
  all	
  political	
  ecology	
  then	
  be	
  considered	
  urban	
  political	
  ecology?	
  And	
  if	
  there	
  is	
  
no	
  conceptual	
  outside	
  for	
  the	
  urban,	
  then	
  how	
  can	
  we	
  understand	
  the	
  persistence	
  of	
  
the	
  rural	
  in	
  everyday	
  life?	
  	
   If	
  we	
  take	
  the	
  theory	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  seriously,	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  dichotomy	
  disappears	
  and	
  is	
  replaced	
  by	
  an	
  uneven	
  fabric	
  of	
  urban	
  space.	
  Rural	
  space	
  can	
  no	
  longer	
  be	
  conceptualized	
  as	
  outside	
  of	
  and	
  separate	
  from	
  urban	
  space.	
  However,	
  this	
  does	
  not	
  mean	
  that	
  the	
  rural	
  disappears.	
  In	
  fact,	
  in	
  spaces	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  like	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  symbols	
  of	
  rural	
  life	
  become	
  increasingly	
  commodified	
  and	
  contested	
  as	
  ex-­‐urbanites	
  contradictorily	
  attempt	
  to	
  continue	
  their	
  urban	
  lifestyles	
  while	
  also	
  nostalgically	
  re-­‐creating	
  rural	
  space.	
  	
  	
   Political	
  ecology	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.,	
  and	
  the	
  developed	
  world	
  more	
  broadly,	
  has	
  split	
  into	
  a	
  two	
  somewhat	
  separate	
  lines	
  of	
  research,	
  along	
  urban-­‐rural	
  lines.	
  Although	
  urban	
  political	
  ecology	
  and	
  exurban	
  political	
  ecology	
  writing	
  on	
  North	
  America	
  
	
  	
  
	
   60	
  
emerged	
  around	
  the	
  same	
  time,	
  their	
  differing	
  theoretical	
  underpinnings	
  have	
  led	
  to	
  a	
  perplexing	
  lack	
  of	
  engagement	
  across	
  urban-­‐rural	
  lines.28	
  Urban	
  political	
  ecology,	
  has	
  focused	
  on	
  socio-­‐environmental	
  issues	
  within	
  cities,	
  framing	
  the	
  ecological	
  impacts	
  and	
  power	
  deferentials	
  driving	
  them	
  using	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  the	
  metabolization	
  of	
  nature	
  (Keil	
  2005).	
  Exurban	
  political	
  ecology	
  has,	
  in	
  contrast,	
  focused	
  on	
  the	
  environmental	
  changes,	
  political	
  conflicts,	
  and	
  management	
  challenges	
  that	
  emerge	
  from	
  flows	
  of	
  amenity	
  migrants	
  into	
  picturesque	
  country	
  landscapes	
  (Walker	
  and	
  Fortmann	
  2003).	
  Studies	
  have	
  tended	
  to	
  frame	
  these	
  conflicts	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  the	
  persistent	
  differences	
  between	
  rural	
  and	
  urban	
  identities,	
  ways	
  of	
  life,	
  and	
  cultures,	
  using	
  cultural	
  landscape	
  studies	
  to	
  focus	
  on	
  the	
  construction	
  of	
  discourses	
  and	
  ideologies	
  of	
  nature.	
  	
  	
   Political	
  ecology	
  arrived	
  in	
  North	
  America	
  in	
  the	
  1980s,	
  with	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  rural	
  settings	
  and	
  issues	
  adopted	
  from	
  origins	
  in	
  3rd	
  world	
  development.	
  Fortmann	
  (1996)	
  called	
  for	
  using	
  the	
  tools	
  of	
  international	
  property	
  scholarship	
  to	
  help	
  us	
  understand	
  conflicts	
  over	
  land	
  and	
  resources	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.	
  However	
  within	
  a	
  few	
  years	
  Robbins	
  (2002)	
  suggested	
  that	
  political	
  ecology	
  needed	
  to	
  study	
  up	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  down,	
  that	
  is	
  examine	
  the	
  power	
  of	
  institutions	
  and	
  practices	
  of	
  officials	
  while	
  continuing	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  what	
  he	
  calls	
  the	
  tools	
  of	
  political	
  ecology	
  -­‐-­‐	
  "ethnography	
  and	
  intense	
  focus	
  on	
  micro-­‐politics."	
  Today	
  the	
  largest	
  literature	
  in	
  political	
  ecology	
  in	
  the	
  developed	
  world	
  focuses	
  on	
  exurbanization	
  and	
  amenity	
  migration	
  in	
  the	
  American	
  West.	
  There	
  are	
  also	
  an	
  expanding	
  number	
  of	
  case	
  studies	
  in	
  other	
  regions	
  of	
  the	
  developed	
  world,	
  including	
  other	
  parts	
  of	
  the	
  U.S.,	
  Europe,	
  Canada,	
  and	
  Australia.	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  28.	
  As	
  Blaikie	
  (1999)	
  pointed	
  out,	
  sometimes	
  disjunctures	
  come	
  about	
  not	
  so	
  much	
  because	
  of	
  unresolved	
  debates,	
  but	
  because	
  of	
  non-­‐engagement.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   61	
  
Yet	
  the	
  focus	
  on	
  the	
  parallels	
  and	
  commonalities	
  within	
  amenity	
  landscapes	
  has	
  perhaps	
  obscured	
  the	
  need	
  for	
  work	
  that	
  extends	
  beyond	
  the	
  boundaries	
  of	
  these	
  spaces	
  and	
  examines	
  the	
  drivers	
  of	
  this	
  global	
  phenomenon	
  and	
  the	
  social	
  and	
  environmental	
  displacements	
  these	
  changes	
  cause	
  (Abrams	
  et	
  al.	
  2012).	
  	
  	
   In	
  a	
  largely	
  separate	
  line	
  of	
  research,	
  urban	
  political	
  ecologists	
  have	
  eagerly	
  sought	
  to	
  dismantle	
  the	
  nature-­‐culture	
  divide	
  by	
  illuminating	
  the	
  myriad	
  of	
  ways	
  that	
  cities	
  are	
  "natural.29"	
  A	
  major	
  theme	
  of	
  this	
  research	
  is	
  the	
  flow	
  of	
  resources	
  through	
  the	
  city	
  and	
  the	
  mediations	
  of	
  such	
  flows	
  by	
  economic,	
  political,	
  and	
  social	
  relationships.	
  Yet	
  while	
  UPE	
  has	
  sought	
  to	
  erase	
  the	
  nature	
  -­‐	
  city	
  divide,	
  it	
  has	
  largely	
  been	
  strangely	
  silent	
  about	
  where	
  these	
  flows	
  arrive	
  from	
  or	
  drain	
  to.	
  While	
  focusing	
  on	
  Marxist	
  conceptions	
  of	
  metabolism,	
  the	
  idea	
  of	
  a	
  metabolic	
  rift	
  (Foster	
  and	
  Magdoff	
  2000),	
  that	
  causes	
  mirrored	
  problems	
  of	
  depletion	
  and	
  pollution	
  in	
  both	
  the	
  city	
  and	
  the	
  country,	
  seems	
  to	
  figure	
  less	
  prominently	
  as	
  urban	
  political	
  ecologists	
  have	
  remained	
  focused	
  on	
  the	
  city.	
  	
  	
   To	
  date,	
  there	
  has	
  been	
  little	
  theoretical	
  or	
  empirical	
  work	
  that	
  crosses	
  the	
  newly	
  created	
  urban-­‐exurban	
  divide	
  in	
  political	
  ecology.	
  In	
  effect	
  the	
  creation	
  of	
  UPE	
  has,	
  at	
  least	
  to	
  a	
  degree,	
  reinforced	
  the	
  nature-­‐society	
  divide	
  it	
  was	
  attempting	
  to	
  dissolve	
  by	
  reinforcing	
  its	
  analog,	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  divide.	
  Only	
  a	
  few	
  studies	
  have	
  worked	
  across	
  this	
  spatial	
  divide,	
  particularly	
  Robbins	
  (2003)	
  work	
  on	
  lawns,	
  Keil	
  and	
  Young's	
  (2009)	
  work	
  on	
  "in	
  between"	
  urban	
  landscapes	
  in	
  Canada,	
  and	
  Swyngedeau	
  and	
  Kaika’s	
  (2005)	
  work	
  on	
  the	
  urbanization	
  of	
  water.	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  29.	
  As	
  David	
  Harvey	
  stated	
  "There	
  is	
  nothing	
  unnatural	
  about	
  New	
  York	
  City."	
  
	
  	
  
	
   62	
  
	
   Now	
  some	
  scholars	
  influenced	
  by	
  the	
  resurgent	
  interest	
  in	
  Lefebvre's	
  concept	
  of	
  a	
  global	
  urban	
  society	
  (Brenner	
  2013)	
  have	
  begun	
  to	
  call	
  for	
  UPE	
  to	
  give	
  up	
  its	
  	
  "methodological	
  cityism"	
  in	
  favor	
  of	
  a	
  new	
  focus	
  on	
  urbanization	
  processes	
  (Angelo	
  and	
  Wachsmuth).	
  As	
  part	
  of	
  this,	
  a	
  growing	
  number	
  of	
  researchers	
  have	
  taken	
  up	
  work	
  using	
  a	
  UPE	
  framework	
  to	
  research	
  sites	
  outside	
  of	
  the	
  city	
  proper.	
  Examples	
  of	
  this	
  type	
  of	
  work	
  include	
  the	
  work	
  of	
  Gustafson	
  et	
  al.	
  (2013)	
  on	
  land	
  use	
  conflicts	
  in	
  exurban	
  Appalachia,	
  Kitchen's	
  research	
  on	
  urban	
  forests	
  in	
  South	
  Wales	
  (2013),	
  and	
  Pares,	
  March,	
  and	
  Saurai’s	
  (2013)	
  study	
  of	
  the	
  suburban	
  landscapes	
  of	
  Barcelona.	
  These	
  new	
  approaches	
  that	
  reach	
  across	
  this	
  urban-­‐rural	
  divide	
  have	
  the	
  potential	
  to	
  address	
  the	
  broader	
  processes	
  of	
  globalization	
  and	
  uneven	
  development	
  and	
  re-­‐situate	
  the	
  work	
  of	
  urban	
  and	
  exuburban	
  political	
  ecology	
  within	
  those	
  processes.	
  	
  	
   One	
  possible	
  stumbling	
  block	
  in	
  working	
  to	
  reconcile	
  these	
  two	
  distinct	
  yet	
  complementary	
  approaches	
  is	
  that	
  a	
  central	
  conceptual	
  element	
  in	
  many	
  exurban	
  political	
  ecology	
  studies,	
  the	
  distinction	
  between	
  rural	
  and	
  urban	
  identities	
  and	
  cultures,	
  is	
  viewed	
  as	
  leading	
  to	
  political	
  conflict	
  and	
  potentially	
  ecological	
  change.	
  However,	
  in	
  this	
  paper,	
  I	
  suggest	
  that	
  rather	
  than	
  viewing	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  as	
  problematic	
  for	
  the	
  continued	
  study	
  of	
  the	
  rural,	
  this	
  framework	
  provides	
  an	
  opportunity	
  to	
  engage	
  across	
  sub-­‐disciplinary	
  boundaries.	
  Political	
  ecologists	
  who	
  focus	
  on	
  processes	
  of	
  exurbanization	
  and	
  amenity	
  migration—who	
  study	
  the	
  margins	
  of	
  cities	
  and	
  the	
  peripheries—have	
  much	
  to	
  offer	
  to	
  our	
  understandings	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization.	
  While	
  urban	
  political	
  ecologists	
  have	
  largely	
  remained	
  methodologically	
  focused	
  on	
  cities,	
  there	
  is	
  a	
  rich	
  line	
  of	
  research	
  
	
  	
  
	
   63	
  
on	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migration,	
  exurbanization,	
  and	
  the	
  globalization	
  of	
  the	
  rural	
  that	
  has	
  already	
  been	
  developing	
  our	
  understandings	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  (Cadieux	
  2008,	
  Gosnell	
  and	
  Abrams	
  2009,	
  Hurley	
  and	
  Walker	
  2004,	
  Larsen	
  and	
  Hutton	
  2011,	
  Nelson	
  and	
  Nelson	
  2010,	
  Taylor	
  2009,	
  Theobald	
  2005).	
  	
  	
   Discussions	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  have	
  not	
  included	
  a	
  conceptualization	
  of	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  the	
  rural,	
  in	
  part	
  because	
  the	
  rural	
  is	
  no	
  longer	
  the	
  constitutive	
  "other"	
  to	
  the	
  rising	
  wave	
  of	
  urbanization.	
  However,	
  just	
  because	
  the	
  rural	
  is	
  no	
  longer	
  outside	
  the	
  urban,	
  does	
  not	
  mean	
  the	
  rural	
  disappears.	
  Rather,	
  the	
  rural	
  becomes	
  an	
  unevenly	
  distributed	
  remnant	
  within	
  the	
  urban	
  fabric.	
  Spaces	
  dominated	
  by	
  extended	
  urbanization,	
  in	
  particular,	
  continue	
  to	
  be	
  heavily	
  influenced	
  by	
  the	
  rural	
  ideologies	
  and	
  visions,	
  even	
  as	
  rural	
  lifeways	
  continue	
  to	
  decline.	
  In	
  places	
  like	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  these	
  rural	
  images	
  are	
  often	
  mobilized	
  to	
  support	
  particular	
  political	
  and	
  economic	
  interests	
  while	
  invoking	
  romantic	
  notions	
  of	
  rural	
  community	
  life	
  and	
  family	
  farming.	
  	
  	
  	
  
Extended	
  Urbanization	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  	
   My	
  case	
  study	
  focuses	
  on	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  in	
  southern	
  Oregon	
  (see	
  figure	
  8)	
  and	
  urbanization	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley,	
  which	
  is	
  centered	
  on	
  the	
  city	
  of	
  Medford.	
  This	
  metropolitan	
  area	
  has	
  a	
  population	
  of	
  over	
  200,000	
  people,	
  many	
  of	
  whom	
  live	
  in	
  the	
  small	
  towns	
  and	
  pockets	
  of	
  development	
  surrounding	
  the	
  city.	
  Besides	
  the	
  city	
  of	
  Medford,	
  the	
  valley	
  is	
  dotted	
  with	
  eleven	
  incorporated	
  municipalities	
  and	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  unincorporated	
  communities.	
  While	
  Jackson	
  County	
  hardly	
  constitutes	
  an	
  urban	
  area	
  in	
  the	
  minds	
  of	
  most	
  familiar	
  with	
  the	
  region,	
  this	
  small	
  metropolitan	
  region	
  is	
  part	
  of	
  what	
  Luke	
  (2003)	
  calls	
  'global	
  cities',	
  where	
  most	
  of	
  the	
  world's	
  
	
  	
  
	
   64	
  
urban	
  population	
  still	
  lives.	
  Small	
  "g"	
  global	
  cities,	
  in	
  contrast	
  to	
  "Global"	
  cities,	
  are	
  not	
  power	
  centers	
  where	
  the	
  global	
  economy	
  is	
  organized	
  but	
  rather	
  these	
  ordinary	
  cities	
  are	
  significant	
  because	
  of	
  their	
  collective	
  ecological	
  impacts.	
  Their	
  small	
  size,	
  decentralization,	
  and	
  often-­‐limited	
  economic	
  resources	
  produces	
  huge	
  potential	
  for	
  inefficient	
  use	
  of	
  land	
  and	
  resources	
  and	
  the	
  production	
  of	
  relatively	
  large	
  levels	
  of	
  waste	
  and	
  pollution.	
  In	
  fact,	
  the	
  conceptualization	
  of	
  such	
  places	
  as	
  rural	
  contributes	
  to	
  tensions	
  and	
  contradictions	
  in	
  the	
  way	
  they	
  grow	
  and	
  how	
  growth	
  is	
  handled.	
  	
  
Contradictions	
  of	
  Growth	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  	
   Growth	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  and	
  the	
  concurrent	
  conflicts	
  around	
  how	
  to	
  grow	
  cannot	
  be	
  conceptualized	
  simply	
  as	
  a	
  matter	
  of	
  counter-­‐urbanization	
  or	
  de-­‐urbanization.	
  Neither	
  can	
  the	
  politics	
  of	
  growth	
  be	
  understood	
  as	
  a	
  straightforward	
  embrace	
  of	
  urbanization.	
  Population	
  growth	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  throughout	
  the	
  20th	
  century	
  and	
  continuing	
  to	
  today,	
  has	
  largely	
  depended	
  on	
  a	
  flow	
  of	
  migrants	
  from	
  large	
  urban	
  areas	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.	
  and	
  particularly	
  California	
  to	
  the	
  small	
  cities	
  and	
  rural	
  areas	
  in	
  the	
  county	
  (Hines,	
  2010),	
  including	
  a	
  strong	
  'back	
  to	
  the	
  land'	
  ethic	
  for	
  many	
  of	
  the	
  newcomers.	
  The	
  largest	
  in-­‐migrant	
  flows	
  into	
  the	
  region	
  over	
  the	
  past	
  30	
  years	
  have	
  consistently	
  come	
  from	
  the	
  Portland	
  metropolitan	
  region,	
  the	
  San	
  Francisco	
  Bay	
  Area,	
  and	
  the	
  Greater	
  Los	
  Angeles	
  region.	
  The	
  region	
  has	
  doubled	
  in	
  population	
  since	
  the	
  1970s	
  to	
  203,206	
  by	
  the	
  2010	
  census	
  and	
  population	
  projections	
  from	
  the	
  Portland	
  State	
  Population	
  Research	
  Center	
  have	
  predicted	
  another	
  doubling	
  within	
  the	
  next	
  50	
  years.	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   65	
  
	
  
Figure	
  8:	
  Jackson	
  County	
   	
  	
  	
   The	
  significance	
  of	
  the	
  urban	
  origins	
  of	
  migrants	
  to	
  the	
  region	
  is	
  not	
  something	
  that	
  can	
  be	
  comprehended	
  simply	
  through	
  numbers	
  of	
  new	
  arrivals.	
  What	
  emerges	
  from	
  both	
  written	
  documentation	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  processes	
  and	
  interviews	
  with	
  local	
  residents,	
  is	
  how	
  people	
  who	
  arrive	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  from	
  large	
  urban	
  centers	
  value	
  this	
  place	
  for	
  its	
  rural	
  character	
  and	
  desire	
  the	
  preserve	
  those	
  qualities.	
  It	
  is	
  this	
  attachment	
  to	
  particular	
  visions	
  of	
  what	
  it	
  means	
  to	
  be	
  rural	
  and	
  
	
  	
  
	
   66	
  
rejection	
  of	
  urbanism	
  that	
  limits	
  how	
  growth	
  takes	
  place	
  and	
  promotes	
  policies	
  that	
  damage	
  the	
  very	
  qualities	
  these	
  places	
  are	
  seeking	
  to	
  preserve.	
  	
  	
   The	
  steady,	
  ongoing	
  influx	
  of	
  new	
  migrants	
  has	
  resulted	
  in	
  a	
  growing	
  metro	
  area	
  facing	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  very	
  problems	
  residents	
  sought	
  to	
  escape	
  from.	
  Local	
  municipalities	
  are	
  struggling	
  with	
  complex	
  and	
  often	
  contradictory	
  impulses	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  ongoing	
  processes	
  of	
  growth	
  and	
  urbanization	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  including	
  minimizing	
  damage	
  to	
  sensitive	
  ecosystems,	
  maintaining	
  areas	
  of	
  open	
  space	
  and	
  farmland,	
  planning	
  for	
  increased	
  traffic	
  and	
  resulting	
  pollution,	
  competing	
  for	
  growth,	
  and	
  at	
  the	
  same	
  time	
  maintaining	
  the	
  small	
  town	
  "rural	
  character"	
  that	
  attracts	
  migrants	
  to	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  	
  	
   Much	
  of	
  the	
  population	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  is	
  fueled	
  by	
  the	
  movement	
  of	
  people	
  away	
  from	
  large	
  urban	
  centers	
  and	
  towards	
  what	
  they	
  perceive	
  to	
  be	
  a	
  largely	
  rural	
  area;	
  this	
  process	
  has	
  created	
  a	
  small	
  but	
  growing	
  urban	
  center	
  which	
  provides	
  urban	
  goods	
  and	
  services	
  for	
  a	
  rapidly	
  expanding	
  population	
  with	
  urban	
  lifestyles	
  and	
  tastes.	
  The	
  rural	
  economies	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  are	
  increasingly	
  marginalized	
  and	
  transformed	
  by	
  urban	
  desires	
  and	
  urban	
  concerns.	
  Despite	
  a	
  supposed	
  concern	
  for	
  the	
  importance	
  of	
  rural	
  economies,	
  power	
  is	
  largely	
  concentrated	
  in	
  urban	
  forms	
  of	
  governance	
  and	
  with	
  the	
  urban	
  population.	
  In	
  the	
  graphs	
  below	
  (see	
  figures	
  9	
  &	
  10)	
  it	
  is	
  possible	
  to	
  see	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  jobs	
  in	
  farming,	
  fishing,	
  and	
  forestry	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  in	
  comparison	
  to	
  other	
  metropolitan	
  and	
  non-­‐metropolitan	
  regions	
  in	
  Oregon.	
  The	
  second	
  graph	
  shows	
  the	
  percentage	
  of	
  jobs	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  the	
  total	
  number	
  in	
  each	
  region,	
  thus	
  accounting	
  for	
  differences	
  in	
  total	
  population	
  between	
  the	
  areas.	
  Both	
  as	
  a	
  total	
  number	
  and	
  as	
  a	
  percentage,	
  the	
  
	
  	
  
	
   67	
  
Medford	
  metropolitan	
  area	
  has	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  lowest	
  levels	
  in	
  the	
  state.	
  This	
  reflects	
  the	
  largely	
  non-­‐commercial	
  nature	
  of	
  farming	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  the	
  decline	
  of	
  the	
  forestry	
  industry.	
  	
  
	
  
Figure	
  9:	
  Total	
  number	
  of	
  workers	
  employed	
  in	
  farming,	
  fishing,	
  and	
  forestry	
  
in	
  2013.	
  From	
  the	
  Bureau	
  of	
  Labor	
  Statistics..	
  
	
  
Figure	
  10:	
  The	
  percentage	
  of	
  the	
  total	
  workforce	
  employed	
  in	
  farming,	
  fishing,	
  
and	
  forestry	
  in	
  2013.	
  From	
  the	
  Bureau	
  of	
  Labor	
  Statistics.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   68	
  
	
   Understanding	
  the	
  two	
  moments	
  of	
  urbanization,	
  concentration	
  and	
  extension,	
  allows	
  us	
  to	
  view	
  Jackson	
  County's	
  land	
  use	
  patterns	
  and	
  politics	
  for	
  what	
  they	
  are,	
  an	
  urbanization	
  process,	
  while	
  acknowledging	
  the	
  extensive,	
  rather	
  than	
  intensive	
  form	
  that	
  it	
  takes	
  in	
  this	
  case.	
  Extended	
  urbanization	
  acknowledges	
  what	
  has	
  often	
  been	
  called	
  counter-­‐urbanization	
  that	
  is,	
  in	
  some	
  cases,	
  a	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  urbanization	
  process.	
  Migration	
  from	
  urban	
  areas	
  and	
  exurban	
  settlement	
  patterns	
  are	
  part	
  of	
  a	
  thickening	
  and	
  extension	
  of	
  the	
  urban	
  fabric	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  	
  As	
  this	
  global	
  process	
  of	
  industrialization	
  and	
  urbanization	
  was	
  taking	
  place,	
  the	
  large	
  cities	
  exploded,	
  giving	
  rise	
  to	
  growths	
  of	
  dubious	
  value:	
  suburbs,	
  residential	
  conglomerations	
  and	
  industrial	
  complexes	
  satellite	
  cities	
  that	
  differ	
  little	
  from	
  urbanized	
  towns.	
  Small	
  and	
  midsize	
  cities	
  became	
  dependencies,	
  partial	
  colonies	
  of	
  the	
  metropolis.	
  (Lefebvre	
  2003)	
  	
  Planning	
  for	
  Growth	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  problems	
  was	
  the	
  laws	
  were	
  designed	
  for	
  the	
  Willamette	
  Valley	
  in	
  the	
  north.	
  They	
  were	
  not	
  designed	
  for	
  southern	
  Oregon,	
  which	
  has	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  smaller	
  plots	
  and	
  variable	
  plots	
  all	
  around	
  the	
  valley.	
  -­‐	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  farmer	
  
and	
  land	
  use	
  advocate.	
  	
  	
   One	
  way	
  to	
  see	
  the	
  problematic	
  effects	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  is	
  through	
  the	
  workings	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  politics	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  Oregon's	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  regulations	
  and	
  the	
  complex	
  system	
  through	
  which	
  it	
  is	
  enforced	
  create	
  a	
  strict	
  enforcement	
  of	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  dichotomy	
  at	
  the	
  level	
  of	
  individual	
  cities.	
  Each	
  incorporated	
  city	
  in	
  Oregon	
  is	
  required	
  by	
  the	
  state	
  to	
  create	
  a	
  comprehensive	
  plan,	
  which	
  designates	
  an	
  urban	
  growth	
  boundary	
  containing	
  enough	
  land	
  for	
  development	
  over	
  the	
  next	
  20	
  years.	
  In	
  principle	
  at	
  least,	
  outside	
  the	
  UGB,	
  development	
  is	
  strictly	
  limited.	
  	
  	
   The	
  history	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  and	
  pattern	
  of	
  the	
  Medford	
  metropolitan	
  region	
  however,	
  makes	
  constructing	
  a	
  strict	
  separation	
  between	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  land	
  uses	
  
	
  	
  
	
   69	
  
problematic.	
  In	
  1973,	
  when	
  the	
  statewide	
  planning	
  regulations	
  were	
  first	
  passed,	
  the	
  dominant	
  pattern	
  of	
  development	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  was	
  already	
  low-­‐density	
  rural	
  development	
  spatially	
  mixed	
  with	
  small	
  and	
  medium	
  sized	
  farms.	
  Local	
  governments	
  were	
  opposed	
  to	
  state	
  interference	
  in	
  land	
  use	
  governance,	
  and	
  so	
  resisted	
  creating	
  a	
  comprehensive	
  plan	
  for	
  more	
  than	
  seven	
  years.	
  During	
  this	
  time,	
  development	
  continued,	
  and	
  perhaps	
  even	
  accelerated,	
  as	
  land	
  owners	
  hurried	
  to	
  subdivide	
  before	
  the	
  new	
  limitations	
  where	
  put	
  into	
  place.	
  	
   In	
  the	
  1990s,	
  as	
  rapid	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  continued,	
  local	
  concern	
  about	
  sprawl	
  grew,	
  which	
  led	
  to	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  a	
  locally	
  initiated	
  effort	
  to	
  coordinate	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  The	
  development	
  of	
  this	
  regional	
  plan	
  was	
  supported	
  by	
  state	
  regulation	
  and	
  from	
  its	
  inception	
  designed	
  to	
  limit	
  development	
  on	
  the	
  small	
  amounts	
  of	
  farmland	
  and	
  open	
  space	
  left	
  in	
  the	
  valley.	
  As	
  the	
  process	
  developed	
  however,	
  the	
  influence	
  of	
  urban	
  centers	
  began	
  to	
  place	
  the	
  needs	
  of	
  urbanization	
  above	
  those	
  of	
  rural	
  preservation.	
  What	
  was	
  ostensibly	
  a	
  regional	
  planning	
  process,	
  focused	
  on	
  the	
  needs	
  of	
  the	
  region,	
  instead	
  became	
  vested	
  in	
  the	
  desire	
  for	
  growth	
  and	
  economic	
  prosperity	
  of	
  each	
  individual	
  municipality.	
  Rather	
  than	
  working	
  for	
  regional	
  goals,	
  the	
  process	
  became	
  enmeshed	
  in	
  political	
  machinations	
  in	
  which	
  individual	
  communities	
  vied	
  for	
  the	
  right	
  to	
  grow	
  and	
  develop.	
  So	
  despite	
  the	
  significant	
  discourse	
  around	
  preserving	
  rural	
  character,	
  the	
  dominating	
  focus	
  in	
  the	
  planning	
  process	
  became	
  urban	
  growth.	
  Competition	
  to	
  attract	
  development	
  ensured	
  that	
  each	
  city	
  sought	
  to	
  designate	
  the	
  largest	
  amount	
  of	
  land	
  for	
  development	
  permitted	
  by	
  state	
  regulation.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   70	
  
	
   Local	
  residents	
  with	
  concerns	
  about	
  the	
  sustainability	
  of	
  low	
  density	
  urban	
  growth	
  or	
  the	
  preservation	
  of	
  farmland	
  and	
  open	
  space	
  became	
  disillusioned	
  with	
  a	
  process	
  that	
  largely	
  seemed	
  to	
  be	
  serving	
  the	
  interests	
  of	
  local	
  real	
  estate	
  developers	
  and	
  large	
  land	
  owners.	
  The	
  ideological	
  divide	
  in	
  the	
  process	
  became	
  one	
  in	
  which	
  one	
  group	
  viewed	
  the	
  goal	
  as	
  preservation	
  of	
  rural	
  lands,	
  whereas	
  city	
  leaders	
  largely	
  became	
  focused	
  on	
  where	
  cities	
  would	
  grow.	
  On	
  the	
  surface,	
  these	
  seem	
  to	
  be	
  compatible	
  goals,	
  two	
  sides	
  of	
  the	
  same	
  coin,	
  but	
  for	
  those	
  advocating	
  higher	
  densities	
  and	
  limiting	
  the	
  loss	
  of	
  farmland,	
  placing	
  the	
  desire	
  of	
  cities	
  for	
  growth	
  first	
  insured	
  that	
  the	
  location	
  of	
  new	
  growth	
  would	
  be	
  determined	
  by	
  the	
  needs	
  of	
  cities	
  rather	
  than	
  determinations	
  of	
  which	
  lands	
  are	
  most	
  deserving	
  of	
  preservation.	
  The	
  two	
  maps	
  below	
  (see	
  figures	
  11	
  &12)	
  are	
  the	
  results	
  of	
  this	
  transition	
  from	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  both	
  urban	
  expansion	
  and	
  farmland	
  conservation.	
  The	
  Our	
  Region	
  map	
  is	
  one	
  of	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  components	
  of	
  the	
  informal	
  grassroots	
  plan.	
  After	
  12	
  years	
  and	
  a	
  formalized	
  process,	
  many	
  of	
  the	
  innovative	
  elements	
  around	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  were	
  lost	
  and	
  instead	
  the	
  focus	
  became	
  cities’	
  plans	
  for	
  urban	
  expansion.	
  	
  Urbanizing	
  Agriculture	
  	
   Extended	
  urbanization	
  also	
  puts	
  the	
  distinction	
  between	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  agriculture	
  into	
  question.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  planning	
  laws	
  strictly	
  delineate	
  spaces	
  within	
  urban	
  growth	
  boundaries	
  as	
  distinct	
  from	
  rural	
  spaces,	
  which	
  are	
  zoned	
  for	
  farm	
  use.	
  This	
  separation	
  of	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  space	
  has	
  worked	
  rather	
  well	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  limiting	
  sprawl	
  and	
  directing	
  growth	
  in	
  Oregon	
  (Gosnell	
  et	
  al.	
  2011,	
  Nelson	
  1992).	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   71	
  
	
  
Figure	
  11:	
  Our	
  Region	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  zone.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   72	
  
	
  
O
ct
ob
er
 2
01
1
Medford
Ashland
Eagle Point
Central Point
Talent
Phoenix
Jacksonville
Gold Hill
MD-5
MD-3
MD-P Prsct
CP-1B
PH-5
EP-2
MD-1
EP-3
CP-6A
MD-2
EP-4
PH-3
CP-2B
MD-4
CP-6B
TA-3
MD-6
EP-1A
MD-5
MD-9
MD-7mid
MD-P Chrsy
CP-4D
CP-1C
PH-1
MD-8
TA-1
PH-2
PH-1a
CP-3
CP-5
PH-10
TA-5
TA-4
MD-7n
MD-7s
MD-9
T-1 row
MD-9
TA-2
 
Legend
Regional Problem Solving Boundary
Urban Growth Boundary
City Limits
Urban Reserves
3 0 31.5 Miles
U
rb
a
n
 R
e
s
e
rv
e
 B
o
u
n
d
a
ri
e
s
G
re
a
te
r 
B
e
a
r 
C
re
e
k
 V
al
le
y
 -
 R
e
g
io
n
al
 P
la
n
A
tl
a
s
 P
a
g
e 
1
	
  
Figure	
  12:	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  urban	
  reserves	
  map.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   73	
  
	
  However	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  agriculture	
  outside	
  urban	
  growth	
  boundaries	
  is	
  impacted	
  in	
  numerous	
  ways	
  by	
  urbanization.	
  	
  	
   Farming	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  faces	
  the	
  pressures	
  of	
  global	
  agricultural	
  markets,	
  which	
  increasingly	
  place	
  local	
  farmers	
  in	
  the	
  position	
  of	
  competing	
  with	
  farmers	
  across	
  the	
  globe	
  and	
  even	
  over	
  broader	
  periods	
  of	
  time30.	
  It	
  is	
  not	
  uncommon	
  for	
  farmers	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  to	
  complain	
  about	
  the	
  restrictions	
  placed	
  on	
  them	
  by	
  not	
  only	
  the	
  planning	
  system	
  in	
  Oregon,	
  but	
  more	
  broadly	
  by	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  regulations	
  designed	
  to	
  uphold	
  basic	
  standards	
  for	
  workers	
  and	
  the	
  environment.	
  However,	
  the	
  onerous	
  character	
  of	
  these	
  regulations	
  comes	
  in	
  the	
  context	
  of	
  a	
  long	
  term	
  widening	
  in	
  global	
  competition	
  as	
  technologies	
  for	
  the	
  transportation	
  and	
  storage	
  of	
  delicate	
  fruits	
  have	
  developed.	
  	
  	
  	
   In	
  Jackson	
  County	
  the	
  dominant	
  fruit	
  crop	
  has	
  been	
  pears.	
  In	
  recent	
  decades,	
  pear	
  farmers	
  in	
  the	
  Pacific	
  Northwest	
  have	
  faced	
  increasing	
  competition	
  in	
  the	
  global	
  export	
  market	
  from	
  producers	
  in	
  China.	
  Growers	
  and	
  distributers	
  have	
  developed	
  more	
  and	
  more	
  sophisticated	
  ways	
  to	
  extend	
  the	
  storage	
  life	
  of	
  pears,	
  using	
  cold	
  storage	
  and	
  low	
  oxygen	
  environments	
  to	
  slow	
  ripening.	
  This	
  allowed	
  for	
  a	
  broadening	
  of	
  the	
  season	
  that	
  pears	
  from	
  the	
  U.S.	
  could	
  be	
  found	
  in	
  supermarkets.	
  The	
  extension	
  of	
  the	
  time	
  pears	
  could	
  be	
  brought	
  to	
  market	
  has	
  created	
  additional	
  competition	
  as	
  the	
  season	
  for	
  pears	
  grown	
  in	
  the	
  southern	
  hemisphere	
  now	
  significantly	
  overlaps	
  with	
  that	
  of	
  the	
  northern	
  hemisphere.	
  The	
  result	
  is	
  increasing	
  competition	
  from	
  growers	
  in	
  South	
  America.	
  All	
  of	
  this	
  results	
  in	
  lower	
  prices	
  in	
  the	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  30.	
  High	
  tech	
  storage	
  methods	
  for	
  fruit	
  have	
  allowed	
  farmers	
  in	
  the	
  Northern	
  and	
  Southern	
  Hemispheres	
  to	
  come	
  into	
  direct	
  competition	
  in	
  the	
  supermarkets	
  as	
  storage	
  times	
  have	
  extended.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   74	
  
global	
  commodity	
  market.	
  Farmers	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  are	
  well	
  aware	
  of	
  these	
  increased	
  pressures	
  and	
  their	
  own	
  connections	
  to	
  this	
  global	
  trade	
  network	
  (Davenport	
  2009).	
  The	
  largest	
  producers	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  have	
  taken	
  steps	
  to	
  globalize	
  their	
  production	
  networks,	
  buying	
  land	
  in	
  other	
  pear	
  growing	
  regions	
  globally	
  while	
  maintaining	
  a	
  presence	
  and	
  headquarters	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  	
  	
   At	
  the	
  same	
  time	
  that	
  they	
  are	
  contending	
  with	
  increasing	
  global	
  competition	
  and	
  falling	
  commodity	
  prices,	
  farmers	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  must	
  deal	
  with	
  ongoing	
  pressure	
  and	
  conflict	
  from	
  urban	
  and	
  exurban	
  neighbors	
  regarding	
  farm	
  practices.	
  Oregon	
  has	
  right	
  to	
  farm	
  laws,	
  but	
  Jackson	
  County	
  in	
  particular	
  is	
  faced	
  by	
  a	
  highly	
  intertwined	
  mix	
  of	
  urban	
  and	
  exurban	
  settlement	
  near	
  farms.	
  Additionally,	
  the	
  mix	
  of	
  small	
  family	
  farms,	
  including	
  retirement	
  and	
  lifestyle	
  farms	
  with	
  larger	
  commercial	
  operations,	
  has	
  meant	
  that	
  farmers	
  themselves	
  don’t	
  always	
  agree	
  about	
  the	
  types	
  of	
  uses	
  appropriate	
  on	
  farmland.	
  Oregon’s	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  is	
  designed	
  to	
  limit	
  conflict	
  between	
  urban	
  residents	
  and	
  farming	
  by	
  restricting	
  growth	
  and	
  development	
  on	
  and	
  near	
  farmland,	
  however	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  there	
  were	
  significant	
  areas	
  of	
  rural	
  residential	
  development	
  when	
  the	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system	
  came	
  into	
  play	
  in	
  the	
  early	
  1980s.	
  	
  	
   Certainly	
  political	
  ecologists	
  and	
  environmental	
  historians	
  should	
  be	
  well	
  aware	
  of	
  how	
  farmers	
  and	
  other	
  primary	
  sector	
  producers	
  historically	
  have	
  been	
  and	
  continue	
  to	
  be	
  incorporated	
  into	
  global	
  circuits	
  of	
  capital	
  (Cronon	
  1992).	
  However,	
  global	
  urbanization	
  puts	
  these	
  processes	
  in	
  an	
  explicitly	
  urban	
  framework.	
  Studies	
  of	
  the	
  political	
  economy	
  of	
  capitalist	
  agriculture	
  have	
  detailed	
  
	
  	
  
	
   75	
  
the	
  industrialization	
  of	
  the	
  countryside,	
  but	
  have	
  been	
  less	
  explicit	
  in	
  examining	
  how	
  this	
  process	
  has	
  been	
  tied	
  to	
  urbanization.	
  	
  	
  
Post-­‐Productivist	
  Agriculture	
  	
   While	
  the	
  growth	
  and	
  urbanization	
  pressures	
  I	
  have	
  outlined	
  so	
  far	
  seem	
  to	
  indicate	
  an	
  inevitable	
  decline	
  in	
  agriculture,	
  under	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  agriculture	
  doesn’t	
  disappear.	
  Instead	
  it	
  becomes	
  increasingly	
  subordinated	
  to	
  urban	
  markets	
  and	
  urban	
  desires.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  County	
  this	
  can	
  be	
  seen	
  through	
  the	
  growth	
  in	
  what	
  has	
  been	
  called	
  post-­‐productivist	
  agriculture	
  (Holmes	
  2002,	
  Evans,	
  Morris,	
  and	
  Winter	
  2002),	
  a	
  form	
  of	
  agriculture	
  that	
  relies	
  of	
  the	
  proximity	
  of	
  urban	
  consumers	
  even	
  as	
  it	
  trades	
  on	
  the	
  desire	
  for	
  rural	
  experiences.	
  	
  In	
  the	
  Western	
  U.S.	
  waves	
  of	
  excess	
  capital	
  have	
  found	
  new	
  frontiers	
  for	
  accumulation	
  as	
  amenity	
  migrants	
  have	
  exploded	
  into	
  rural	
  space	
  (Sayre	
  2009.)	
  	
  	
   These	
  new	
  arrivals	
  engage	
  in	
  small-­‐scale	
  production	
  on	
  their	
  properties	
  but	
  often	
  with	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  the	
  experience	
  of	
  farming,	
  or	
  rural	
  life,	
  instead	
  of	
  commodity	
  production	
  (Cadieux	
  2007).	
  This	
  urbanized	
  agriculture	
  is	
  mixed	
  with	
  exurban	
  residential	
  development,	
  and	
  also	
  exists	
  in	
  zones	
  farther	
  out	
  from	
  urban	
  areas,	
  within	
  driving	
  distance	
  but	
  too	
  far	
  out	
  for	
  significant	
  urbanization/redevelopment	
  pressure.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  the	
  growing	
  urban	
  population	
  opens	
  up	
  new	
  markets	
  for	
  agricultural	
  production	
  and	
  the	
  consumption	
  of	
  rural	
  experiences.	
  This	
  can	
  be	
  seen	
  in	
  the	
  growth	
  of	
  direct	
  marketing,	
  farmers	
  markets,	
  specialty	
  local	
  food	
  production,	
  vineyards	
  and	
  wineries	
  that	
  provide	
  food	
  and	
  wine	
  for	
  consumers	
  willing	
  to	
  pay	
  for	
  not	
  only	
  the	
  product	
  but	
  the	
  also	
  for	
  the	
  experience	
  of	
  visiting	
  the	
  farm	
  or	
  the	
  farmers	
  market	
  (see	
  figure	
  13).	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   76	
  
	
  
Figure	
  13:	
  Marketing	
  rural	
  space,	
  Hillcrest	
  Winery,	
  Medford	
  Oregon.	
  	
  Extended	
  Urbanization	
  and	
  the	
  Rural	
  Imaginary	
  	
   If	
  we	
  take	
  the	
  theory	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  seriously,	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  dichotomy	
  disappears	
  and	
  is	
  replaced	
  by	
  an	
  uneven	
  fabric	
  of	
  urban	
  space.	
  However,	
  this	
  does	
  not	
  mean	
  that	
  the	
  rural	
  disappears.	
  In	
  fact,	
  in	
  spaces	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  like	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  symbols	
  of	
  rural	
  life	
  become	
  increasingly	
  commodified	
  and	
  contested.	
  This	
  can	
  be	
  seen	
  through	
  the	
  increasing	
  prominence	
  of	
  symbols	
  of	
  rural	
  life	
  and	
  the	
  increasing	
  marketing	
  of	
  rural	
  experiences	
  and	
  rural	
  lifestyles	
  to	
  urban	
  tourists	
  and	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migrants.	
  This	
  includes	
  connections	
  to	
  farm	
  living,	
  traditional	
  small-­‐town	
  values,	
  and	
  connections	
  to	
  the	
  natural	
  landscape	
  and	
  recreation.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  County	
  the	
  marketing	
  of	
  rural	
  life	
  can	
  be	
  seen	
  in	
  real	
  estate,	
  the	
  local	
  food	
  movement,	
  and	
  particularly	
  the	
  expansion	
  of	
  vineyards	
  and	
  
	
  	
  
	
   77	
  
wineries.	
  Agri-­‐tourism	
  is	
  expanding	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  as	
  the	
  influx	
  of	
  new	
  urban	
  residents	
  grows	
  large	
  enough	
  to	
  provide	
  markets	
  for	
  rural	
  experiences.	
  The	
  growth	
  in	
  these	
  markets	
  relies,	
  somewhat	
  contradictorily,	
  on	
  the	
  presence	
  of	
  urban	
  consumers,	
  so	
  the	
  prominent	
  displays	
  of	
  rural	
  activities	
  increase	
  in	
  response	
  to	
  growing	
  urbanization.	
  	
  Alienation	
  and	
  Escaping	
  the	
  Urban	
  	
   Looking	
  at	
  growth	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  through	
  the	
  lens	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  makes	
  it	
  clear	
  that	
  simply	
  moving	
  to	
  a	
  "rural"	
  space	
  does	
  not	
  allow	
  escape	
  from	
  the	
  pressures	
  and	
  processes	
  of	
  urbanization.	
  We	
  can	
  see	
  that	
  ex-­‐urbanites	
  bring	
  urbanization	
  processes	
  with	
  them,	
  even	
  while	
  they	
  seek	
  to	
  escape	
  from	
  them.	
  The	
  literature	
  on	
  ex-­‐urban	
  transformations	
  of	
  rural	
  space	
  has,	
  to	
  date,	
  largely	
  situated	
  these	
  changes	
  as	
  part	
  of	
  ongoing	
  globalization	
  of	
  rural	
  space.31	
  Yet	
  to	
  the	
  degree	
  that	
  exurbanization	
  represents	
  the	
  commodification	
  of	
  rural	
  space—the	
  buying	
  of	
  a	
  rural	
  lifestyle—it	
  becomes	
  part	
  of	
  urbanization.	
  	
  	
   Lefebvre,	
  now	
  famous	
  for	
  his	
  work	
  on	
  urban	
  life,	
  began	
  his	
  career	
  as	
  a	
  rural	
  sociologist	
  and	
  studied	
  the	
  impacts	
  of	
  urbanization	
  on	
  traditional	
  ways	
  of	
  life	
  in	
  rural	
  France.	
  Lefebvre	
  saw	
  the	
  disappearance	
  of	
  French	
  peasant	
  life,	
  with	
  its	
  focus	
  on	
  traditions	
  and	
  collective	
  action.	
  The	
  disappearance	
  of	
  rural	
  life	
  in	
  France	
  reflected	
  increased	
  alienation	
  in	
  everyday	
  life	
  and	
  in	
  work,	
  rather	
  than	
  an	
  infiltration	
  of	
  rural	
  space	
  by	
  urban	
  settlement	
  patterns	
  (Lefebvre	
  2008).	
  In	
  "Notes	
  Written	
  One	
  Sunday",	
  Lefebvre's	
  rich	
  description	
  of	
  rural	
  festivals	
  and	
  their	
  relationship	
  to	
  everyday	
  life	
  emphasizes	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  magic	
  and	
  ritual	
  as	
  key	
  elements	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  31.	
  For	
  one	
  exception	
  see	
  Taylor	
  2009.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   78	
  
in	
  a	
  non-­‐alienated	
  everyday	
  life	
  as	
  experienced	
  in	
  peasant	
  society.	
  In	
  one	
  section	
  he	
  notes	
  how	
  community	
  festivals	
  relied	
  on	
  collective	
  contributions	
  for	
  the	
  feast	
  and	
  dialectic	
  connection	
  between	
  nature	
  and	
  human	
  life.	
  Lefebvre	
  implies	
  that	
  the	
  difference	
  in	
  these	
  rural	
  societies	
  was	
  a	
  connection	
  between	
  the	
  individual	
  and	
  the	
  community,	
  and	
  the	
  individual	
  and	
  nature	
  that	
  did	
  not	
  rely	
  on	
  the	
  commodity	
  fetish	
  and	
  so	
  promoted	
  the	
  formation	
  of	
  relationships	
  between	
  people,	
  and	
  not	
  between	
  people	
  and	
  things.	
  Urbanization	
  involved	
  alienation:	
  from	
  work,	
  from	
  community,	
  from	
  everyday	
  life	
  (Lefebvre	
  2008).	
  Understanding	
  Lefebvre's	
  conceptualization	
  of	
  everyday	
  life	
  as	
  the	
  central	
  realm	
  for	
  the	
  struggle	
  with	
  alienation	
  opens	
  up	
  a	
  deeper	
  understanding	
  of	
  the	
  underlying	
  contradictions	
  of	
  the	
  exurban	
  impulse.	
  Alienation,	
  a	
  central	
  theme	
  in	
  Lefebvre's	
  work	
  on	
  everyday	
  life,	
  connects	
  the	
  work	
  of	
  urban	
  political	
  ecologists	
  on	
  "second	
  nature",	
  metabolism,	
  and	
  circulation,	
  with	
  the	
  work	
  on	
  exurban	
  political	
  ecology,	
  which	
  highlights	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  meaning,	
  culture,	
  and	
  landscape.	
  To	
  the	
  extent	
  that	
  newly	
  arrived	
  residents	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  are	
  searching	
  for	
  ways	
  to	
  escape	
  alienation	
  and	
  attempt	
  to	
  adopt	
  the	
  lifestyle	
  and	
  values,	
  they	
  are	
  attempting	
  to	
  escape	
  urbanization	
  (see	
  figure	
  14).	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   79	
  
	
  
	
  
Figure	
  14:	
  Billboard	
  northeast	
  of	
  Medford	
  advertising	
  home	
  sites	
  with	
  
"Absolute	
  Privacy	
  Forever!!"	
  	
  Even	
  as	
  these	
  ex-­‐urban	
  migrants	
  desire	
  to	
  escape	
  the	
  urban	
  and	
  attempt	
  to	
  do	
  this	
  through	
  a	
  change	
  in	
  residential	
  location,	
  they	
  largely	
  cling	
  to	
  connections	
  to	
  the	
  broader	
  urban	
  world,	
  and	
  to	
  urban	
  ways	
  of	
  life.	
  Their	
  very	
  presence	
  also	
  fuels	
  shifts	
  in	
  the	
  way	
  that	
  nature	
  is	
  metabolized.	
  	
   As	
  in	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  studies	
  of	
  the	
  motivations	
  of	
  exurbanites	
  (Johnson	
  2008),	
  exurban	
  settlers	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  often	
  cite	
  access	
  to	
  natural	
  amenities	
  and	
  the	
  "rural	
  character"	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  as	
  motivating	
  factors	
  in	
  their	
  choice	
  to	
  buy	
  property	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  move.	
  While	
  some	
  exurbanites	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  engage	
  in	
  passive	
  consumption	
  of	
  nature	
  through	
  recreation	
  or	
  passive	
  forms	
  of	
  land	
  management,	
  active	
  engagement	
  with	
  the	
  non-­‐human	
  world	
  through	
  some	
  sort	
  of	
  labor	
  is	
  a	
  
	
  	
  
	
   80	
  
significant	
  driver	
  of	
  population	
  growth.	
  Various	
  forms	
  of	
  agricultural	
  pursuits	
  are	
  popular	
  throughout	
  the	
  valley,	
  from	
  luxury	
  equestrian	
  ranches	
  to	
  small	
  vineyards,	
  to	
  sub-­‐urban	
  and	
  ex-­‐urban	
  homesteaders	
  keeping	
  their	
  own	
  chickens	
  and	
  canning	
  their	
  own	
  pickles.	
  Through	
  these	
  pursuits	
  ex-­‐urbanites	
  attempt	
  to	
  gain	
  a	
  sense	
  of	
  themselves	
  outside	
  of	
  capital	
  modes	
  of	
  exchange	
  and	
  engage	
  in	
  a	
  non-­‐mediated	
  direct	
  relationship	
  with	
  various	
  forms	
  of	
  'nature'.	
  	
   At	
  the	
  same	
  time,	
  these	
  new	
  "hobby	
  farms"	
  or	
  consumptive	
  forms	
  of	
  agriculture	
  have,	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley,	
  resulted	
  in	
  an	
  entirely	
  new	
  secondary	
  service	
  and	
  provisioning	
  industry	
  oriented	
  towards	
  this	
  new	
  hobby	
  economy.	
  This	
  can	
  be	
  seen	
  most	
  clearly	
  in	
  the	
  growth	
  a	
  small	
  vanity	
  vineyards	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  The	
  average	
  size	
  of	
  vineyards	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  is	
  5	
  acres.	
  The	
  many	
  micro-­‐vineyards	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  are	
  serviced	
  by	
  vineyard	
  management	
  companies,	
  which	
  allow	
  ex-­‐urban	
  would-­‐be	
  wine	
  makers	
  to	
  enjoy	
  the	
  dream	
  of	
  living	
  on	
  a	
  rural	
  estate	
  with	
  its	
  own	
  vineyard	
  while	
  the	
  work	
  of	
  growing	
  the	
  grapes	
  and	
  making	
  the	
  wine	
  is	
  taken	
  care	
  of	
  by	
  others.	
  The	
  finished	
  wine,	
  bottled	
  and	
  labeled	
  is,	
  brought	
  back	
  to	
  the	
  owners	
  for	
  sale	
  or	
  private	
  distribution	
  to	
  friends	
  and	
  family.	
  	
  	
   Yet	
  for	
  all	
  their	
  professed	
  desire	
  to	
  escape	
  urban	
  life,	
  exurbanites	
  continue	
  to	
  demand	
  urban	
  levels	
  of	
  social	
  provisioning	
  and	
  consumption.	
  Medford,	
  in	
  response	
  to	
  the	
  large	
  numbers	
  of	
  retirees	
  settling	
  in	
  the	
  region,	
  has	
  become	
  a	
  major	
  center	
  for	
  the	
  medical	
  industry.	
  The	
  increasing	
  sophistication	
  and	
  urban	
  orientation	
  of	
  consumption	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  can	
  be	
  seen,	
  for	
  example,	
  in	
  the	
  arrival	
  of	
  REI	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  in	
  2012	
  (see	
  figure	
  15).	
  
	
  	
  
	
   81	
  
	
  
Figure	
  15:	
  New	
  mall	
  under	
  construction	
  in	
  west	
  Medford,	
  anchored	
  by	
  REI	
  and	
  
Trader	
  Joes.	
  
Discussion	
  and	
  Conclusion	
  	
   The	
  intention	
  of	
  this	
  paper	
  has	
  been	
  twofold:	
  first	
  to	
  examine	
  the	
  implications	
  and	
  utility	
  of	
  the	
  theory	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  for	
  political	
  ecology,	
  and	
  to	
  use	
  global	
  urbanization	
  as	
  a	
  framework	
  for	
  the	
  examination	
  of	
  the	
  contradictions	
  of	
  growth	
  in	
  my	
  case	
  study	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  Oregon.	
  	
  	
   Political	
  ecologists	
  working	
  in	
  the	
  developed	
  world	
  have	
  become	
  increasingly	
  divided	
  into	
  to	
  separate	
  camps,	
  urban	
  political	
  ecologists	
  and	
  political	
  ecologists	
  who	
  continue	
  to	
  work	
  in	
  rural	
  or	
  semi-­‐rural	
  settings.	
  Political	
  ecologists	
  in	
  the	
  rural	
  parts	
  of	
  developed	
  countries	
  have	
  largely	
  focused	
  on	
  the	
  uneven	
  production	
  of	
  environmental	
  amenities,	
  in	
  particular	
  the	
  production	
  of	
  landscapes	
  of	
  privilege	
  for	
  the	
  consumption	
  of	
  the	
  wealthy.	
  Whereas	
  urban	
  political	
  ecologists	
  have	
  tended	
  to	
  focus	
  on	
  the	
  metabolization	
  of	
  nature	
  by	
  the	
  processes	
  of	
  urbanization	
  and	
  the	
  ways	
  that	
  this	
  process	
  produces	
  landscapes	
  of	
  environmental	
  injustice.	
  This	
  division	
  is,	
  in	
  
	
  	
  
	
   82	
  
some	
  ways,	
  to	
  be	
  expected;	
  uneven	
  development	
  produces	
  a	
  world	
  in	
  which	
  privilege	
  and	
  deprivation	
  are	
  often	
  strongly	
  spatially	
  differentiated.	
  	
  Additionally	
  political	
  ecology	
  studies	
  tend	
  to	
  be	
  strongly	
  tied	
  to	
  places	
  and	
  processes	
  at	
  the	
  local	
  scale.	
  However,	
  the	
  production	
  of	
  landscapes	
  of	
  pastoral	
  delight	
  for	
  the	
  consumption	
  of	
  the	
  privileged	
  and	
  the	
  production	
  of	
  contaminated	
  extractive	
  landscapes	
  are	
  both	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  same	
  processes	
  of	
  uneven	
  development	
  (Smith	
  2008).	
  	
  	
   It	
  is	
  important	
  to	
  not	
  lose	
  sight	
  of	
  the	
  broader	
  processes	
  at	
  work	
  that	
  produce	
  these	
  uneven	
  landscapes.	
  While	
  some	
  urban	
  political	
  ecologists	
  have	
  taken	
  an	
  important	
  step	
  forward	
  in	
  moving	
  away	
  from	
  methodological	
  cityism,	
  additional	
  steps	
  need	
  to	
  be	
  taken	
  to	
  address	
  the	
  theoretical	
  and	
  geographic	
  divide	
  in	
  political	
  ecology.	
  In	
  such	
  a	
  sprawling	
  field,	
  it	
  is	
  often	
  easy	
  to	
  segregate	
  one's	
  focus	
  by	
  geographic	
  location	
  or	
  resource	
  type,	
  but	
  dialog	
  across	
  the	
  divide	
  is	
  essential.	
  This	
  will	
  mean	
  that	
  as	
  UPE	
  moves	
  away	
  from	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  cities	
  and	
  towards	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  urbanization	
  processes,	
  it	
  will	
  have	
  to	
  acknowledge	
  already	
  existing	
  bodies	
  of	
  literature	
  on	
  non-­‐urban,	
  ex-­‐urban,	
  and	
  zwischenstadt	
  landscapes	
  (Sieverts	
  2003).	
  	
  This	
  literature	
  includes	
  significant	
  work	
  by	
  political	
  ecologists	
  on	
  the	
  cultural	
  politics	
  of	
  amenity	
  migration	
  (Walker	
  and	
  Fortmann	
  2003,	
  Cadieux	
  and	
  Taylor	
  2013)	
  and	
  exurbanization.	
  Additionally,	
  there	
  is	
  a	
  largely	
  unacknowledged	
  body	
  of	
  work	
  on	
  the	
  urbanization	
  of	
  previously	
  "rural"	
  subsistence	
  activities	
  including	
  activities	
  such	
  as	
  gathering	
  non-­‐timber	
  forest	
  products	
  (Hurley	
  et	
  al.	
  2008).	
  	
  	
   In	
  order	
  to	
  move	
  away	
  from	
  an	
  exclusive	
  focus	
  on	
  cities,	
  UPE	
  will	
  have	
  to	
  acknowledge	
  the	
  ways	
  those	
  rural	
  ideals	
  and	
  ideologies	
  of	
  nature	
  will	
  continue	
  to	
  
	
  	
  
	
   83	
  
shape	
  urbanization	
  processes.	
  Particularly	
  as	
  urbanization	
  processes	
  increasingly	
  extend	
  beyond	
  what	
  is	
  widely	
  recognized	
  as	
  urban	
  landscapes.	
  	
  	
   At	
  the	
  same	
  time,	
  researchers	
  steeped	
  in	
  the	
  literature	
  on	
  exurban	
  and	
  rural	
  resource	
  conflicts	
  would	
  benefit	
  from	
  a	
  theoretical	
  engagement	
  with	
  global	
  urbanization.	
  In	
  particular,	
  an	
  UPE	
  analysis	
  of	
  exurbanization	
  would	
  shift	
  the	
  focus	
  from	
  exurbanites	
  and	
  locals	
  and	
  flows	
  of	
  discourse	
  by	
  situating	
  those	
  discourses	
  within	
  flows	
  of	
  capital	
  and	
  materials.	
  Abrams	
  et	
  al.	
  (2012)	
  have	
  suggested	
  that	
  while	
  we	
  now	
  know	
  a	
  significant	
  amount	
  about	
  amenity	
  migrants	
  themselves,	
  we	
  know	
  less	
  about	
  the	
  other	
  actors	
  involved	
  with	
  facilitating	
  the	
  "green	
  sprawl"	
  process	
  such	
  as	
  real	
  estate	
  developers,	
  local	
  boosters,	
  builders,	
  land	
  owners,	
  and	
  speculators.	
  	
  	
   For	
  me,	
  the	
  value	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  is	
  in	
  encouraging	
  researchers	
  and	
  activists	
  alike	
  to	
  consider	
  not	
  only	
  urban	
  sustainability	
  or	
  rural	
  sustainability,	
  but	
  rather	
  to	
  contemplate	
  the	
  broad	
  range	
  of	
  settlement	
  types	
  and	
  how	
  patterns	
  in	
  one	
  place	
  might	
  be	
  related	
  to	
  patterns	
  in	
  another	
  place.	
  Continuing	
  to	
  focus	
  on	
  a	
  simplistic	
  form	
  urban-­‐rural	
  dichotomy	
  tends	
  to	
  limit	
  our	
  thinking	
  about	
  potential	
  solutions	
  for	
  resource	
  intensive	
  land	
  uses.	
  While	
  discussions	
  of	
  the	
  growth	
  in	
  urban	
  agriculture	
  and	
  the	
  increasing	
  globalization	
  of	
  the	
  countryside	
  have	
  been	
  ongoing	
  for	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  years,	
  both	
  these	
  patterns	
  are	
  encompassed	
  within	
  the	
  framework	
  of	
  global	
  urbanization	
  and	
  Levefbre’s	
  writings	
  on	
  alienation	
  potentially	
  facilitating	
  our	
  ability	
  to	
  consider	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  these	
  phenomenon	
  within	
  broader	
  patterns	
  of	
  development.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   84	
  
	
  
CHAPTER	
  V	
  
A	
  STICKY	
  SITUATION:	
  PRESERVING	
  HIGH	
  VALUE	
  SOIL	
  OR	
  	
  
COMMERCIAL	
  AGRICULTURE?	
  	
  
	
  	
   This	
  is	
  a	
  story	
  about	
  dirt,	
  dirt	
  that	
  turns	
  into	
  mud	
  when	
  it	
  rains.	
  And	
  not	
  just	
  any	
  mud;	
  this	
  mud	
  sticks	
  to	
  your	
  boots	
  as	
  you	
  walk	
  until	
  your	
  feet	
  are	
  heavy	
  with	
  the	
  accumulating	
  clay.	
  During	
  hot	
  dry	
  summers	
  this	
  dirt	
  transforms	
  into	
  a	
  cracked	
  cement.	
  A	
  hundred	
  years	
  ago,	
  the	
  farmers	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  called	
  this	
  dirt,	
  which	
  trapped	
  their	
  buggies	
  in	
  winter	
  and	
  stymied	
  their	
  attempts	
  to	
  plant	
  in	
  summer,	
  "The	
  Big	
  Sticky."	
  They	
  have	
  been	
  cursing	
  and	
  fighting	
  over	
  this	
  dirt	
  for	
  over	
  a	
  hundred	
  years.	
  This	
  dirt	
  has	
  made	
  fortunes32	
  for	
  some	
  and	
  bankrupted	
  others.33	
  But	
  this	
  story	
  is	
  not	
  just	
  about	
  dirt,	
  it	
  is	
  about	
  the	
  political	
  battle	
  over	
  whether	
  this	
  particular	
  dirt	
  will	
  be	
  saved	
  from	
  paving	
  over.	
  Since	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  statewide	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  in	
  1973,	
  farmers,	
  landowners,	
  politicians,	
  and	
  planners	
  have	
  been	
  fighting	
  over	
  which	
  farmland	
  to	
  save	
  from	
  development	
  and	
  who	
  gets	
  to	
  decide.	
  	
  	
   In	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  continuing	
  opposition	
  to	
  statewide	
  control	
  over	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  has	
  led	
  to	
  efforts	
  to	
  localize	
  decision-­‐making.	
  This	
  paper	
  examines	
  the	
  politics	
  of	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  In	
  particular,	
  I	
  analyze	
  the	
  political	
  economy	
  of	
  farming	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  how	
  shifts	
  in	
  the	
  rural	
  economy	
  have	
  shaped	
  the	
  debate	
  over	
  which	
  farmlands	
  should	
  be	
  preserved.	
  The	
  details	
  of	
  this	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  32.	
  Arthur	
  M.	
  Geary,	
  "Enormous	
  Wealth	
  of	
  Rogue	
  River	
  Orchards,"	
  Morning	
  Oregonian,	
  Portland,	
  September	
  5,	
  1909,	
  page	
  F2	
  	
  33.	
  Medford	
  Mail	
  Tribune,	
  Feb	
  17,	
  2002	
  "A	
  sticky	
  situation."	
  
	
  	
  
	
   85	
  
case	
  are	
  particular	
  to	
  the	
  unique	
  regulatory	
  context	
  of	
  Oregon,	
  but	
  the	
  broad	
  characteristics	
  have	
  implications	
  for	
  land	
  use	
  governance	
  in	
  regions	
  experiencing	
  growth.	
  Farmland	
  conservation	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  has	
  put	
  everyone	
  involved	
  in	
  a	
  sticky	
  political	
  situation.	
  	
   My	
  investigation	
  of	
  this	
  case	
  takes	
  place	
  in	
  the	
  context	
  of	
  what	
  Brown	
  and	
  Purcell	
  (2005)	
  have	
  called	
  the	
  local	
  trap.	
  That	
  is	
  the	
  assumption	
  that	
  local	
  "community	
  based"	
  management	
  of	
  natural	
  resources	
  will	
  lead	
  to	
  beneficial	
  social	
  and	
  ecological	
  outcomes.	
  This	
  case,	
  however	
  examines	
  the	
  particular	
  political,	
  economic,	
  and	
  ecological	
  factors	
  that	
  have	
  led	
  to	
  a	
  change	
  in	
  the	
  scale	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  governance	
  and	
  asks	
  why	
  this	
  change	
  has	
  taken	
  place	
  and	
  what	
  the	
  implications	
  of	
  this	
  change	
  might	
  be	
  for	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  in	
  Oregon.	
  	
  	
   This	
  chapter	
  examines	
  efforts	
  to	
  relieve	
  longstanding	
  tensions	
  over	
  farmland	
  protection	
  in	
  Oregon	
  through	
  engagement	
  in	
  scalar	
  politics	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon.	
  It	
  begins	
  with	
  an	
  overview	
  of	
  how	
  Oregon's	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system	
  tries	
  to	
  minimize	
  growth	
  onto	
  the	
  state's	
  most	
  valuable	
  farmlands.	
  In	
  particular	
  I	
  focus	
  on	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  Process,	
  a	
  long	
  term	
  planning	
  effort	
  that	
  allowed	
  the	
  redefinition	
  of	
  which	
  agricultural	
  lands	
  near	
  growing	
  cities	
  should	
  be	
  preserved	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  knowledge	
  of	
  local	
  agriculturalists	
  rather	
  than	
  state	
  definitions.	
  I	
  then	
  examine	
  of	
  the	
  political	
  and	
  economic	
  contradictions	
  inherent	
  in	
  the	
  complex	
  task	
  of	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  	
  It	
  studies	
  the	
  ongoing	
  efforts	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  to	
  redefine	
  which	
  lands	
  are	
  designated	
  "high	
  value	
  farmland"	
  and	
  considers	
  the	
  challenges	
  of	
  mixing	
  conservation	
  and	
  private	
  property	
  rights.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   86	
  
	
  
Land	
  Use	
  Governance	
  in	
  Oregon	
  	
  	
  
	
   	
  	
  Oregon's	
  famed	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  system	
  was	
  controversial	
  from	
  the	
  start	
  and	
  has	
  been	
  the	
  subject	
  of	
  ongoing	
  debate	
  and	
  modification	
  in	
  the	
  more	
  than	
  40	
  years	
  since	
  its	
  passage.	
  While	
  the	
  system	
  regulates	
  a	
  wide	
  variety	
  of	
  uses,	
  Goal	
  3	
  (see	
  Figure	
  16),	
  which	
  prioritizes	
  the	
  conservation	
  of	
  farmlands	
  was	
  central	
  both	
  to	
  the	
  establishment	
  of	
  the	
  system	
  and	
  ongoing	
  debates	
  over	
  its	
  effectiveness	
  and	
  fairness.	
  The	
  creation	
  of	
  this	
  system	
  was	
  made	
  possible	
  politically	
  by	
  a	
  coalition	
  of	
  
Oregon's	
  19	
  Statewide	
  Planning	
  Goals	
  Goal	
  1:	
  Citizen	
  Involvement	
  	
  Goal	
  2:	
  Land	
  Use	
  Planning	
  	
  Goal	
  3:	
  Agricultural	
  Lands	
  	
  Goal	
  4:	
  Forest	
  Lands	
  	
  Goal	
  5:	
  Natural	
  Resources,	
  Scenic	
  and	
  Historic	
  Areas,	
  and	
  Open	
  Spaces	
  	
  Goal	
  6:	
  Air,	
  Water	
  and	
  Land	
  Resources	
  Quality	
  	
  Goal	
  7:	
  Areas	
  Subject	
  to	
  Natural	
  Hazards	
  	
  Goal	
  8:	
  Recreational	
  Needs	
  	
  Goal	
  9:	
  Economic	
  Development	
  	
  Goal	
  10:	
  Housing	
  	
  Goal	
  11:	
  Public	
  Facilities	
  and	
  Services	
  	
  Goal	
  12:	
  Transportation	
  	
  Goal	
  13:	
  Energy	
  Conservation	
  	
  Goal	
  14:	
  Urbanization	
  Goal	
  15:	
  Willamette	
  River	
  Greenway	
  	
  Goal	
  16:	
  Estuarine	
  Resources	
  	
  Goal	
  17:	
  Coastal	
  Shorelands	
  	
  Goal	
  18:	
  Beaches	
  and	
  Dunes	
  	
  Goal	
  19:	
  Ocean	
  Resources	
  	
  
Figure	
  16.	
  Oregon's	
  Statewide	
  Planning	
  Goals	
  
	
  	
  
	
   87	
  
some	
  Williamette	
  Valley	
  farmers	
  concerned	
  with	
  encroachment	
  by	
  urban	
  growth	
  and	
  environmentally	
  oriented	
  urban	
  residents	
  who	
  were	
  broadly	
  supportive	
  of	
  limiting	
  sprawl	
  onto	
  rural	
  lands	
  (Walker	
  and	
  Hurley	
  2011).	
  The	
  goals	
  of	
  these	
  two	
  groups	
  have	
  not	
  always	
  aligned	
  and	
  the	
  question	
  of	
  what	
  exactly	
  is	
  being	
  preserved	
  and	
  for	
  what	
  purpose	
  often	
  becomes	
  a	
  point	
  of	
  conflict.	
  Although	
  Goal	
  3	
  clearly	
  states	
  that	
  farmland	
  is	
  to	
  be	
  preserved	
  for	
  commercial	
  farming	
  because	
  of	
  the	
  economic	
  importance	
  of	
  the	
  agricultural	
  economy	
  to	
  the	
  State,	
  many	
  agricultural	
  producers	
  view	
  the	
  system	
  as	
  working	
  for	
  the	
  desires	
  of	
  urban	
  residents	
  for	
  bucolic	
  rural	
  scenery	
  rather	
  than	
  supporting	
  the	
  needs	
  of	
  farmers	
  to	
  make	
  a	
  living	
  from	
  the	
  land.	
  	
  	
   Many	
  farmers	
  outside	
  of	
  the	
  Williamette	
  Valley	
  in	
  particular	
  opposed	
  statewide	
  planning	
  from	
  the	
  start.	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  respond	
  to	
  concerns	
  of	
  various	
  interest	
  groups,	
  the	
  Oregon	
  legislature	
  has	
  enacted	
  various	
  modifications	
  to	
  state	
  planning	
  regulations	
  in	
  almost	
  every	
  legislative	
  session	
  since	
  1973.	
  The	
  vast	
  majority	
  of	
  these	
  modifications	
  were	
  designed	
  to	
  clarify	
  the	
  goals	
  of	
  the	
  program	
  or	
  intended	
  to	
  provide	
  increased	
  flexibility	
  to	
  permit	
  uses	
  determined	
  to	
  be	
  compatible	
  with	
  farm	
  uses	
  (see	
  figure	
  17).	
  	
  	
   Private	
  property	
  rights	
  advocates	
  maintain	
  that	
  Oregon's	
  land	
  use	
  regulations	
  constitute	
  a	
  "regulatory	
  taking"	
  of	
  the	
  rights	
  of	
  landowners.	
  This	
  assertion	
  became	
  the	
  basis	
  for	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  Measure	
  37	
  in	
  2004,	
  which	
  substantially	
  weakened	
  the	
  limitations	
  on	
  how	
  land	
  owners	
  could	
  use	
  their	
  rural	
  parcels	
  by	
  requiring	
  local	
  governments	
  to	
  compensate	
  land	
  owners,	
  who	
  owned	
  the	
  land	
  before	
  1973,	
  for	
  any	
  laws	
  that	
  limited	
  owners'	
  ability	
  to	
  use	
  their	
  land	
  in	
  any	
  way	
  desired.	
  The	
  financial	
  
	
  	
  
	
   88	
  
and	
  regulatory	
  mayhem	
  caused	
  by	
  Measure	
  37	
  was	
  reduced	
  with	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  Measure	
  49	
  in	
  2007,	
  which	
  permits	
  some	
  limited	
  additional	
  development	
  rights	
  for	
  property	
  owners	
  without	
  allowing	
  unlimited	
  development	
  on	
  rural	
  lands.	
  	
  
	
  
Figure	
  17:	
  Political	
  Cartoon,	
  Capital	
  Press,	
  Feb.	
  11,	
  2000	
  	
  	
   While	
  the	
  controversial	
  efforts	
  of	
  property	
  rights	
  advocates,	
  represented	
  by	
  the	
  struggle	
  to	
  pass	
  and	
  then	
  repeal	
  Measure	
  37	
  along	
  with	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  earlier	
  bills	
  designed	
  to	
  weaken	
  anti-­‐sprawl	
  regulation	
  in	
  Oregon,	
  took	
  place	
  at	
  the	
  state	
  level,	
  a	
  separate	
  yet	
  related	
  argument	
  has	
  challenged	
  the	
  Oregon	
  land	
  use	
  system	
  through	
  efforts	
  to	
  localize	
  decision	
  making	
  and	
  call	
  for	
  increased	
  decision	
  making	
  power	
  for	
  the	
  local	
  community.	
  The	
  perceived	
  strong	
  urban-­‐rural	
  divide	
  in	
  Oregon	
  between	
  the	
  Portland-­‐Williamette	
  Valley	
  region	
  and	
  the	
  rest	
  of	
  the	
  state	
  has	
  resulted	
  in	
  ongoing	
  debates	
  over	
  whether	
  land	
  use	
  laws	
  designed	
  to	
  protect	
  the	
  Williamette	
  Valley	
  from	
  growth	
  in	
  the	
  Portland	
  Metro	
  area	
  are	
  appropriate	
  and	
  effective	
  in	
  other	
  parts	
  of	
  the	
  state.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   89	
  
	
   The	
  argument	
  is	
  that	
  rural	
  portions	
  of	
  the	
  state	
  face	
  different	
  economic	
  and	
  ecological	
  conditions	
  and	
  that	
  urban	
  Portland	
  area	
  politicians	
  and	
  their	
  constituencies	
  fail	
  to	
  understand	
  the	
  realities	
  of	
  rural	
  livelihoods	
  in	
  the	
  rest	
  of	
  the	
  state.	
  Landowners,	
  politicians,	
  and	
  private	
  property	
  rights	
  activists	
  from	
  eastern	
  and	
  southern	
  Oregon	
  have	
  waged	
  an	
  ongoing	
  effort	
  to	
  weaken	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  regulations	
  through	
  engaging	
  in	
  a	
  scalar	
  politics.	
  They	
  argue	
  that	
  the	
  land	
  use	
  decisions	
  should	
  be	
  made	
  by	
  local	
  leaders	
  who	
  best	
  understand	
  the	
  needs	
  and	
  desires	
  of	
  local	
  people,	
  local	
  economies,	
  and	
  local	
  ecological	
  conditions.	
  Planners	
  and	
  supporters	
  of	
  the	
  system	
  have	
  largely	
  dismissed	
  these	
  campaigns	
  as	
  simply	
  an	
  outgrowth	
  of	
  greedy	
  landowners	
  valuing	
  their	
  own	
  profits	
  over	
  public	
  goods.	
  	
  	
   One	
  of	
  the	
  legislative	
  mechanisms	
  created	
  by	
  state	
  government	
  in	
  the	
  1990s	
  for	
  increased	
  flexibility	
  from	
  state	
  regulations	
  is	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving.	
  Rapid	
  population	
  growth	
  during	
  the	
  1990s	
  in	
  Oregon	
  increased	
  challenges	
  for	
  statewide	
  planning.	
  Regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  was	
  designed	
  to	
  allow	
  for	
  limited	
  variance	
  from	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  regulations	
  but	
  requires	
  that	
  the	
  variance	
  still	
  adheres	
  to	
  the	
  spirit	
  of	
  the	
  state	
  wide	
  goals.	
  In	
  exchange	
  for	
  this	
  variance	
  from	
  regulations,	
  the	
  state	
  requires	
  regional	
  cooperation	
  that	
  is	
  the	
  inclusion	
  of	
  all	
  state	
  and	
  local	
  agencies	
  and	
  other	
  local	
  stakeholders	
  in	
  the	
  process.	
  	
  	
   Regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  is	
  a	
  compromise	
  between	
  demands	
  for	
  local	
  control	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  governance	
  and	
  the	
  statewide	
  regulatory	
  system.	
  As	
  Abrams	
  and	
  Gosnell	
  (2012)	
  note	
  in	
  describing	
  regional	
  other	
  variations	
  in	
  Oregon's	
  planning	
  regulations,	
  the	
  state	
  retains	
  some	
  measure	
  of	
  "command	
  and	
  control"	
  under	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving.	
  Therefore	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  is	
  not	
  simple	
  
	
  	
  
	
   90	
  
devolution	
  of	
  authority,	
  but	
  rather	
  an	
  attempt	
  by	
  state	
  government	
  to	
  acknowledge	
  concerns	
  about	
  the	
  "top	
  down"	
  nature	
  of	
  Oregon's	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system	
  and	
  recognize	
  the	
  increasing	
  dominance	
  of	
  discourses	
  of	
  community	
  based	
  natural	
  resource	
  management	
  within	
  policy	
  and	
  planning	
  circles.	
  	
  
Methods	
  	
   This	
  research	
  is	
  based	
  on	
  a	
  mixed	
  method	
  approach	
  involving	
  interviews,	
  observation,	
  discourse	
  analysis	
  of	
  document,	
  and	
  GIS	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  examine	
  the	
  political	
  struggle	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  over	
  farmland	
  conservation.	
  Between	
  2009	
  and	
  2012,	
  I	
  conducted	
  52	
  open-­‐ended	
  interviews	
  with	
  landowners,	
  farmers,	
  planners,	
  state	
  agency	
  staff,	
  and	
  elected	
  officials	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  Interviews	
  began	
  with	
  key	
  actors	
  within	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  Process	
  and	
  expanded	
  through	
  purposeful	
  sampling,	
  which	
  was	
  designed	
  reach	
  out	
  to	
  stakeholders	
  with	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  outlooks	
  and	
  roles	
  in	
  land	
  use	
  governance.	
  In	
  addition,	
  during	
  that	
  time	
  I	
  observed	
  more	
  than	
  ten	
  public	
  meetings	
  around	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  and	
  farmland	
  preservation	
  issues.	
  	
  	
   I	
  supplemented	
  these	
  interviews	
  and	
  field	
  observations	
  with	
  a	
  review	
  of	
  the	
  thousands	
  of	
  pages	
  of	
  documents	
  on	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  processes.	
  I	
  was	
  also	
  able	
  to	
  access	
  recordings	
  of	
  31	
  meetings	
  of	
  the	
  Rural	
  Lands	
  Resource	
  Committee,	
  the	
  local	
  group,	
  which	
  was	
  in	
  charge	
  of	
  designating	
  which	
  rural	
  lands	
  near	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Valley	
  cities	
  were	
  most	
  important	
  for	
  agriculture.	
  These	
  meetings	
  largely	
  took	
  place	
  between	
  2000	
  and	
  2002,	
  but	
  the	
  group	
  continued	
  to	
  meet	
  sporadically	
  until	
  2005.	
  The	
  GIS	
  data	
  used	
  in	
  my	
  analysis	
  of	
  soil	
  types,	
  land	
  cover,	
  property	
  ownership,	
  
	
  	
  
	
   91	
  
zoning,	
  and	
  taxation	
  were	
  provided	
  by	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  the	
  Oregon	
  Department	
  of	
  Forestry,	
  and	
  the	
  Oregon	
  Department	
  of	
  Agriculture.	
  	
  
Setting	
  	
   Jackson	
  County	
  is	
  located	
  in	
  southern	
  Oregon,	
  west	
  of	
  the	
  Cascades	
  and	
  north	
  of	
  the	
  California	
  border	
  and	
  the	
  Klamath	
  National	
  Forest.	
  More	
  than	
  eight	
  percent	
  of	
  the	
  land	
  in	
  the	
  county	
  is	
  considered	
  forest	
  resource	
  land	
  and	
  slightly	
  more	
  than	
  fifty	
  percent	
  of	
  lands	
  are	
  publicly	
  owned.	
  Lumber	
  and	
  farming	
  were	
  the	
  predominant	
  economic	
  drivers	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  for	
  much	
  of	
  the	
  20th	
  century.	
  However	
  forestry	
  and	
  lumber	
  industries	
  have	
  faced	
  declines	
  in	
  recent	
  decades	
  as	
  rural	
  restructuring	
  took	
  hold.	
  Increased	
  international	
  competition,	
  technological	
  innovations	
  that	
  reduced	
  need	
  for	
  labor,	
  and	
  consolidation	
  reduced	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  jobs	
  available	
  in	
  agriculture,	
  timber,	
  and	
  mining.	
  	
  	
   In	
  the	
  late	
  1980s	
  this	
  region	
  became	
  a	
  hotspot	
  for	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  most	
  well	
  know	
  land	
  use	
  conflicts	
  in	
  the	
  western	
  U.S.,	
  the	
  "spotted	
  owl	
  wars."	
  The	
  conflict	
  over	
  the	
  fate	
  of	
  old	
  growth	
  forests	
  and	
  logging	
  on	
  public	
  lands	
  was	
  fueled	
  by	
  the	
  large	
  number	
  of	
  newly	
  arrived	
  urban	
  to	
  rural	
  migrants	
  who	
  brought	
  with	
  them	
  new	
  attitudes	
  towards	
  conservation	
  and	
  public	
  goods.	
  These	
  included	
  many	
  idealistic	
  back-­‐to-­‐the-­‐land	
  counter	
  culture	
  types	
  and	
  middle	
  class	
  homeowners.	
  	
  	
  	
   Less	
  well	
  known	
  outside	
  the	
  region	
  is	
  the	
  equally	
  contentious	
  politics	
  of	
  farmland	
  conservation,	
  brought	
  on	
  by	
  rapid	
  rural	
  gentrification	
  and	
  unintentionally	
  exacerbated	
  by	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  planning.	
  Comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  regulation	
  had	
  provisions	
  for	
  moderate	
  and	
  low	
  income	
  housing	
  within	
  towns	
  and	
  cities,	
  but	
  limited	
  subdivision	
  and	
  the	
  building	
  of	
  new	
  homes	
  on	
  rural	
  
	
  	
  
	
   92	
  
parcels,	
  pushing	
  low	
  income	
  residents	
  out	
  of	
  rural	
  areas	
  and	
  into	
  towns	
  (Brown	
  1995).	
  Initial	
  iterations	
  of	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  did	
  little	
  to	
  slow	
  gentrification	
  and	
  low-­‐density	
  sprawl	
  on	
  farmland.	
  New	
  arrivals	
  continued	
  to	
  trade	
  in	
  moderate	
  homes	
  in	
  California's	
  inflated	
  real	
  estate	
  markets	
  for	
  large	
  rural	
  properties	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  and	
  build	
  palatial	
  homes	
  on	
  them.	
  	
  Depreciation	
  in	
  the	
  agricultural	
  infrastructure,	
  increasing	
  global	
  competition,	
  and	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  worker	
  and	
  environmental	
  protection	
  laws	
  led	
  to	
  rising	
  operational	
  costs	
  and	
  declining	
  profits	
  for	
  farmers.	
  This,	
  combined	
  with	
  an	
  aging	
  farmer	
  population,	
  led	
  many	
  small	
  commercial	
  farmers	
  to	
  sell	
  their	
  land.	
  The	
  combination	
  of	
  declining	
  rural	
  industries,	
  rapid	
  growth	
  and	
  gentrification,	
  and	
  restrictive	
  land	
  use	
  regulations	
  has	
  exacerbated	
  broad	
  political	
  divides	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  over	
  how	
  best	
  to	
  balance	
  private	
  property	
  rights	
  and	
  public	
  goods	
  in	
  the	
  governance	
  of	
  land	
  use.	
  	
   The	
  early	
  proliferation	
  of	
  rural	
  sprawl	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  can	
  be	
  attributed	
  to	
  both	
  the	
  physical	
  geography	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  the	
  historical	
  development	
  of	
  the	
  regional	
  economy.	
  In	
  contrast	
  to	
  the	
  wide	
  valley	
  floors	
  and	
  rich,	
  deep	
  soils	
  of	
  the	
  Williamette	
  Valley	
  or	
  California's	
  Great	
  Central	
  Valley,	
  Jackson	
  County	
  is	
  largely	
  mountainous	
  and	
  the	
  rich	
  soils	
  needed	
  for	
  most	
  crop	
  production	
  lie	
  in	
  narrow	
  bands	
  along	
  the	
  riparian	
  flood	
  plains	
  of	
  the	
  many	
  small	
  rivers	
  and	
  streams	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  Towns	
  and	
  cities	
  grew	
  up	
  on	
  the	
  relatively	
  flat	
  floor	
  of	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Valley,	
  covering	
  much	
  of	
  the	
  best	
  soil	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  The	
  valley's	
  Mediterranean	
  climate	
  and	
  
	
  	
  
	
   93	
  
location	
  in	
  the	
  rain	
  shadow	
  of	
  the	
  Siskiyou	
  Mountains	
  made	
  easy	
  access	
  to	
  water	
  key	
  challenge	
  for	
  early	
  agriculturalists.34	
  	
  	
   Outside	
  these	
  narrow	
  bands	
  of	
  riparian	
  soil,	
  much	
  of	
  the	
  soil	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  is	
  rocky	
  and	
  sloping,	
  more	
  appropriate	
  for	
  less	
  intensive	
  uses	
  such	
  as	
  grazing	
  cattle.	
  Yet	
  the	
  early	
  parcelization	
  of	
  the	
  landscape	
  by	
  real	
  estate	
  speculators	
  left	
  few	
  areas	
  large	
  enough	
  to	
  support	
  a	
  commercial	
  scale	
  cattle	
  operation.	
  Rather,	
  marginal	
  lands	
  provided	
  low	
  income	
  residents	
  the	
  opportunity	
  to	
  creatively	
  piece	
  together	
  a	
  living	
  from	
  a	
  mix	
  of	
  land	
  based	
  subsistence	
  activities	
  and	
  seasonal	
  work	
  in	
  the	
  timber	
  and	
  agricultural	
  industries.	
  By	
  the	
  1980s,	
  when	
  Jackson	
  County's	
  first	
  comprehensive	
  plan	
  was	
  put	
  into	
  put	
  into	
  place,	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Valley	
  was	
  already	
  covered	
  in	
  a	
  patchwork	
  of	
  moderately	
  size	
  commercial	
  farms	
  and	
  small	
  residential	
  parcels.	
  This	
  mix	
  of	
  small	
  holders	
  and	
  rural	
  gentrification	
  with	
  commercial	
  agricultural	
  production	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  made	
  regulating	
  the	
  rural	
  landscape	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  a	
  highly	
  complex	
  and	
  controversial	
  process.	
  	
   Resistance	
  to	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  policies	
  has	
  been	
  longstanding	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  The	
  passage	
  of	
  Senate	
  Bill	
  100	
  only	
  served	
  to	
  increase	
  the	
  rate	
  of	
  rural	
  subdivision	
  as	
  land	
  owners	
  took	
  advantage	
  of	
  the	
  delay	
  between	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  the	
  law	
  and	
  the	
  creation	
  of	
  the	
  county's	
  comprehensive	
  plan	
  (Aklin	
  1995).	
  Even	
  after	
  the	
  plan	
  was	
  put	
  in	
  place	
  in	
  1983	
  the	
  county	
  continued	
  to	
  approve	
  dwellings	
  on	
  lands	
  it	
  considered	
  marginal	
  for	
  farm	
  and	
  forest	
  production,	
  violating	
  state	
  policy	
  and	
  provoking	
  a	
  lawsuit	
  by	
  the	
  Jackson	
  County	
  Citizens	
  League,	
  a	
  local	
  watchdog	
  group.	
  For	
  several	
  years,	
  DLCD	
  seized	
  control	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County’s	
  planning.	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  34.	
  Medford	
  averages	
  about	
  18	
  inches	
  of	
  precipitation	
  a	
  year,	
  a	
  comparable	
  amount	
  to	
  the	
  Sacramento	
  Valley.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   94	
  
	
   Reverence	
  for	
  private	
  property	
  rights	
  and	
  aversion	
  for	
  government	
  interference	
  is	
  common	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon,	
  an	
  isolated	
  rural	
  region	
  that	
  attracts	
  residents	
  looking	
  for	
  an	
  independent	
  lifestyle.35	
  Politically	
  both	
  new	
  arrivals	
  and	
  long	
  term	
  residents	
  tend	
  to	
  appreciate	
  independence	
  and	
  self-­‐reliance.	
  Negative	
  attitudes	
  towards	
  statewide	
  policies	
  can	
  be	
  attributed,	
  at	
  least	
  in	
  part,	
  to	
  predominantly	
  conservative	
  politics	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  While	
  the	
  region	
  has	
  a	
  history	
  of	
  conservative	
  values,	
  historically	
  there	
  have	
  also	
  been	
  strong	
  class	
  and	
  political	
  divisions	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  These	
  have	
  only	
  increased	
  as	
  new	
  arrivals	
  both	
  embraced	
  the	
  cultural	
  norms	
  of	
  the	
  area	
  and	
  brought	
  with	
  them	
  their	
  own	
  variation	
  of	
  those	
  norms.	
  To	
  a	
  certain	
  extent,	
  residents	
  on	
  both	
  the	
  political	
  left	
  and	
  right	
  have	
  shared	
  a	
  distrust	
  of	
  government	
  and	
  desire	
  for	
  a	
  rural	
  lifestyle	
  emphasizing	
  community	
  and	
  mutual	
  aid	
  over	
  regulation.	
  Walker	
  and	
  Hurley,	
  drawing	
  from	
  an	
  essay	
  by	
  SOU	
  historian	
  Jeff	
  Lalande,	
  call	
  this	
  tendency	
  towards	
  independent	
  thinking	
  and	
  distaste	
  for	
  big	
  government	
  "an	
  ornery	
  tradition"	
  (2011).	
  On	
  the	
  other	
  hand	
  rising	
  population	
  densities	
  have	
  increased	
  conflicts	
  between	
  neighbors	
  over	
  land	
  uses	
  and	
  led	
  some	
  residents	
  to	
  question	
  the	
  benefits	
  of	
  completely	
  unrestricted	
  private	
  property	
  rights.	
  	
   Yet	
  a	
  simplistic	
  explanation	
  of	
  political	
  conflict	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  based	
  on	
  differences	
  in	
  political	
  outlooks	
  alone,	
  hides	
  broader	
  issues	
  that	
  make	
  the	
  preservation	
  of	
  farmland	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  challenging	
  and	
  drive	
  dissatisfaction	
  with	
  land	
  use	
  regulation.	
  While	
  there	
  is	
  broad	
  agreement	
  with	
  the	
  goal	
  of	
  preserving	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
35. This is the region that spawned the State of Jefferson independence movement.  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   95	
  
farmland	
  and	
  supporting	
  agricultural	
  economies	
  in	
  the	
  region,	
  the	
  best	
  way	
  to	
  accomplish	
  these	
  goals	
  remains	
  a	
  subject	
  of	
  ongoing	
  debate.	
  For	
  many	
  in	
  the	
  region,	
  the	
  statewide	
  system	
  of	
  farm	
  zoning	
  designated	
  far	
  too	
  much	
  land	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  as	
  valuable	
  farm	
  or	
  timberland,	
  resulting	
  in	
  many	
  lands	
  of	
  marginal	
  economic	
  value	
  being	
  un-­‐developable	
  for	
  other	
  uses.	
  For	
  many	
  others,	
  the	
  state	
  system	
  doesn't	
  go	
  far	
  enough	
  since	
  the	
  goal	
  is	
  to	
  direct	
  growth	
  and	
  minimize	
  the	
  loss	
  of	
  farmland,	
  not	
  to	
  limit	
  or	
  prevent	
  growth	
  onto	
  farmland	
  altogether.	
  	
  
Contradictions	
  of	
  Farmland	
  Preservation	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  	
   Continuing	
  growth	
  is	
  inevitable	
  in	
  most	
  residents'	
  framings	
  of	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  .	
  The	
  question	
  is	
  simply	
  what	
  form	
  that	
  growth	
  will	
  take.	
  There	
  is	
  also	
  broad	
  agreement	
  that	
  farming	
  and	
  particularly	
  farmland	
  should	
  be	
  preserved	
  as	
  much	
  as	
  possible	
  as	
  growth	
  proceeds.	
  The	
  question	
  becomes	
  which	
  farmland	
  should	
  be	
  preserved	
  and	
  in	
  particular,	
  which	
  landowners	
  should	
  benefit	
  when	
  land	
  is	
  converted	
  from	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  use	
  to	
  urban	
  zoning.	
  	
  	
   Oregon's	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  places	
  farmland	
  in	
  a	
  protected	
  category,	
  but	
  determining	
  which	
  lands	
  should	
  be	
  protected	
  is	
  no	
  simple	
  matter.	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  key	
  tools	
  planners	
  use	
  to	
  determine	
  which	
  soils	
  are	
  the	
  most	
  valuable	
  for	
  farming	
  is	
  the	
  Natural	
  Resource	
  Conservation	
  Service	
  (NRCS)	
  soil	
  classification	
  system.	
  The	
  NRCS	
  classification	
  system	
  divides	
  soils	
  into	
  eight	
  broad	
  classifications,	
  ranked	
  from	
  1	
  to	
  8.	
  In	
  the	
  1930s	
  soils	
  scientists	
  at	
  the	
  NRCS	
  created	
  the	
  soil	
  capabilities	
  classification	
  system	
  as	
  a	
  simplified	
  way	
  to	
  describe	
  the	
  physical	
  characteristics	
  of	
  soils.	
  NRCS	
  soil	
  scientists	
  worked	
  with	
  farmers	
  to	
  create	
  soil	
  conservation	
  plans	
  for	
  their	
  properties	
  and	
  the	
  classification	
  system	
  was	
  a	
  simple	
  method	
  for	
  understanding	
  which	
  soils	
  
	
  	
  
	
   96	
  
can	
  be	
  used	
  for	
  crops	
  without	
  being	
  rapidly	
  degraded	
  and	
  which	
  soils	
  should	
  be	
  limited	
  to	
  grazing	
  or	
  left	
  undisturbed	
  (Helms	
  1992).	
  Class	
  1-­‐4	
  soils	
  are	
  considered	
  arable	
  and	
  can	
  be	
  used	
  for	
  cultivation.	
  Class	
  one	
  and	
  two	
  soils	
  are	
  commonly	
  discussed	
  as	
  the	
  most	
  nutrient	
  rich	
  and	
  able	
  to	
  grow	
  the	
  broadest	
  range	
  of	
  crops.	
  In	
  Oregon	
  planning	
  it	
  is	
  these	
  Type	
  1	
  and	
  2	
  soils	
  that	
  are	
  most	
  likely	
  to	
  be	
  considered	
  "high	
  value"	
  and	
  contested	
  if	
  they	
  are	
  included	
  lands	
  designated	
  for	
  development	
  or	
  future	
  urban	
  growth.	
  	
  	
  	
   The	
  question	
  of	
  which	
  plots	
  of	
  land	
  should	
  be	
  preserved	
  for	
  future	
  farming	
  is	
  a	
  source	
  of	
  significant	
  disagreement	
  between	
  state	
  planners	
  and	
  local	
  farmers	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon.	
  When	
  the	
  first	
  comprehensive	
  plan	
  for	
  Jackson	
  County	
  was	
  made	
  after	
  the	
  passage	
  of	
  Senate	
  bill	
  100,	
  only	
  a	
  small	
  portion	
  of	
  the	
  lands	
  being	
  farmed	
  in	
  the	
  area	
  were	
  Class	
  1	
  or	
  Class	
  2	
  soils.	
  Large	
  areas	
  of	
  land	
  were	
  designed	
  for	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  use	
  based	
  on	
  their	
  current	
  and	
  historic	
  use	
  for	
  farming.	
  	
  	
   The	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  process	
  committed	
  to	
  a	
  process	
  that	
  prioritized	
  the	
  preservation	
  of	
  lands	
  in	
  the	
  "commercial	
  agricultural	
  base"	
  from	
  urban	
  growth	
  over	
  the	
  next	
  fifty	
  years.	
  The	
  emphasis	
  on	
  the	
  "commercial	
  agricultural	
  base"	
  is	
  consistent	
  with	
  statewide	
  planning	
  system	
  to	
  preserve	
  farm	
  and	
  forest	
  land	
  for	
  commercial	
  uses.	
  However,	
  the	
  RPS	
  process	
  relied	
  on	
  a	
  committee	
  of	
  local	
  experts	
  to	
  determine	
  which	
  land	
  should	
  be	
  considered	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  "commercial	
  agricultural	
  base"	
  rather	
  than	
  focusing	
  specifically	
  on	
  the	
  NRCS	
  soil	
  classification	
  system.	
  	
  	
   Farmers,	
  as	
  landowners,	
  are	
  in	
  a	
  contradictory	
  position	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  the	
  use	
  values	
  of	
  their	
  land	
  and	
  its	
  potential	
  exchange	
  value.	
  As	
  farmers	
  the	
  potential	
  of	
  the	
  
	
  	
  
	
   97	
  
land	
  to	
  grow	
  crops	
  essential	
  to	
  making	
  a	
  living,	
  however,	
  the	
  market	
  value	
  of	
  the	
  land	
  is	
  also	
  a	
  key	
  asset	
  in	
  case	
  of	
  economic	
  hardship.	
  Because	
  of	
  what	
  is	
  perceived	
  to	
  be	
  an	
  unfair	
  advantage	
  in	
  the	
  land	
  market,	
  caused	
  by	
  the	
  suppression	
  of	
  agricultural	
  land	
  values	
  by	
  Oregon's	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  system,	
  there	
  are	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  discourses	
  around	
  the	
  economic	
  difficulties	
  of	
  farming	
  that	
  become	
  central	
  to	
  local	
  discussions	
  around	
  the	
  fairness	
  of	
  the	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system.	
  Rural	
  landowners	
  often	
  discuss	
  the	
  rural-­‐urban	
  divide	
  in	
  Oregon	
  and	
  how	
  urban	
  people	
  simply	
  don't	
  understand	
  the	
  realities	
  of	
  rural	
  life	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon.	
  Land	
  owners	
  and	
  private	
  property	
  rights	
  advocates	
  engage	
  discourses	
  that	
  challenge	
  the	
  validity	
  of	
  Oregon's	
  statewide	
  zoning	
  and	
  engage	
  the	
  idea	
  of	
  local	
  expertise	
  as	
  best	
  suited	
  to	
  determine	
  which	
  lands	
  are	
  suited	
  for	
  continued	
  farming.	
  	
  	
   The	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  process	
  began	
  after	
  an	
  attempt	
  to	
  identify	
  areas	
  around	
  Medford	
  for	
  urban	
  expansion	
  broke	
  down.	
  According	
  to	
  locals,	
  the	
  state	
  priority	
  system	
  for	
  which	
  lands	
  should	
  be	
  urbanized	
  was	
  forcing	
  growth	
  onto	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  last	
  remaining	
  high	
  value	
  farmland	
  in	
  the	
  valley.	
  This	
  is	
  because	
  as	
  cities	
  grow,	
  they	
  are	
  first	
  required	
  to	
  look	
  at	
  areas	
  of	
  rural	
  residences	
  as	
  potential	
  areas	
  for	
  city	
  growth	
  and	
  only	
  take	
  in	
  high	
  value	
  farmland	
  if	
  no	
  other	
  land	
  can	
  be	
  identified	
  for	
  growth.	
  Around	
  Medford	
  the	
  best	
  farmland	
  lies	
  to	
  the	
  west,	
  in	
  an	
  area	
  of	
  mixed	
  small	
  farm	
  parcels	
  and	
  rural	
  residential	
  parcels.	
  The	
  smaller	
  size	
  of	
  the	
  farm	
  parcels	
  and	
  their	
  potential	
  conflict	
  with	
  their	
  urban	
  neighbors	
  means	
  that	
  there	
  is	
  some	
  logic	
  according	
  to	
  the	
  Oregon	
  system	
  to	
  converting	
  some	
  rural	
  residential	
  lands	
  and	
  some	
  nearby	
  small	
  farm	
  parcels	
  to	
  urban	
  uses	
  (see	
  Figure	
  18).	
  However,	
  that	
  would	
  have	
  meant	
  continuing	
  to	
  pave	
  over	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  richest	
  soils	
  in	
  valley.	
  Many	
  
	
  	
  
	
   98	
  
involved	
  in	
  the	
  Medford	
  planning	
  process	
  felt	
  (correctly	
  or	
  not36)	
  that	
  they	
  were	
  being	
  required	
  by	
  the	
  state	
  to	
  grow	
  in	
  this	
  pattern	
  despite	
  the	
  objections	
  of	
  rural	
  landowners	
  and	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  	
  The	
  thing	
  with	
  the	
  priority	
  of	
  lands	
  is	
  if	
  you've	
  got	
  a	
  string	
  of	
  exception	
  lands	
  that	
  go	
  out	
  into	
  farmlands	
  you	
  could	
  figure	
  it	
  in	
  such	
  a	
  way	
  that	
  you	
  could	
  actually	
  bring	
  that	
  in	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  good	
  farmland	
  encircled	
  by	
  exception	
  land.	
  	
  That	
  would	
  be	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  higher	
  priorities.	
  Jackson	
  county	
  has	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  exception	
  lands	
  sprinkled	
  throughout	
  its	
  farmlands-­‐-­‐	
  and	
  it	
  seems	
  to	
  coexist	
  fairly	
  well-­‐-­‐	
  so	
  basically	
  what	
  you're	
  doing	
  is	
  upsetting	
  that	
  balance.	
  	
  And	
  you	
  could	
  be	
  forcing	
  cities	
  to	
  take	
  good	
  viable	
  farmland	
  in	
  because	
  of	
  the	
  geometry	
  of	
  these	
  exception	
  lands.	
  That's	
  something	
  that	
  they	
  didn't	
  want	
  and	
  they	
  pointed	
  to	
  the	
  area	
  between	
  Jacksonville	
  in	
  Medford	
  as	
  a	
  prime	
  example	
  of	
  that	
  occurring	
  if	
  you	
  if	
  you	
  stuck	
  directly	
  to	
  the	
  priority	
  of	
  land	
  system	
  itself.	
  -­‐	
  
Local	
  planner	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
   Beyond	
  the	
  belief	
  that	
  statewide	
  planning	
  was	
  forcing	
  growth	
  into	
  areas	
  of	
  high	
  value	
  farmland,	
  locals,	
  and	
  particularly	
  farmers	
  often	
  bring	
  up	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  other	
  issues	
  with	
  how	
  farmland	
  is	
  regulated	
  under	
  statewide	
  planning.	
  Farmers	
  expressed	
  concerns	
  over	
  the	
  accuracy	
  of	
  official	
  maps	
  used	
  for	
  determining	
  soil	
  types	
  and	
  also	
  the	
  ability	
  of	
  the	
  NRCS	
  system	
  of	
  soil	
  classification	
  to	
  capture	
  the	
  nuanced	
  realities	
  of	
  the	
  soil	
  on	
  their	
  particular	
  farm	
  and	
  its	
  actual	
  capabilities.	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  36.	
  State	
  planners	
  and	
  1000	
  Friends	
  representatives	
  claimed	
  that	
  the	
  cities	
  could	
  have	
  chosen	
  to	
  grow	
  in	
  a	
  different	
  pattern	
  without	
  engaging	
  in	
  the	
  RPS	
  process.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   99	
  
	
  
Figure	
  18:	
  Rural	
  and	
  Farm	
  Zoning	
  west	
  of	
  Medford	
  
	
  	
  
	
   100	
  
	
   These	
  concerns	
  are	
  so	
  often	
  heard	
  by	
  state	
  planners	
  and	
  other	
  defenders	
  of	
  the	
  system	
  that	
  they	
  are	
  usually	
  dismissed	
  as	
  myths	
  or	
  cynical	
  attempts	
  to	
  get	
  around	
  land	
  use	
  laws	
  for	
  personal	
  gain.	
  While	
  these	
  discourses	
  about	
  problems	
  with	
  how	
  land	
  was	
  zoned	
  for	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  use	
  have	
  certainly	
  been	
  picked	
  up	
  by	
  opponents	
  of	
  the	
  system	
  and	
  used	
  by	
  speculators	
  or	
  farmers	
  looking	
  to	
  profit	
  from	
  the	
  sale	
  and	
  development	
  of	
  their	
  land,	
  in	
  my	
  interviews	
  even	
  farmers	
  who	
  were	
  strong	
  supporters	
  of	
  the	
  farmland	
  protection	
  often	
  brought	
  up	
  issues	
  with	
  the	
  how	
  farm	
  zoning	
  was	
  applied	
  and	
  the	
  restrictions	
  it	
  imposed	
  on	
  their	
  ability	
  to	
  make	
  use	
  of	
  their	
  lands.	
  Soil	
  mapping	
  Errors	
  	
   Whether	
  they	
  supported	
  the	
  state	
  land	
  use	
  regulations	
  or	
  not,	
  many	
  farmers	
  agreed	
  that	
  the	
  map	
  used	
  by	
  the	
  county	
  planning	
  office	
  was	
  not	
  accurate	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  the	
  actual	
  capabilities	
  of	
  the	
  soils	
  on	
  their	
  land.	
  Since	
  soil	
  classification	
  maps	
  are	
  often	
  a	
  key	
  factor	
  in	
  the	
  permitting	
  of	
  a	
  new	
  residences	
  or	
  other	
  non-­‐farm	
  uses,	
  the	
  accuracy	
  of	
  these	
  maps	
  is	
  a	
  significant	
  issue	
  for	
  landowners.	
  The	
  soil	
  map	
  that	
  they	
  still	
  use	
  for	
  appraisal	
  purposes	
  was	
  developed	
  way	
  back	
  when	
  they	
  did	
  the	
  original	
  soil	
  survey	
  and	
  that	
  is	
  still	
  used	
  taxlot	
  by	
  taxlot.	
  In	
  fact	
  its	
  an	
  old	
  map	
  thats	
  followed	
  in	
  part	
  that	
  they	
  guard	
  with	
  their	
  lives	
  down	
  at	
  the	
  appraisers	
  office	
  but	
  that	
  is	
  still	
  used	
  to	
  determine	
  the	
  tariff	
  on	
  various	
  taxlots...ancient,	
  ancient	
  old	
  information.	
  There	
  has	
  been	
  no	
  recent	
  inventory	
  of	
  suitable	
  or	
  high	
  value	
  farmland,	
  so	
  the	
  current	
  mapping	
  is	
  way	
  out	
  of	
  date.	
  We	
  have	
  acres	
  that	
  are	
  considered	
  Type	
  1,	
  high	
  value	
  and	
  acres	
  that	
  are	
  not	
  but	
  the	
  mapping	
  is	
  not	
  accurate.	
  -­‐	
  Jackson	
  county	
  farmer,	
  
describing	
  his	
  frustration	
  at	
  the	
  soil	
  mapping.	
  	
  	
   While	
  farmers	
  often	
  indicate	
  that	
  official	
  soil	
  maps	
  are	
  old	
  and	
  inaccurate	
  and	
  so	
  should	
  be	
  remapped,	
  there	
  may	
  also	
  simply	
  be	
  a	
  scalar	
  mismatch	
  between	
  the	
  NRCS	
  desired	
  levels	
  of	
  accuracy	
  and	
  the	
  expectations	
  of	
  landowners.	
  The	
  NRCS	
  
	
  	
  
	
   101	
  
report	
  on	
  the	
  Jackson	
  County	
  soil	
  survey	
  states	
  that	
  "the	
  minimum	
  size	
  of	
  map	
  unit	
  delineations	
  was	
  5	
  acres"	
  meaning	
  that	
  the	
  map	
  was	
  not	
  intended	
  to	
  be	
  accurate	
  when	
  examining	
  soil	
  patterns	
  in	
  areas	
  smaller	
  than	
  5	
  acres	
  (NRCS	
  1993).	
  	
  	
   Because	
  the	
  permitting	
  of	
  particular	
  uses	
  may	
  depend	
  on	
  proving	
  the	
  non-­‐productivity	
  of	
  the	
  land,	
  landowners	
  frequently	
  employ	
  their	
  own	
  independent	
  soil	
  surveyors	
  to	
  provide	
  evidence	
  of	
  the	
  inaccuracies	
  of	
  soil	
  mapping	
  on	
  their	
  property.	
  The	
  accuracy	
  of	
  independent	
  surveys	
  are	
  then	
  viewed	
  with	
  suspicion	
  by	
  watchdog	
  groups	
  and	
  disagreements	
  over	
  soil	
  types	
  can	
  become	
  quite	
  controversial.	
  In	
  January	
  2000,	
  for	
  example,	
  a	
  local	
  watchdog	
  group,	
  the	
  Jackson	
  County	
  Citizens	
  League	
  trespassed	
  onto	
  private	
  property	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  obtain	
  soil	
  samples	
  to	
  refute	
  the	
  landowner's	
  claims.	
  They	
  were	
  able	
  to	
  successfully	
  block	
  development	
  on	
  that	
  property,	
  but	
  were	
  then	
  sued	
  for	
  damages	
  by	
  the	
  landowner	
  for	
  the	
  trespass.	
  Soil	
  classification	
  and	
  actual	
  uses	
  	
   In	
  addition	
  to	
  the	
  limitations	
  of	
  the	
  NRCS	
  soil	
  map	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  the	
  scale	
  of	
  the	
  map,	
  farmers	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  often	
  discuss	
  numerous	
  factors	
  not	
  captured	
  by	
  the	
  soil	
  classification	
  system.	
  Even	
  though	
  the	
  soil	
  classifications	
  are	
  based	
  on	
  fairly	
  stable	
  concepts	
  like	
  the	
  amount	
  of	
  nutrients	
  in	
  the	
  soil	
  and	
  the	
  soil	
  texture,	
  the	
  implications	
  of	
  these	
  physical	
  characteristics	
  for	
  particular	
  crops	
  and	
  particular	
  farmers	
  vary	
  significantly.	
  	
  	
   The	
  dominant	
  agricultural	
  crop	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  for	
  much	
  of	
  the	
  20th	
  century	
  was	
  pears.	
  The	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Valley	
  is	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  largest	
  pear	
  growing	
  districts	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.	
  The	
  dominance	
  of	
  pears	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  rather	
  than	
  other	
  tree	
  fruits	
  is	
  directly	
  related	
  to	
  the	
  ability	
  of	
  pear	
  trees	
  to	
  grow	
  successfully	
  in	
  heavy	
  clay	
  soils.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   102	
  
Some	
  of	
  the	
  more	
  productive	
  soils	
  for	
  pears	
  have	
  more	
  clay	
  or	
  more	
  silt	
  in	
  them.	
  Our	
  hill	
  in	
  the	
  pasture	
  was	
  mapped	
  as	
  Brader-­‐Debenger	
  series	
  which	
  in	
  some	
  areas	
  is	
  limited	
  in	
  productivity	
  due	
  to	
  stoniness	
  and	
  shallowness	
  and	
  in	
  other	
  areas	
  it	
  is	
  less	
  than	
  three	
  feet	
  of	
  soil	
  over	
  clay	
  layer	
  which	
  acts	
  as...it	
  holds	
  the	
  water	
  on	
  the	
  surface	
  so	
  it	
  is	
  not	
  as	
  well	
  drained.	
  But	
  if	
  you	
  take	
  that	
  soil	
  that	
  you	
  have	
  got	
  three	
  feet	
  over	
  the	
  clay	
  layer	
  and	
  burm	
  it	
  up	
  it	
  is	
  wonderful	
  for	
  growing	
  pears	
  and	
  I	
  have	
  six	
  acres	
  of	
  pears	
  on	
  that	
  soil	
  and	
  it	
  produces	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  best	
  looking	
  pears	
  I	
  have	
  got	
  but	
  it	
  is	
  mapped	
  as	
  Class	
  5	
  even	
  though	
  the	
  whole	
  hill	
  and	
  everything	
  70	
  -­‐	
  90	
  some	
  acres	
  is	
  classified	
  as	
  Brader-­‐Debenger	
  and	
  maybe	
  the	
  hill	
  has	
  a	
  problem	
  with	
  stoniness	
  and	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  pasture	
  with	
  shallow	
  soil,	
  but	
  there	
  is	
  probably	
  25	
  acres	
  that	
  is	
  good	
  productive	
  soil	
  out	
  there	
  even	
  though	
  it	
  is	
  mapped	
  that	
  way.	
  –Local	
  pear	
  
farmer	
  discussing	
  the	
  soils	
  on	
  his	
  farm.	
  	
  According	
  to	
  this	
  farmer,	
  pears	
  can	
  be	
  grown	
  successfully	
  on	
  soils	
  that	
  might	
  be	
  considered	
  less	
  valuable	
  for	
  farmland	
  conservation.	
  At	
  the	
  same	
  time,	
  other	
  growers	
  complain	
  about	
  soil	
  limitations	
  not	
  recorded	
  in	
  the	
  NRCS	
  classification	
  system.	
  For	
  example,	
  a	
  lack	
  of	
  available	
  irrigation	
  water	
  or	
  plant	
  nutrition	
  problem	
  called	
  chlorosis.	
  	
  At	
  various	
  depths	
  below	
  the	
  soil	
  surface	
  in	
  various	
  parts	
  of	
  the	
  valley	
  there	
  is	
  a	
  layer	
  of	
  lime,	
  essentially	
  chalk.	
  And	
  I	
  have	
  been	
  in	
  orchards	
  where	
  the	
  first	
  two	
  or	
  three	
  feet,	
  digging,	
  looked	
  great	
  and	
  the	
  trees	
  grow	
  great	
  for	
  the	
  first	
  few	
  years.	
  And	
  then	
  when	
  you	
  get	
  three	
  feet	
  down,	
  for	
  example,	
  just	
  outcrops	
  of	
  chalk.	
  It	
  ties	
  up	
  iron,	
  so	
  that	
  the	
  trees	
  can't	
  get	
  iron	
  and	
  become	
  very	
  unproductive.	
  Some	
  of	
  the	
  area	
  in	
  the	
  southern	
  margin	
  of	
  the	
  proposed	
  50	
  year	
  growth	
  boundary	
  for	
  Medford	
  included	
  land	
  like	
  that.	
  And	
  a	
  shallow	
  crop	
  could	
  grow	
  there,	
  but	
  it	
  is	
  not	
  very	
  promising.	
  -­‐	
  	
  Agency	
  staff,	
  describing	
  
the	
  lime	
  induced	
  chlorosis	
  problem	
  with	
  some	
  soils	
  in	
  the	
  valley.	
  	
  	
  Yet	
  claims	
  of	
  irrigation	
  problems	
  or	
  chlorosis	
  are	
  often	
  met	
  with	
  skepticism	
  by	
  planners	
  and	
  conservationists	
  because	
  the	
  financial	
  incentive	
  for	
  land	
  owners	
  is	
  so	
  large.	
  	
  	
  	
   Today	
  pear	
  growing	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  is	
  declining	
  as	
  older	
  growers	
  retire	
  and	
  older	
  orchards	
  are	
  torn	
  out	
  and	
  not	
  replanted.	
  For	
  many	
  in	
  the	
  valley,	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  agriculture	
  as	
  an	
  industry	
  is	
  wine	
  grapes.	
  Yet	
  wine	
  grapes	
  are	
  also	
  a	
  highly	
  unusual	
  
	
  	
  
	
   103	
  
crop	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  the	
  economics	
  of	
  production.	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  produce	
  the	
  concentrated	
  flavors	
  needed	
  for	
  high	
  priced	
  wines,	
  growers	
  reduce	
  production	
  on	
  each	
  vine.	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  do	
  so	
  growers	
  limit	
  irrigation	
  and	
  prefer	
  nutrient	
  poor,	
  well-­‐drained	
  soils	
  located	
  on	
  slopes	
  rather	
  than	
  the	
  richest	
  soils	
  of	
  the	
  alluvial	
  valley	
  bottoms.	
  So	
  neither	
  of	
  the	
  dominant	
  crops	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  are	
  best	
  suited	
  to	
  the	
  lands	
  that	
  state	
  regulations	
  say	
  are	
  highest	
  priority	
  for	
  protection.	
  	
  Zoning	
  "Mistakes"	
  	
   Farmers	
  and	
  other	
  rural	
  land	
  owners	
  also	
  often	
  express	
  frustration	
  with	
  what	
  they	
  feel	
  are	
  zoning	
  errors.	
  In	
  some	
  cases	
  they	
  believe	
  that	
  their	
  land	
  should	
  never	
  have	
  been	
  zoned	
  for	
  agricultural	
  use.	
  In	
  this	
  discourse	
  only	
  lands	
  highly	
  productive	
  soils	
  should	
  be	
  zoned	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  use.	
  In	
  these	
  discussions	
  the	
  issue	
  is	
  not	
  a	
  mistake	
  in	
  the	
  soil	
  mapping,	
  but	
  rather	
  a	
  perceived	
  mismatch	
  between	
  the	
  farm	
  zoning	
  and	
  the	
  capabilities	
  of	
  the	
  soils.	
  For	
  many	
  land	
  owners,	
  there	
  is	
  a	
  sense	
  that	
  if	
  their	
  land	
  is	
  zoned	
  for	
  farm	
  use	
  they	
  should	
  be	
  able	
  to	
  earn	
  a	
  profit	
  from	
  farming	
  that	
  land.	
  If	
  the	
  land	
  is	
  only	
  suitable	
  for	
  limited	
  activities	
  such	
  as	
  low	
  intensity	
  grazing,	
  there	
  is	
  a	
  sense	
  that	
  it	
  was	
  a	
  mistake	
  for	
  it	
  to	
  have	
  been	
  zoned	
  for	
  exclusive	
  agricultural	
  use.	
  
Defining	
  the	
  "Commercial	
  Agricultural	
  Base"	
  and	
  Debating	
  the	
  Future	
  of	
  
Farming	
  	
   The	
  strain	
  of	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  economic	
  challenges	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  farming	
  and	
  continued	
  amenity	
  migration	
  and	
  gentrification	
  on	
  farmland	
  have	
  contributed	
  to	
  the	
  current	
  climate	
  towards	
  statewide	
  planning	
  in	
  southern	
  Oregon,	
  placing	
  pressure	
  on	
  state	
  agencies	
  and	
  the	
  legislature	
  to	
  devolve	
  control	
  over	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  
	
  	
  
	
   104	
  
decisions	
  to	
  local	
  authorities.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  process	
  appointed	
  a	
  group	
  of	
  local	
  agricultural	
  experts	
  to	
  the	
  Resource	
  Lands	
  Review	
  Committee	
  (RLRC).	
  The	
  RLRC	
  was	
  in	
  charge	
  of	
  reviewing	
  all	
  the	
  lands	
  that	
  cities	
  were	
  proposing	
  as	
  potential	
  new	
  areas	
  for	
  urban	
  growth	
  and	
  deciding	
  which	
  lands	
  should	
  be	
  considered	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  "commercial	
  agricultural	
  land	
  base."	
  	
  	
   In	
  designating	
  lands,	
  the	
  committee	
  considered	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  factors.	
  The	
  committee	
  agreed	
  that	
  soil,	
  access	
  to	
  irrigation	
  water,	
  and	
  microclimate	
  were	
  the	
  most	
  important	
  factors.	
  But	
  there	
  was	
  less	
  agreement	
  about	
  other	
  economic,	
  site,	
  or	
  locational	
  issues	
  such	
  as	
  parcel	
  size,	
  neighboring	
  land	
  uses,	
  topography,	
  current	
  zoning.	
  Early	
  on	
  in	
  their	
  deliberations,	
  the	
  committee	
  worked	
  with	
  GIS	
  staff	
  who	
  created	
  models	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  criteria	
  they	
  prioritized.	
  However,	
  they	
  rapidly	
  came	
  to	
  prioritize	
  what	
  they	
  called	
  a	
  "heuristic"37	
  thinking,	
  relying	
  on	
  the	
  life	
  experiences	
  and	
  collective	
  expertise	
  of	
  the	
  group	
  rather	
  than	
  focusing	
  on	
  a	
  complex	
  system	
  of	
  rankings	
  or	
  quantifications.	
  	
  	
   While	
  staff	
  and	
  planners	
  often	
  sought	
  to	
  keep	
  discussions	
  focused	
  and	
  limited	
  to	
  the	
  task	
  of	
  designating	
  particular	
  areas	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  commercial	
  agricultural	
  base,	
  	
  members	
  of	
  the	
  RLRC	
  and	
  testifying	
  land	
  owners	
  often	
  took	
  the	
  opportunity	
  to	
  discuss	
  the	
  broad	
  social	
  and	
  economic	
  changes	
  they	
  saw	
  taking	
  place	
  and	
  to	
  consider	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  While	
  the	
  restructuring	
  in	
  the	
  agricultural	
  economy	
  and	
  the	
  challenges	
  for	
  farmers	
  are	
  broadly	
  agreed	
  upon,	
  this	
  agreement	
  did	
  not	
  lead	
  to	
  a	
  common	
  vision	
  for	
  of	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  the	
  potential	
  steps	
  to	
  support	
  a	
  healthy	
  farming	
  economy.	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  37.	
  RLRC	
  meeting	
  10/24/2000	
  
	
  	
  
	
   105	
  
	
   Defining	
  what	
  constitutes	
  land	
  within	
  the	
  commercial	
  agricultural	
  base	
  was	
  a	
  challenge	
  for	
  the	
  committee.	
  Much	
  of	
  the	
  best	
  agricultural	
  soils	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  are	
  already	
  covered	
  by	
  urban	
  levels	
  of	
  development	
  and	
  much	
  of	
  the	
  remaining	
  lands	
  within	
  areas	
  zoned	
  for	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  use	
  are	
  divided	
  into	
  such	
  small	
  parcels	
  that	
  making	
  a	
  living	
  from	
  farming	
  would	
  be	
  difficult.	
  	
  	
   The	
  main	
  commercial	
  crop	
  for	
  the	
  region,	
  pears,	
  has	
  experienced	
  a	
  major	
  decline	
  and	
  consolidation	
  as	
  global	
  prices	
  have	
  stagnated	
  and	
  farmers’	
  expenses	
  continued	
  to	
  grow.	
  Most	
  pear	
  growers	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  are	
  retiring,	
  leasing	
  or	
  selling	
  their	
  orchards	
  to	
  the	
  few	
  remaining	
  large	
  producers.	
  As	
  a	
  result,	
  the	
  needed	
  infrastructure	
  for	
  packing	
  and	
  shipping	
  fruit	
  was	
  in	
  serious	
  decline.	
  For	
  some,	
  the	
  changes	
  in	
  the	
  agricultural	
  industry	
  simply	
  signal	
  the	
  gradual	
  but	
  inevitable	
  end	
  of	
  commercial	
  agriculture	
  in	
  a	
  rapidly	
  urbanizing	
  region.	
  	
  	
  	
   Others	
  see	
  the	
  growth	
  in	
  vineyards	
  and	
  wineries	
  as	
  a	
  new	
  beginning	
  and	
  direction	
  for	
  agricultural	
  lands.	
  By	
  2001,	
  there	
  were	
  78	
  vineyards	
  and	
  1334	
  acres	
  of	
  vines	
  planted	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  AVA,	
  which	
  includes	
  parts	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  and	
  neighboring	
  Josephine	
  County.	
  This	
  represents	
  a	
  huge	
  growth	
  from	
  1987,	
  the	
  first	
  year	
  vineyards	
  were	
  surveyed	
  by	
  the	
  Oregon	
  Department	
  of	
  Agriculture,	
  when	
  there	
  were	
  only	
  305	
  acres	
  planted	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  (Jones	
  and	
  Light	
  2001).	
  A	
  growing	
  number	
  of	
  wine	
  industry	
  entrepreneurs	
  are	
  betting	
  on	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  wine	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  "I	
  know	
  that	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  people	
  think	
  that	
  wine	
  grapes	
  are	
  the	
  future.	
  There	
  is	
  caution	
  on	
  one	
  part,	
  because	
  the	
  market	
  could	
  become	
  saturated	
  but	
  there	
  are	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  people	
  who	
  are	
  saying	
  it	
  can	
  be	
  made	
  to	
  work	
  and	
  you	
  have	
  to	
  get	
  a	
  critical	
  volume	
  in	
  this	
  valley	
  before	
  the	
  brand	
  of	
  this	
  valley	
  can	
  become	
  known	
  for	
  there	
  to	
  
	
  	
  
	
   106	
  
be	
  a	
  market."	
  -­‐RLRC	
  member	
  discussing	
  the	
  potential	
  for	
  vineyards	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  One	
  horticultural	
  expert	
  claimed	
  that	
  about	
  80%	
  of	
  orchard	
  lands	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  could	
  be	
  used	
  to	
  grow	
  wine	
  grapes.	
  	
  	
   Yet	
  the	
  viability	
  of	
  the	
  wine	
  industry	
  is	
  something	
  that	
  many	
  pear	
  farmers	
  question.	
  Some	
  members	
  of	
  the	
  RLRC	
  brought	
  up	
  research	
  that	
  points	
  to	
  global	
  overproduction	
  of	
  wine	
  grapes	
  and	
  openly	
  wondered	
  whether	
  growers	
  are	
  able	
  to	
  make	
  a	
  profit.	
  	
  Additionally,	
  while	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  acres	
  and	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  vineyards	
  are	
  continuing	
  to	
  grow,	
  the	
  average	
  size	
  of	
  vineyards	
  is	
  declining,	
  and	
  many	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  see	
  the	
  proliferation	
  of	
  hobby	
  vineyards	
  over	
  commercial	
  production.	
  	
  	
   For	
  some,	
  commercial	
  farming	
  by	
  definition	
  would	
  mean	
  making	
  a	
  living	
  from	
  farming.	
  However,	
  there	
  is	
  broad	
  awareness	
  in	
  the	
  valley	
  of	
  the	
  many	
  challenges	
  of	
  earning	
  a	
  living	
  exclusively	
  from	
  farming.	
  The	
  RLRC	
  committee	
  engaged	
  in	
  broad	
  discussions	
  of	
  the	
  challenges	
  farmers	
  face	
  in	
  making	
  a	
  living.	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  broadly	
  agreed	
  upon	
  concepts	
  discussed	
  by	
  the	
  RLRC	
  was	
  the	
  creation	
  of	
  an	
  "enhanced	
  agricultural	
  zone"	
  that	
  would	
  "enhance	
  the	
  economic	
  viability	
  of	
  farms	
  and	
  their	
  sustainability	
  long	
  term"	
  through	
  various	
  protection	
  measures	
  or	
  enhancements.	
  Discussions	
  of	
  these	
  potential	
  measures	
  included	
  many	
  of	
  the	
  tools	
  used	
  to	
  promote	
  farmland	
  preservation	
  in	
  other	
  parts	
  of	
  the	
  world,	
  including	
  buffering	
  between	
  farms	
  and	
  urban	
  developments,	
  transfer	
  of	
  development	
  rights,	
  tax	
  breaks,	
  and	
  easier	
  permitting	
  processes	
  for	
  direct	
  marketing	
  on	
  farms	
  (farm	
  stands,	
  wine	
  tasting	
  rooms).	
  The	
  restrictions	
  on	
  the	
  types	
  of	
  uses	
  permitted	
  on	
  land	
  zoned	
  EFU	
  were	
  also	
  commented	
  on	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  hurting	
  farmers	
  attempts	
  to	
  vertically	
  integrate	
  their	
  businesses	
  and	
  remain	
  profitable.	
  Many	
  within	
  the	
  agricultural	
  community	
  
	
  	
  
	
   107	
  
expressed	
  the	
  feeling	
  that	
  farmers’	
  who	
  need	
  money	
  to	
  retire	
  or	
  simply	
  can	
  no	
  longer	
  make	
  a	
  living	
  on	
  a	
  parcel	
  should	
  be	
  allowed	
  to	
  sell	
  land	
  for	
  development.	
  	
   Perhaps	
  one	
  of	
  most	
  divisive	
  issues	
  when	
  discussing	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  farming	
  was	
  the	
  relationship	
  between	
  "commercial"	
  growers	
  and	
  hobby	
  farmers.	
  Since	
  hobby	
  farmers	
  are,	
  at	
  least	
  in	
  principle,	
  also	
  growing	
  agricultural	
  products,	
  some	
  on	
  the	
  committee	
  believed	
  that	
  small	
  agricultural	
  lots	
  could	
  potentially	
  be	
  part	
  of	
  a	
  system	
  of	
  buffers	
  between	
  urban	
  growth	
  and	
  commercial	
  agricultural	
  parcels.	
  Many	
  saw	
  part-­‐time	
  farmers	
  as	
  part	
  of	
  "commercial"	
  agriculture	
  and	
  so	
  their	
  property	
  worthy	
  of	
  protection	
  from	
  growth.	
  Even	
  new	
  farmers	
  who	
  would	
  like	
  to	
  be	
  making	
  a	
  full-­‐time	
  living	
  from	
  farming	
  often	
  take	
  years	
  to	
  build	
  their	
  businesses	
  and	
  may	
  not	
  be	
  making	
  a	
  profit	
  in	
  a	
  particular	
  year	
  or	
  may	
  not	
  be	
  making	
  enough	
  to	
  support	
  their	
  household	
  without	
  additional	
  outside	
  income.	
  However,	
  other	
  farmers	
  complain	
  that	
  hobby	
  farmers	
  are	
  actually	
  the	
  source	
  of	
  the	
  most	
  complaints	
  and	
  conflicts	
  in	
  contrast	
  to	
  urban	
  neighbors.	
  In	
  general,	
  the	
  division	
  between	
  hobby	
  farming	
  and	
  commercial	
  farming	
  is	
  unclear	
  and	
  the	
  idea	
  of	
  only	
  supporting	
  farmers	
  whose	
  main	
  occupation	
  was	
  farming	
  is	
  untenable	
  since	
  the	
  vast	
  majority	
  of	
  farmers	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  like	
  the	
  rest	
  of	
  the	
  U.S.,	
  are	
  part-­‐time	
  or	
  retired	
  from	
  other	
  occupations	
  (see	
  Figure	
  19).	
  	
  	
   The	
  committee	
  frequently	
  heard	
  testimony	
  from	
  landowners	
  as	
  to	
  the	
  productivity	
  of	
  the	
  properties	
  for	
  agriculture.	
  The	
  validity	
  of	
  that	
  testimony	
  however,	
  was	
  colored	
  by	
  owners'	
  positionality	
  within	
  the	
  agricultural	
  community	
  and	
  that	
  person's	
  ability	
  to	
  speak	
  to	
  their	
  efforts	
  to	
  make	
  the	
  property	
  productive.	
  The	
  presence	
  of	
  speculative	
  owners	
  is	
  widely	
  acknowledged	
  among	
  those	
  active	
  in	
  
	
  	
  
	
   108	
  
land	
  use	
  issues	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  In	
  some	
  cases	
  owners	
  were	
  very	
  open	
  about	
  their	
  status	
  as	
  investors	
  and	
  still	
  argued	
  that	
  the	
  land	
  they	
  had	
  purchased	
  was	
  not	
  productive,	
  maintaining	
  that	
  their	
  intentions	
  when	
  they	
  bought	
  the	
  property	
  should	
  have	
  no	
  influence	
  on	
  the	
  committee's	
  decisions.	
  	
  
	
  
Figure	
  19:	
  USDA	
  farm	
  typology.	
  See	
  Appendix	
  B	
  for	
  definitions	
  of	
  these	
  farm	
  
types.	
  	
  There	
  was	
  a	
  huge	
  influence	
  on	
  the	
  part	
  of	
  individual	
  land	
  owners	
  and	
  that	
  included	
  a	
  couple	
  of	
  key	
  speculative	
  owners,	
  those	
  who	
  had	
  come	
  up	
  and	
  bought	
  up	
  large	
  tracts	
  of	
  land	
  with	
  the	
  thought	
  that	
  they	
  could	
  influence	
  the	
  process	
  to	
  bring	
  those	
  lands	
  into	
  the	
  urban	
  growth	
  areas.	
  They	
  were	
  really	
  active,	
  on	
  the	
  rural	
  lands	
  committee	
  they	
  came	
  in	
  and	
  just	
  railed	
  on	
  the	
  committee	
  and	
  this	
  was	
  a	
  committee	
  of	
  professionals	
  who	
  were	
  technically	
  inclined	
  and	
  were	
  not	
  use	
  to	
  this	
  and	
  I'll	
  tell	
  you,	
  it	
  was	
  a	
  real	
  difficult	
  process	
  for	
  many	
  of	
  the	
  people	
  on	
  the	
  committee	
  to	
  deal	
  with.	
  Many	
  of	
  the	
  people	
  on	
  the	
  committee	
  were	
  ready	
  to	
  drop	
  out	
  because	
  they	
  were	
  being	
  harassed	
  essentially."	
  -­‐	
  Committee	
  member	
  commenting	
  on	
  the	
  influence	
  
of	
  landowners	
  in	
  the	
  decision	
  making	
  process.	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   109	
  
	
   Yet	
  distinguishing	
  between	
  speculators	
  and	
  farmers	
  who	
  have	
  honestly	
  made	
  an	
  effort	
  to	
  put	
  their	
  land	
  to	
  productive	
  uses	
  and	
  found	
  serious	
  bio-­‐physical	
  limitations	
  requires	
  more	
  than	
  a	
  knowledge	
  of	
  the	
  art	
  and	
  science	
  of	
  agriculture,	
  it	
  also	
  requires	
  a	
  knowledge	
  of	
  the	
  intentions	
  of	
  the	
  specific	
  landowner.	
  Other	
  landowners	
  maintained	
  that	
  while	
  a	
  particular	
  plot	
  of	
  land	
  was	
  no	
  longer	
  productive	
  because	
  of	
  soil	
  problems,	
  microclimate	
  issues,	
  or	
  increasing	
  conflicts	
  with	
  neighbors,	
  they	
  intended	
  to	
  buy	
  a	
  more	
  productive	
  agricultural	
  property	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  if	
  their	
  property	
  became	
  eligible	
  for	
  development.	
  One	
  farmer,	
  whose	
  property	
  was	
  located	
  next	
  to	
  a	
  city	
  and	
  ended	
  up	
  in	
  a	
  future	
  growth	
  area	
  explained	
  it	
  like	
  this:	
  "I	
  mean	
  we	
  are	
  trying	
  to	
  utilize	
  that	
  land,	
  to	
  make	
  it	
  as	
  productive	
  as	
  we	
  can.	
  But	
  those	
  forty	
  acre	
  farms,	
  unless	
  you	
  are	
  doing	
  vegetable	
  or	
  something	
  very	
  intensive,	
  you	
  can't	
  generate	
  a	
  living	
  income...If	
  the	
  housing	
  market	
  rebounds	
  a	
  little	
  bit	
  the	
  odds	
  are	
  I	
  can	
  make	
  a	
  profit	
  selling	
  my	
  property	
  for	
  enough	
  money	
  to	
  actually	
  buy	
  a	
  [larger]	
  farm	
  where	
  I	
  could	
  have	
  a	
  viable	
  operation."	
  	
  	
   Even	
  well	
  known	
  growers	
  with	
  long	
  family	
  histories	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  were	
  still	
  balancing	
  the	
  productive	
  value	
  of	
  their	
  lands	
  with	
  it	
  potential	
  value	
  if	
  it	
  became	
  developable.	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  largest	
  pear	
  growers	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  waged	
  an	
  active	
  campaign	
  directed	
  at	
  the	
  media	
  and	
  local	
  politicians	
  arguing	
  that	
  the	
  only	
  way	
  his	
  business	
  could	
  survive	
  was	
  if	
  some	
  of	
  his	
  land	
  was	
  designated	
  for	
  future	
  urban	
  growth.	
  When	
  coming	
  to	
  testify	
  in	
  front	
  of	
  a	
  county	
  commissioners'	
  meeting	
  on	
  the	
  RPS	
  plan,	
  he	
  brought	
  with	
  him	
  approximately	
  20	
  employees	
  who	
  all	
  dutifully	
  testified	
  on	
  his	
  behalf	
  about	
  the	
  importance	
  of	
  the	
  business	
  to	
  their	
  lives	
  and	
  their	
  long	
  histories	
  working	
  with	
  this	
  grower.	
  Another	
  large	
  pear	
  grower,	
  who	
  was	
  active	
  
	
  	
  
	
   110	
  
in	
  the	
  RPS	
  process,	
  was	
  widely	
  criticized	
  by	
  many	
  in	
  the	
  agricultural	
  community	
  for	
  making	
  open	
  statements	
  in	
  the	
  press	
  about	
  the	
  his	
  dismal	
  view	
  of	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  denouncing	
  the	
  work	
  of	
  the	
  RLRC	
  committee	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  influence	
  politicians	
  to	
  include	
  more	
  of	
  his	
  farmland	
  in	
  the	
  urban	
  growth	
  areas.	
  	
  
Intraclass	
  Conflict	
  and	
  Farmland	
  Preservation	
  	
   Conflict	
  among	
  Jackson	
  County	
  farmers	
  about	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  should	
  be	
  seen	
  not	
  only	
  in	
  light	
  of	
  value	
  differences,	
  but	
  also	
  as	
  a	
  response	
  to	
  ongoing	
  processes	
  of	
  rural	
  gentrification	
  that	
  Oregon's	
  planning	
  system	
  has	
  had	
  limited	
  success	
  in	
  preventing.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  County	
  aging	
  orchards	
  are	
  providing	
  their	
  owners	
  with	
  decreasing	
  returns.	
  Some	
  growers	
  have	
  been	
  able	
  to	
  replant	
  older	
  orchards,	
  but	
  large	
  capital	
  investments	
  are	
  required	
  and	
  potential	
  profits	
  from	
  pear	
  farming	
  are	
  declining.	
  Because	
  of	
  the	
  regulatory	
  limitations	
  on	
  development	
  on	
  farmlands,	
  farm	
  owners	
  are	
  left	
  limited	
  options	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  realizing	
  returns	
  from	
  their	
  properties.	
  	
  	
  The	
  appreciation	
  of	
  the	
  land	
  was	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  reason	
  for	
  being	
  in	
  agriculture-­‐-­‐because	
  if	
  agriculture	
  didn't	
  make	
  any	
  money,	
  at	
  least	
  the	
  land	
  values	
  would	
  be	
  there,	
  so	
  you	
  could	
  sell	
  and	
  retire.	
  	
  Now	
  you	
  can	
  sell	
  and	
  go	
  starve	
  to	
  death,	
  live	
  on	
  Social	
  Security.	
  	
  It's	
  terrible	
  now.	
  	
  We've	
  been	
  able-­‐-­‐	
  because	
  of	
  our	
  marketing	
  and	
  culture-­‐-­‐	
  we've	
  been	
  able	
  to	
  survive.	
  	
  It	
  certainly	
  hasn't	
  been	
  easy	
  -­‐Pear	
  farmer	
  discussing	
  the	
  impact	
  of	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  
planning	
  on	
  agricultural	
  land	
  values.	
  	
  	
   The	
  literature	
  on	
  Oregon's	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  system	
  has	
  shown	
  evidence	
  of	
  significant	
  if	
  perhaps	
  moderate	
  impacts	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  limiting	
  sprawling	
  growth	
  (Gosnell	
  et	
  al.	
  2011).	
  However,	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  includes	
  a	
  fairly	
  limited	
  set	
  of	
  tools	
  for	
  protecting	
  agricultural	
  land	
  from	
  gentrification.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  
	
  	
  
	
   111	
  
county	
  several	
  factors	
  have	
  converged	
  to	
  promote	
  gentrification	
  on	
  land	
  zoned	
  for	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  use	
  in	
  particular	
  large	
  scale	
  processes	
  of	
  capital	
  investment,	
  depreciation,	
  and	
  reinvestment	
  interacting	
  with	
  the	
  particularities	
  of	
  this	
  place	
  and	
  the	
  governance	
  regime.	
  	
  	
  	
   Neil	
  Smith's	
  rent	
  gap	
  theory	
  (1987)	
  describes	
  the	
  process	
  of	
  gentrification	
  in	
  urban	
  settings	
  as	
  beginning	
  with	
  disinvestment	
  as	
  neighborhood	
  housing	
  stocks	
  age.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  aging	
  orchards	
  and	
  the	
  high	
  cost	
  of	
  replanting	
  have	
  discouraged	
  pear	
  farmers	
  from	
  reinvesting	
  in	
  a	
  crop	
  which	
  has	
  become	
  less	
  profitable	
  in	
  recent	
  decades.	
  Global	
  competition	
  in	
  the	
  pear	
  market	
  has	
  increased	
  as	
  new	
  pear	
  growing	
  regions	
  have	
  opened	
  up	
  in	
  China	
  and	
  South	
  America.	
  In	
  the	
  U.S.	
  pear	
  consumption	
  has	
  been	
  falling	
  for	
  decades.	
  Environmental	
  and	
  labor	
  regulations	
  have	
  raised	
  the	
  cost	
  of	
  production	
  for	
  farmers	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.	
  Rising	
  transportation	
  costs	
  have	
  negatively	
  impacted	
  producers	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  in	
  particular	
  as	
  the	
  county	
  is	
  significantly	
  further	
  from	
  major	
  population	
  centers	
  and	
  transportation	
  hubs	
  than	
  other	
  pear	
  growing	
  districts	
  in	
  the	
  Northwest	
  and	
  California.	
  	
  	
   Eliza	
  Darling	
  (2005)	
  points	
  to	
  a	
  strong	
  role	
  for	
  state-­‐regulation	
  in	
  producing	
  a	
  rent	
  gap	
  and	
  gentrified	
  housing	
  in	
  the	
  rural	
  region	
  around	
  Adirondack	
  Park	
  rather	
  than	
  a	
  decline	
  in	
  resource	
  industries	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  Similarly	
  Oregon's	
  comprehensive	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system	
  has	
  played	
  a	
  significant	
  role	
  in	
  shaping	
  and	
  even	
  promoting	
  particular	
  types	
  of	
  gentrification	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  	
  Because	
  farm	
  zoning	
  makes	
  land	
  undevelopable,	
  farmland	
  retains	
  relatively	
  low	
  prices	
  per	
  acre.	
  Speculators	
  and	
  gentrifiers,	
  from	
  outside	
  the	
  local	
  area,	
  benefit	
  when	
  they	
  purchase	
  land	
  from	
  the	
  lower	
  land	
  prices	
  provided	
  by	
  farm	
  zoning.	
  They	
  are	
  able	
  to	
  
	
  	
  
	
   112	
  
buy	
  large	
  acreages	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  and	
  build	
  palatial	
  homes	
  for	
  the	
  same	
  price	
  they	
  might	
  pay	
  for	
  a	
  small	
  home	
  or	
  apartment	
  in	
  the	
  inflated	
  residential	
  markets	
  of	
  the	
  San	
  Francisco	
  Bay	
  Area	
  or	
  Silicon	
  Valley.	
  Farm	
  zoning	
  in	
  Oregon	
  produces	
  a	
  sort	
  of	
  low-­‐pressure	
  area	
  in	
  land	
  markets	
  and	
  amenity	
  migrants	
  rush	
  in	
  to	
  fill	
  that	
  void.	
  As	
  a	
  result,	
  gentrification	
  on	
  lands	
  zoned	
  EFU	
  is,	
  paradoxically,	
  proceeding	
  more	
  quickly	
  than	
  on	
  lands	
  zoned	
  for	
  either	
  urban	
  uses	
  or	
  rural	
  residences	
  (see	
  Figure	
  20).	
  	
  
	
  
Figure	
  20:	
  This	
  graph	
  is	
  based	
  on	
  a	
  GIS	
  analysis	
  of	
  assessors’	
  codes	
  of	
  quality	
  
of	
  single-­‐family	
  homes.	
  The	
  higher	
  the	
  number	
  on	
  the	
  x-­‐axis,	
  the	
  higher	
  the	
  
assessor's	
  ranking	
  of	
  the	
  home's	
  building	
  qualities.	
  There	
  are	
  583	
  homes	
  of	
  
quality	
  7	
  and	
  8	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  Of	
  these,	
  457	
  are	
  located	
  in	
  rural	
  areas.	
  	
  	
  	
   Oregon	
  planners	
  have	
  attempted	
  to	
  limit	
  gentrification	
  on	
  farmland	
  by	
  enacting	
  income	
  requirements	
  before	
  farmers	
  can	
  build	
  new	
  homes	
  on	
  land	
  zoned	
  for	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  use.	
  This	
  has	
  the	
  effect	
  of	
  limiting	
  the	
  proliferation	
  of	
  new	
  houses	
  
	
  	
  
	
   113	
  
within	
  farm	
  zones,	
  but	
  does	
  not	
  limit	
  remodeling	
  of	
  existing	
  farmhouses	
  by	
  new	
  amenity	
  oriented	
  owners.	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  farmers	
  on	
  the	
  RLRC	
  committee	
  described	
  the	
  remodeling	
  activities	
  of	
  his	
  neighbors:	
  I	
  was	
  on	
  my	
  way	
  home	
  the	
  other	
  night	
  and	
  I	
  was	
  looking	
  at	
  that	
  stable	
  up	
  there	
  on	
  Wagner	
  Creek.	
  I	
  don't	
  know	
  how	
  much	
  money	
  they	
  put	
  into	
  that!	
  It's	
  changing	
  you	
  know,	
  it	
  was	
  a	
  dirt-­‐poor	
  piece	
  of	
  ground	
  and	
  it	
  looks	
  like	
  two	
  parcels	
  consolidated.	
  And	
  in	
  that	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  valley	
  people	
  have	
  caught	
  on:	
  'Don't	
  fight	
  that	
  $80,000	
  or	
  $40,000	
  criteria	
  for	
  building	
  a	
  farm	
  house.	
  Go	
  buy	
  a	
  rundown	
  farmhouse	
  with	
  20	
  or	
  30	
  acres	
  and	
  get	
  a	
  remodel	
  permit.'	
  A	
  neighbor	
  of	
  mine	
  had	
  a	
  1200	
  sq.	
  foot	
  home,	
  he's	
  now	
  living	
  in	
  a	
  3400	
  sq	
  ft	
  home,	
  a	
  remodel	
  and	
  that's	
  what's	
  going	
  on	
  up	
  there.	
  And	
  a	
  huge	
  stable,	
  I	
  can't	
  even	
  guess	
  how	
  much	
  money	
  went	
  into	
  that.	
  Pears	
  are	
  way	
  down,	
  people	
  have	
  different	
  ideas	
  about	
  the	
  activity.	
  A	
  lot	
  of	
  farms	
  are	
  family	
  style.	
  It	
  almost	
  looks	
  like	
  a	
  sort	
  of	
  a	
  4-­‐H	
  setup,	
  mixed	
  use.	
  	
  Frustration	
  at	
  the	
  limitations	
  placed	
  on	
  them	
  by	
  Oregon's	
  planning	
  system	
  can	
  be	
  seen	
  particularly	
  as	
  a	
  form	
  of	
  intra-­‐class	
  conflict	
  (Philips	
  1993,	
  Cloke	
  and	
  Thrift	
  1987,	
  Hines	
  2010)	
  in	
  which	
  existing	
  production-­‐oriented	
  land	
  owners,	
  who	
  saw	
  themselves	
  as	
  "ruling	
  this	
  valley"	
  now	
  see	
  themselves	
  as	
  losing	
  out	
  to	
  a	
  wave	
  of	
  new	
  arrivals	
  with	
  capital	
  to	
  invest.	
  One	
  farm	
  manager	
  described	
  the	
  tension	
  between	
  pear	
  farmers	
  and	
  those	
  in	
  the	
  wine	
  industry	
  like	
  this:	
  	
  Pear	
  growers	
  as	
  a	
  group	
  have	
  been	
  more	
  conservative	
  and	
  more	
  development	
  oriented.	
  They	
  historically	
  owned	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  land	
  and	
  due	
  to	
  the	
  economics	
  of	
  the	
  pear	
  industry	
  for	
  many	
  years,	
  felt	
  that	
  a	
  much	
  better	
  use	
  for	
  their	
  land	
  would	
  be	
  development	
  rather	
  than	
  farming.	
  And	
  it	
  has	
  been	
  a	
  stated	
  goal,	
  and	
  I	
  think	
  there	
  is	
  some	
  validity	
  to	
  it,	
  that	
  the	
  land	
  base	
  that	
  they	
  have	
  is	
  much	
  larger	
  than	
  what	
  they	
  are	
  really	
  able	
  to	
  market.	
  And	
  the	
  cost	
  of	
  replanting	
  was	
  quite	
  high	
  so	
  being	
  able	
  to	
  sell	
  off	
  land	
  for	
  development	
  and	
  put	
  that	
  money	
  back	
  into	
  orchards	
  was	
  a	
  goal	
  of	
  many	
  growers.	
  Some	
  were	
  able	
  to	
  make	
  that	
  work	
  and	
  some	
  took	
  the	
  money	
  and	
  ran.	
  It	
  was	
  definitely	
  a	
  very	
  tough	
  business	
  to	
  be	
  in.	
  Some	
  of	
  the	
  land	
  was	
  sold	
  to	
  prospective	
  vineyard	
  owners.	
  I	
  think	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  that	
  is	
  really	
  economically	
  viable.	
  For	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  years	
  there	
  was	
  this	
  kind	
  of	
  friction	
  between	
  vineyard	
  owners	
  and	
  pear	
  growers	
  because	
  there	
  was	
  this	
  feeling	
  that	
  it	
  would	
  be	
  just	
  as	
  tough	
  to	
  get	
  going	
  and	
  for	
  vineyards	
  to	
  be	
  economically	
  viable.	
  And	
  there	
  was	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  the	
  people	
  in	
  the	
  wine	
  industry	
  
	
  	
  
	
   114	
  
that	
  had	
  the	
  goal	
  of	
  protecting	
  the	
  land	
  base,	
  not	
  developing	
  it.	
  And	
  the	
  pear	
  growers	
  really	
  wanted	
  to	
  develop	
  it,	
  so	
  there	
  is	
  that	
  tension	
  back	
  and	
  forth.	
  	
  	
  The	
  devolution	
  of	
  responsibility	
  for	
  designating	
  which	
  farmlands	
  will	
  convert	
  to	
  urban	
  uses	
  and	
  which	
  will	
  remain	
  in	
  farm	
  uses,	
  provides	
  a	
  tool	
  for	
  local	
  land	
  owners,	
  who	
  view	
  themselves	
  and	
  other	
  long-­‐term	
  owners	
  as	
  unfairly	
  disadvantaged	
  by	
  the	
  system,	
  to	
  realize	
  value	
  on	
  their	
  own	
  property	
  and	
  to	
  limit	
  the	
  ability	
  of	
  a	
  new	
  group	
  of	
  land	
  owners,	
  including	
  speculators	
  and	
  gentrifiers,	
  to	
  benefit.	
  
Discussion	
  and	
  Conclusion	
  	
   The	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  process	
  has	
  now	
  been	
  concluded	
  with	
  relative	
  success	
  after	
  more	
  than	
  12	
  years	
  of	
  work	
  by	
  local	
  stakeholders	
  to	
  build	
  a	
  plan	
  that	
  could	
  be	
  supported	
  by	
  participating	
  municipalities,	
  Jackson	
  County	
  and	
  DLCD	
  but	
  would	
  not	
  be	
  challenged	
  by	
  either	
  state	
  planners	
  or	
  watchdog	
  groups	
  such	
  as	
  1000	
  Friends	
  of	
  Oregon	
  (see	
  Figure	
  21	
  for	
  a	
  map	
  of	
  current	
  urbanization	
  and	
  “future	
  growth	
  areas”).	
  Although	
  the	
  specifics	
  of	
  this	
  case	
  are	
  unique	
  to	
  Oregon,	
  the	
  challenges	
  of	
  governing	
  growth	
  and	
  development	
  in	
  traditionally	
  agricultural	
  regions	
  facing	
  potentially	
  sprawling	
  urban	
  growth	
  are	
  broadly	
  applicable.	
  As	
  this	
  case	
  points	
  out,	
  it	
  is	
  not	
  simply	
  a	
  matter	
  of	
  sorting	
  speculators	
  and	
  amenity	
  oriented	
  new	
  arrivals	
  from	
  "authentic"	
  agricultural	
  producers.	
  A	
  number	
  of	
  studies	
  have	
  pointed	
  out	
  the	
  paradoxical	
  interests	
  of	
  amenity	
  migrants	
  who	
  both	
  contribute	
  to	
  sprawl	
  and	
  are	
  often	
  the	
  loudest	
  voices	
  decrying	
  further	
  development	
  on	
  rural	
  lands	
  (Taylor	
  and	
  Cadiuex	
  2013,	
  Walker	
  and	
  Fortmann	
  2003).	
  Agricultural	
  producers	
  can	
  also	
  embody	
  complex	
  and	
  contradictory	
  positionalities	
  as	
  both	
  authentic	
  representatives	
  of	
  
	
  	
  
	
   115	
  
farming	
  interests	
  and	
  as	
  potential	
  speculators.	
  As	
  one	
  grower	
  put	
  it:	
  "In	
  the	
  resource	
  community	
  one	
  faction	
  says	
  look	
  we	
  -­‐	
  agriculture	
  has	
  never	
  been	
  a	
  high	
  tech,	
  high	
  margin	
  industry.	
  That's	
  just	
  the	
  way	
  it	
  is,	
  it's	
  long	
  term.	
  The	
  other	
  faction	
  says,	
  if	
  we	
  can	
  convert,	
  we	
  can	
  continue	
  to	
  capitalize	
  the	
  balance	
  of	
  the	
  operations.	
  I	
  think	
  we	
  saw	
  a	
  little	
  bit	
  of	
  that	
  on	
  the	
  committee	
  going	
  both	
  ways."	
  	
  	
   The	
  complex	
  and	
  competing	
  interests	
  of	
  rural	
  land	
  owners	
  makes	
  the	
  task	
  of	
  producing	
  policies	
  to	
  conserve	
  agricultural	
  lands	
  while	
  also	
  preserving	
  private	
  property	
  rights	
  Herculean	
  in	
  all	
  but	
  the	
  most	
  gentrified	
  of	
  landscapes.	
  In	
  Napa	
  County,	
  California,	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  most	
  highly	
  valued	
  agricultural	
  landscapes	
  in	
  the	
  world,	
  the	
  value	
  of	
  agricultural	
  land	
  for	
  continued	
  production	
  and	
  tourist	
  consumption	
  makes	
  it	
  politically	
  feasible	
  to	
  pass	
  strict	
  protections	
  for	
  agricultural	
  land	
  and	
  strictly	
  limit	
  urban	
  encroachment	
  (Walker	
  2007).	
  The	
  work	
  of	
  the	
  RLRC	
  committee	
  in	
  designating	
  lands	
  in	
  the	
  "commercial	
  agricultural	
  base"	
  and	
  the	
  concerns	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  farmers	
  and	
  rural	
  land	
  owners	
  over	
  the	
  impacts	
  of	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  on	
  their	
  ability	
  to	
  successfully	
  farm	
  point	
  out	
  the	
  challenge	
  of	
  designing	
  farm	
  conservation	
  policies	
  that	
  both	
  preserve	
  agricultural	
  lands	
  and	
  support	
  farmers.	
  It	
  is	
  frequently	
  unclear	
  which	
  activities	
  will	
  be	
  compatible	
  with	
  neighboring	
  farms.	
  This	
  can	
  be	
  seen,	
  for	
  example	
  in	
  recent	
  debates	
  over	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  events	
  that	
  wineries	
  located	
  on	
  resource	
  lands	
  are	
  allowed	
  to	
  host.	
  Senate	
  Bill	
  841	
  was	
  passed	
  in	
  2013	
  and	
  limits	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  non-­‐wine	
  related	
  events	
  (parties,	
  weddings,	
  concerts)	
  that	
  wineries	
  can	
  hold	
  each	
  year,	
  attempting	
  to	
  ensure	
  that	
  land	
  in	
  farm	
  zones	
  is	
  primarily	
  being	
  used	
  for	
  farming	
  and	
  production	
  agricultural	
  products.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   116	
  
	
  
Figure	
  21:	
  Map	
  of	
  current	
  and	
  future	
  urbanization	
  and	
  high	
  value	
  farm	
  soil.	
  	
  	
   Yet	
  while	
  no	
  one	
  challenged	
  the	
  plan,	
  in	
  2010	
  the	
  Oregon	
  legislature	
  passed	
  modifications	
  to	
  the	
  RPS	
  statute	
  to	
  ensure	
  that	
  further	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  processes	
  would	
  be	
  less	
  comprehensive	
  in	
  scope	
  and	
  less	
  protracted	
  in	
  their	
  development.	
  The	
  long-­‐term	
  impacts	
  of	
  this	
  plan	
  have	
  yet	
  to	
  be	
  seen	
  and	
  the	
  future	
  
	
  	
  
	
   117	
  
of	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  county	
  is	
  still	
  uncertain.	
  How	
  fast	
  will	
  population	
  growth	
  and	
  urbanization	
  proceed?	
  Can	
  farming	
  co-­‐exist	
  with	
  expanding	
  cities?	
  Does	
  the	
  future	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County	
  look	
  more	
  like	
  the	
  Napa	
  Valley	
  or	
  more	
  like	
  Silicon	
  Valley?	
  	
  	
   Although	
  this	
  article	
  has	
  focuses	
  on	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  process	
  and	
  struggles	
  over	
  which	
  farmland	
  in	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Valley	
  should	
  be	
  protected	
  from	
  development,	
  efforts	
  to	
  redefine	
  "high	
  value"	
  farmland	
  have	
  not	
  abated	
  with	
  the	
  successful	
  conclusion	
  of	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS.	
  	
  In	
  2011	
  and	
  2012,	
  bills	
  were	
  introduced	
  into	
  the	
  Oregon	
  legislature	
  that	
  would	
  have	
  allowed	
  Jackson,	
  Josephine,	
  and	
  Douglas	
  counties	
  to	
  create	
  their	
  own	
  regional	
  definitions	
  of	
  what	
  constitutes	
  valuable	
  farm	
  and	
  forest	
  lands.	
  Neither	
  of	
  these	
  bills	
  were	
  passed,	
  but	
  in	
  2012,	
  Governor	
  Kitzahaber	
  signed	
  an	
  executive	
  order	
  allocating	
  $550,000	
  for	
  a	
  "Southern	
  Oregon	
  Pilot	
  Program"	
  under	
  which	
  the	
  three	
  counties	
  are	
  working	
  to	
  create	
  alternative	
  definitions	
  of	
  what	
  constitutes	
  valuable	
  resource	
  lands,	
  correct	
  what	
  are	
  called	
  "mapping	
  errors"	
  made	
  when	
  the	
  county	
  comprehensive	
  plans	
  were	
  first	
  put	
  into	
  place,	
  and	
  create	
  "revised	
  methods	
  for	
  the	
  authorization	
  of	
  dwellings"	
  on	
  resource	
  lands.	
  	
   Like	
  the	
  regional	
  problem	
  solving	
  statute,	
  the	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  Pilot	
  Program	
  allows	
  the	
  state	
  government	
  to	
  counter	
  attempts	
  to	
  dismantle	
  statewide	
  planning	
  through	
  calls	
  for	
  local	
  control,	
  through	
  a	
  compromise	
  under	
  which	
  county	
  governments	
  must	
  cooperate	
  and	
  agree	
  on	
  a	
  set	
  of	
  guidelines	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  submit	
  them	
  to	
  state	
  agencies	
  for	
  approval.	
  In	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  the	
  RPS	
  process	
  has	
  largely	
  settled	
  the	
  question	
  of	
  which	
  lands	
  are	
  likely	
  to	
  be	
  available	
  for	
  urban	
  development	
  in	
  areas	
  adjacent	
  to	
  cities.	
  However,	
  there	
  are	
  also	
  wide	
  swaths	
  of	
  land	
  away	
  from	
  
	
  	
  
	
   118	
  
cities	
  that	
  are	
  zoned	
  for	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  use.	
  These	
  lands	
  could	
  be	
  opened	
  up	
  for	
  parcelization	
  and	
  exurban	
  style	
  low-­‐density	
  development	
  if	
  comprehensive	
  planning	
  opponents	
  are	
  successful	
  in	
  redefining	
  what	
  constitutes	
  "high	
  value"	
  farmland	
  in	
  Southern	
  Oregon.	
  	
  	
   Efforts	
  like	
  these	
  to	
  weaken	
  land	
  use	
  controls	
  through	
  more	
  local	
  control	
  point	
  to	
  the	
  continued	
  need	
  for	
  supporters	
  of	
  state	
  growth	
  controls	
  to	
  work	
  with	
  agricultural	
  producers	
  and	
  rural	
  landowners	
  to	
  find	
  ways	
  to	
  address	
  their	
  concerns.	
  Many	
  of	
  the	
  economic	
  issues	
  faced	
  by	
  farmers,	
  such	
  as	
  access	
  to	
  credit	
  and	
  assistance	
  with	
  startup	
  costs	
  for	
  new	
  farmers,	
  are	
  beyond	
  the	
  scope	
  of	
  land	
  use	
  regulation,	
  but	
  are	
  essential	
  to	
  the	
  continued	
  success	
  of	
  both	
  agriculture	
  and	
  growth	
  control	
  in	
  Oregon.	
  Supporting	
  farming	
  maybe	
  the	
  best	
  way	
  out	
  of	
  this	
  sticky	
  situation	
  for	
  Oregon’s	
  planning	
  system.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   119	
  
	
  
CHAPTER	
  VI	
  
CONCLUSION	
  	
  	
   The	
  previous	
  three	
  chapters	
  constitute	
  a	
  partial	
  record	
  of	
  my	
  answers	
  to	
  the	
  research	
  questions	
  posed	
  in	
  the	
  introduction	
  of	
  this	
  document:	
  
• Why	
  is	
  there	
  pressure	
  to	
  rescale	
  land	
  use	
  governance	
  in	
  Oregon?	
  	
  
• What	
  is	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  divide	
  in	
  this	
  process?	
  
• What	
  are	
  the	
  implications	
  of	
  this	
  localization	
  for	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  in	
  Oregon?	
  I	
  say	
  that	
  these	
  are	
  partial	
  answers	
  because	
  these	
  chapters	
  touch	
  on	
  some,	
  but	
  not	
  all	
  of	
  the	
  issues	
  that	
  shape	
  land	
  use	
  politics	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  	
  
Rescaling	
  	
   The	
  pressure	
  for	
  increased	
  local	
  control	
  over	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  is	
  more	
  complex	
  than	
  the	
  common	
  discourses	
  on	
  rescaling	
  in	
  Oregon	
  would	
  suggest.	
  For	
  supporters	
  of	
  Oregon’s	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  system	
  rescaling	
  represents	
  a	
  significant	
  threat	
  to	
  the	
  stability	
  of	
  that	
  system.	
  As	
  a	
  result,	
  suggestions	
  that	
  state	
  planners	
  fail	
  to	
  understand	
  local	
  conditions	
  are	
  met	
  with	
  skepticism	
  and	
  derision.	
  There	
  is	
  no	
  question	
  that	
  private	
  property	
  rights	
  activists	
  are	
  using	
  arguments	
  for	
  local	
  control	
  as	
  a	
  conscious	
  strategy	
  for	
  weakening	
  the	
  state	
  system.	
  	
  	
   Political	
  discussions	
  of	
  this	
  issue	
  often	
  focus	
  on	
  whether	
  the	
  physical	
  geography	
  of	
  the	
  various	
  regions	
  of	
  Oregon	
  justifies	
  variations	
  in	
  how	
  land	
  use	
  is	
  governed.	
  While	
  there	
  is	
  no	
  doubt	
  that	
  Jackson	
  County’s	
  physical	
  geography	
  is	
  significantly	
  different	
  than	
  that	
  of	
  the	
  Willamette	
  Valley,	
  my	
  argument	
  is	
  not	
  that	
  
	
  	
  
	
   120	
  
these	
  physical	
  differences	
  necessarily	
  call	
  for	
  a	
  different	
  governance	
  strategy,	
  but	
  rather	
  that	
  the	
  physical	
  geography,	
  along	
  with	
  the	
  historical	
  development	
  of	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  political	
  economy,	
  shape	
  the	
  local	
  culture	
  and	
  attitudes	
  towards	
  land	
  use	
  governance	
  in	
  the	
  region.	
  In	
  particular,	
  the	
  economic	
  marginality	
  of	
  agriculture	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  and	
  the	
  long	
  history	
  of	
  tourism	
  and	
  gentrified	
  rural	
  settlement	
  make	
  the	
  strong	
  division	
  between	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  land	
  uses	
  imposed	
  by	
  state	
  regulation	
  appear	
  to	
  many	
  locals	
  as	
  disruptive	
  of	
  the	
  historical	
  governance	
  regime	
  and	
  land	
  use	
  conventions.	
  	
  The	
  three	
  preceding	
  papers	
  also	
  illustrate	
  the	
  complexity	
  of	
  scalar	
  interactions	
  in	
  environmental	
  governance.	
  In	
  relation	
  to	
  scale,	
  this	
  case	
  makes	
  two	
  points.	
  First,	
  that	
  the	
  local	
  is	
  not	
  simply	
  in	
  contrast	
  to	
  the	
  global	
  or	
  a	
  site	
  for	
  domination,	
  but	
  rather	
  that	
  forces	
  at	
  the	
  local	
  scale	
  can	
  influence	
  environmental	
  governance	
  at	
  the	
  regional	
  level.	
  	
  
Urban-­‐Rural	
  Interactions	
  	
   One	
  of	
  the	
  key	
  discourses	
  that	
  reinforces	
  the	
  calls	
  for	
  increased	
  local	
  control	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  relates	
  to	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  dichotomy	
  and	
  Jackson	
  County’s	
  place	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  that	
  divided.	
  While	
  places	
  like	
  Jackson	
  County	
  are	
  commonly	
  thought	
  of	
  as	
  rural,	
  these	
  places	
  are	
  increasingly	
  dominated	
  by	
  extended	
  urbanization.	
  That	
  is,	
  these	
  places	
  are	
  part	
  of	
  global	
  processes	
  of	
  urbanization	
  and	
  dominated	
  by	
  urban	
  desires	
  and	
  urban	
  economic	
  forces.	
  The	
  fabric	
  of	
  urban	
  society	
  is	
  rapidly	
  thickening	
  in	
  such	
  locations	
  with	
  significant	
  ecological	
  and	
  social	
  consequences.	
  	
  	
   The	
  three	
  articles	
  that	
  make	
  up	
  this	
  dissertation	
  have	
  each	
  centered	
  in	
  various	
  ways	
  on	
  the	
  urban-­‐rural	
  dichotomy,	
  which	
  has	
  been	
  central	
  to	
  both	
  the	
  success	
  of	
  
	
  	
  
	
   121	
  
and	
  challenges	
  to	
  Oregon's	
  land	
  use	
  planning	
  system.	
  The	
  first	
  paper	
  argued	
  that	
  from	
  the	
  start	
  of	
  Jackson	
  County’s	
  development	
  as	
  a	
  region	
  there	
  was	
  a	
  different	
  sort	
  of	
  interaction	
  between	
  urban	
  or	
  exurban	
  desires	
  and	
  rural	
  economies.	
  The	
  second	
  paper	
  outlined	
  a	
  theoretical	
  framework	
  for	
  understanding	
  the	
  interactions	
  between	
  urban	
  and	
  rural	
  spaces	
  and	
  ideals	
  using	
  the	
  theory	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  to	
  understand	
  these	
  interactions.	
  The	
  third	
  paper	
  closely	
  examined	
  how	
  the	
  planning	
  system	
  works	
  for	
  farmers	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County	
  and	
  how	
  urban	
  desires	
  and	
  urban	
  ideas	
  of	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  tend	
  to	
  dominate	
  over	
  a	
  more	
  nuanced	
  portrayal	
  provided	
  by	
  the	
  farmers	
  themselves.	
  	
   In	
  total,	
  these	
  papers	
  make	
  a	
  case	
  for	
  the	
  utility	
  of	
  a	
  theory	
  of	
  extended	
  urbanization	
  in	
  understanding	
  how	
  urbanization	
  impacts	
  historically	
  rural	
  regions.	
  At	
  the	
  same	
  time	
  I	
  have	
  argued	
  that	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  the	
  rural	
  has	
  continuing	
  relevance	
  despite	
  the	
  rapid	
  urbanization	
  of	
  global	
  populations	
  and	
  the	
  increasing	
  dominance	
  of	
  what	
  Lefebvre	
  calls	
  global	
  urban	
  society.	
  	
  
Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  	
   On	
  November	
  12th	
  2012	
  the	
  Land	
  Conservation	
  and	
  Development	
  Commission,	
  the	
  panel	
  that	
  oversees	
  Oregon's	
  land	
  use	
  policies,	
  approved	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  regional	
  plan.	
  The	
  final	
  approval	
  of	
  this	
  plan	
  validated	
  work	
  going	
  back	
  approximately	
  20	
  years	
  to	
  the	
  start	
  of	
  the	
  Our	
  Region	
  project	
  in	
  the	
  early	
  1990s.	
  By	
  2012	
  the	
  approval	
  of	
  this	
  regional	
  plan	
  was	
  a	
  forgone	
  conclusion.	
  The	
  effort	
  had	
  taken	
  on	
  enough	
  inertia	
  that	
  the	
  details	
  of	
  the	
  plan	
  were	
  not	
  at	
  issue.	
  Rather,	
  there	
  was	
  overwhelming	
  investment	
  in	
  the	
  plan	
  by	
  the	
  city	
  governments	
  involved,	
  even	
  among	
  those	
  city	
  councilors	
  who	
  normally	
  oppose	
  statewide	
  
	
  	
  
	
   122	
  
planning.	
  For	
  LCDC,	
  opposing	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  plan	
  would	
  have	
  meant	
  confirming	
  opponent’s	
  arguments	
  about	
  the	
  system's	
  inflexibility	
  and	
  the	
  state's	
  distain	
  for	
  local	
  concerns.	
  	
  	
   The	
  key	
  aspects	
  of	
  the	
  final	
  plan	
  are	
  urban	
  reserves	
  for	
  the	
  cities	
  of	
  Medford,	
  Central	
  Point,	
  Phoenix,	
  Talent,	
  and	
  Eagle	
  Point,	
  guidelines	
  for	
  agricultural	
  buffers,	
  and	
  the	
  appointment	
  of	
  an	
  agricultural	
  task	
  force.	
  The	
  success	
  of	
  this	
  plan	
  is	
  impressive	
  considering	
  the	
  widespread	
  mistrust	
  of	
  statewide	
  planning	
  and	
  big	
  government	
  among	
  many	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  At	
  the	
  same	
  time,	
  many	
  of	
  the	
  most	
  innovative	
  and	
  interesting	
  proposals	
  that	
  had	
  been	
  considered	
  for	
  inclusion	
  in	
  the	
  plan	
  were	
  dropped	
  during	
  the	
  12	
  years	
  of	
  negotiations.	
  Largely,	
  the	
  planning	
  process	
  became	
  focused	
  around	
  designating	
  urban	
  reserves.	
  Since	
  the	
  approval	
  of	
  the	
  Bear	
  Creek	
  RPS	
  however	
  there	
  have	
  been	
  ongoing	
  controversies	
  around	
  land	
  use	
  and	
  regulation	
  of	
  farmland	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  	
  
Implications	
  for	
  the	
  Future	
  of	
  Land	
  Use	
  Policy	
  	
   On	
  May	
  20th	
  2014	
  Jackson	
  County	
  voters	
  decided	
  to	
  pass	
  initiative	
  15-­‐119,	
  which	
  banned	
  the	
  growing	
  of	
  genetically	
  modified	
  crops	
  in	
  the	
  county.	
  The	
  controversial	
  passage	
  of	
  this	
  legislation	
  represents	
  a	
  growing	
  political	
  alliance	
  in	
  the	
  county	
  between	
  urban	
  consumers	
  and	
  the	
  ever-­‐growing	
  contingent	
  of	
  small	
  farmers	
  in	
  the	
  region	
  who	
  value	
  organics,	
  local	
  food	
  production,	
  and	
  particular	
  environmental	
  values	
  of	
  land	
  care	
  over	
  productivity	
  at	
  any	
  cost.	
  	
  	
  Yet	
  again	
  Jackson	
  County	
  is	
  at	
  the	
  center	
  of	
  a	
  dispute	
  over	
  land	
  use.	
  Last	
  October	
  the	
  Oregon	
  legislature	
  passed	
  Senate	
  Bill	
  863,	
  which	
  prohibits	
  counties	
  in	
  Oregon	
  from	
  passing	
  GMO	
  (Genetically	
  Modified	
  Organisms)	
  labeling	
  laws	
  or	
  crop	
  bans.	
  Jackson	
  
	
  	
  
	
   123	
  
County's	
  initiative	
  is	
  exempt	
  from	
  this	
  ban	
  because	
  it	
  was	
  already	
  on	
  the	
  ballot.	
  	
  GMO	
  supporters	
  spent	
  almost	
  a	
  million	
  dollars	
  funding	
  a	
  massive	
  local	
  advertising	
  campaign	
  to	
  defeat	
  this	
  initiative.	
  	
  	
   At	
  the	
  same	
  time,	
  this	
  fight	
  is	
  not	
  just	
  about	
  Jackson	
  County.	
  Three	
  other	
  counties	
  in	
  Oregon	
  have	
  put	
  GMO	
  bans	
  on	
  their	
  ballots	
  despite	
  the	
  statewide	
  ban.	
  Meanwhile	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  other	
  states	
  across	
  the	
  U.S.	
  have	
  passed	
  preemptive	
  bans	
  on	
  local	
  laws	
  that	
  would	
  limit	
  GMOs	
  and	
  a	
  few	
  counties	
  have	
  successfully	
  banned	
  the	
  growing	
  of	
  GMO	
  crops.	
  Farm	
  and	
  food	
  policy	
  are	
  clearly	
  subjects	
  of	
  rising	
  controversy	
  and	
  Oregon,	
  a	
  state	
  with	
  significant	
  populations	
  on	
  both	
  extremes	
  of	
  the	
  political	
  spectrum,	
  is	
  likely	
  to	
  continue	
  to	
  be	
  a	
  magnet	
  for	
  such	
  controversies.	
  	
  	
   Although	
  urban	
  land	
  uses	
  continue	
  to	
  take	
  up	
  a	
  relatively	
  small	
  percentage	
  of	
  the	
  global	
  landscape,	
  increasing	
  pressure	
  on	
  food	
  systems	
  from	
  human-­‐induced	
  climate	
  change	
  and	
  increasing	
  transportation	
  prices	
  makes	
  conservation	
  of	
  farmland	
  an	
  issue	
  of	
  intensifying	
  significance.	
  However,	
  even	
  if	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  and	
  food	
  policy	
  was	
  not	
  an	
  area	
  of	
  concern,	
  there	
  are	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  other	
  reasons	
  to	
  care	
  about	
  growth	
  controls	
  and	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  policies.	
  	
  	
   In	
  Oregon,	
  as	
  in	
  all	
  50	
  U.S.	
  States,	
  farm	
  properties	
  receive	
  significant	
  reductions	
  in	
  their	
  property	
  taxes	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  encourage	
  land	
  to	
  remain	
  in	
  farm	
  uses	
  and	
  discourage	
  sprawl.	
  If	
  my	
  results	
  from	
  Jackson	
  County	
  and	
  the	
  extensive	
  literature	
  on	
  amenity	
  migration	
  to	
  rural	
  areas	
  are	
  any	
  indication,	
  those	
  tax	
  breaks	
  are	
  increasingly	
  going	
  to	
  land	
  owners	
  who	
  are	
  farming	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  enjoy	
  a	
  rural	
  lifestyle	
  rather	
  than	
  producing	
  products	
  or	
  revenue	
  from	
  their	
  farms.	
  On	
  the	
  other	
  hand,	
  it	
  may	
  be	
  that	
  tax	
  breaks	
  for	
  farming	
  and	
  other	
  farmland	
  conservation	
  policies	
  
	
  	
  
	
   124	
  
such	
  as	
  Oregon's	
  exclusive	
  farm	
  zoning	
  are	
  rather	
  a	
  way	
  to	
  preserve	
  a	
  certain	
  aesthetic	
  of	
  the	
  rural	
  landscape	
  for	
  visual	
  or	
  experiential	
  consumption	
  by	
  urban	
  tourists	
  and	
  amenity	
  migrants.	
  	
  	
   In	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  as	
  in	
  the	
  rest	
  of	
  Oregon,	
  there	
  is	
  broad	
  support	
  for	
  farming	
  and	
  policies	
  that	
  assist	
  farmers.	
  However,	
  this	
  has	
  not	
  always	
  translated	
  into	
  support	
  for	
  statewide	
  land	
  use	
  planning.	
  My	
  research	
  illustrates	
  the	
  complex	
  ways	
  that	
  conservation	
  policies,	
  such	
  as	
  Oregon’s	
  statewide	
  planning	
  system,	
  impact	
  individual	
  landowners	
  and	
  the	
  challenges	
  to	
  designing	
  a	
  policy	
  that	
  will	
  support	
  a	
  healthy	
  farm	
  economy	
  in	
  regions	
  that	
  are	
  increasingly	
  marginalized	
  and	
  urbanized.	
  Oregon	
  farmers	
  are	
  not	
  a	
  single	
  group;	
  rather	
  they	
  are	
  increasingly	
  diverse	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  gender,	
  race,	
  class,	
  and	
  motivations	
  for	
  taking	
  up	
  such	
  an	
  economically	
  challenging	
  occupation.	
  As	
  Oregon’s	
  system	
  continues	
  to	
  evolve,	
  if	
  it	
  is	
  to	
  succeed	
  there	
  will	
  have	
  to	
  be	
  continuing	
  discussions	
  among	
  Oregon	
  citizens	
  and	
  policy	
  makers	
  over	
  what	
  they	
  value	
  about	
  agriculture,	
  what	
  types	
  of	
  farming	
  should	
  be	
  supported,	
  and	
  what	
  policies	
  will	
  be	
  needed	
  to	
  ensure	
  a	
  thriving	
  agricultural	
  economy.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   125	
  
	
  
APPENDIX	
  A	
  
CORE	
  METROPOLITAN	
  COUNTIES	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  	
  
	
   126	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  	
  
	
   127	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  	
  
	
   128	
  
APPENDIX	
  B	
  
	
  EXCERPT	
  FROM	
  ERS	
  FARM	
  TYPOLOGY	
  FOR	
  A	
  DIVERSE	
  AGRICULTURAL	
  
SECTOR	
  	
  Robert	
  Hoppe,	
  Janet	
  Perry,	
  and	
  David	
  E.	
  Banker,	
  Agriculture	
  Information	
  Bulletin	
  No.	
  (AIB-­‐759)	
  8	
  pp,	
  September	
  2000	
  
	
  	
  
	
   129	
  
	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   130	
  
REFERENCES	
  CITED	
  
Chapter	
  I	
  
Blaikie,	
  Piers,	
  and	
  Harold	
  Brookfield.	
  1987.	
  Land	
  Degradation	
  and	
  Society.	
  Routledge.	
  Bourdieu,	
  Pierre.	
  1986.	
  The	
  forms	
  of	
  capital.	
  In	
  Handbook	
  of	
  Theory	
  and	
  Research	
  for	
  
the	
  Sociology	
  of	
  Education,	
  ed.	
  J.	
  Richardson,	
  241-­‐258.	
  New	
  York:	
  Greenwood.	
  	
  Brown,	
  Christopher	
  J.,	
  and	
  Mark	
  Purcell.	
  2005.	
  “There’s	
  Nothing	
  Inherent	
  about	
  Scale:	
  Political	
  Ecology,	
  the	
  Local	
  Trap,	
  and	
  the	
  Politics	
  of	
  Development	
  in	
  the	
  Brazilian	
  Amazon.”	
  Geoforum	
  36	
  (5)	
  (September):	
  607–624.	
  	
  Brenner,	
  Neil.	
  2001.	
  “The	
  Limits	
  to	
  Scale?	
  Methodological	
  Reflections	
  on	
  Scalar	
  Structuration.”	
  Progress	
  in	
  Human	
  Geography	
  25	
  (4)	
  (December):	
  591–614.	
  	
  Brenner,	
  Neil,	
  and	
  Nik	
  Theodore.	
  2002.	
  “Preface:	
  From	
  the	
  ‘New	
  Localism’	
  to	
  the	
  Spaces	
  of	
  Neoliberalism.”	
  Antipode	
  34	
  (3)	
  (June):	
  341–347.	
  	
  Goodwin,	
  Philip.	
  1998.	
  “‘Hired	
  Hands’	
  or	
  ‘Local	
  Voice’:	
  Understandings	
  and	
  Experience	
  of	
  Local	
  Participation	
  in	
  Conservation.”	
  Transactions	
  of	
  the	
  Institute	
  
of	
  British	
  Geographers	
  23	
  (4):	
  481–499.	
  	
  Gosnell,	
  Hannah,	
  Jeffrey	
  D.	
  Kline,	
  Garrett	
  Chrostek,	
  and	
  James	
  Duncan.	
  2011.	
  “Is	
  Oregon’s	
  Land	
  Use	
  Planning	
  Program	
  Conserving	
  Forest	
  and	
  Farm	
  Land?	
  A	
  Review	
  of	
  the	
  Evidence.”	
  Land	
  Use	
  Policy	
  28	
  (1)	
  (January):	
  185–192.	
  	
  Herbert,	
  Steve.	
  2005.	
  “The	
  Trapdoor	
  of	
  Community.”	
  Annals	
  of	
  the	
  Association	
  of	
  
American	
  Geographers	
  95	
  (August	
  2004):	
  850–865.	
  	
  Hester,	
  Randy.	
  1996.	
  “Wanted:	
  Local	
  Participation	
  with	
  a	
  View.”	
  Public	
  Lands,	
  
Private	
  Places.	
  42–52.	
  	
  Holling,	
  C.S.	
  S,	
  and	
  Gary	
  K.	
  Meffe.	
  1996.	
  “Command	
  and	
  Control	
  and	
  the	
  Pathology	
  of	
  Natural	
  Resource	
  Management.”	
  Conservation	
  Biology	
  10	
  (2)	
  (April):	
  328–337.	
  	
  Howitt,	
  Richard.	
  2003.	
  “Scale.”	
  In	
  A	
  Companion	
  to	
  Political	
  Geography,	
  eds.	
  John	
  Agnew,	
  Katharyne	
  Mitchell,	
  and	
  Gerard	
  Toal.	
  Malden,	
  MA,	
  USA:	
  Blackwell	
  Publishing	
  Ltd.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   131	
  
Kellert,	
  Stephen	
  R.,	
  Jai	
  N.	
  Mehta,	
  Syma	
  A.	
  Ebbin,	
  and	
  Laly	
  L.	
  Lichtenfeld.	
  2000.	
  “Community	
  Natural	
  Resource	
  Management:	
  Promise,	
  Rhetoric,	
  and	
  Reality.”	
  
Society	
  Natural	
  Resources	
  13	
  (8):	
  705–715.	
  	
  Marston,	
  Sallie	
  A.	
  2000.	
  “The	
  Social	
  Construction	
  of	
  Scale.”	
  Progress	
  in	
  Human	
  
Geography	
  24	
  (2)	
  (June	
  1):	
  219–242.	
  	
  Marston,	
  Sallie	
  A,	
  John	
  Paul	
  Jones,	
  and	
  Keith	
  Woodward.	
  2005.	
  “Human	
  Geography	
  without	
  Scale.”	
  Transactions	
  of	
  the	
  Institute	
  of	
  British	
  Geographers	
  30	
  (4)	
  (December):	
  416–432.	
  	
  McCarthy,	
  James.	
  2002.	
  “First	
  World	
  Political	
  Ecology:	
  Lessons	
  from	
  the	
  Wise	
  Use	
  Movement.”	
  Environment	
  and	
  Planning	
  A	
  34	
  (7):	
  1281–1302.	
  McCarthy,	
  James.	
  2005.	
  “Devolution	
  in	
  the	
  Woods:	
  Community	
  Forestry	
  as	
  Hybrid	
  Neoliberalism.”	
  Environment	
  and	
  Planning	
  A	
  37	
  (6):	
  995–1014.	
  	
  Nabeta,	
  Marguerite.	
  2013.	
  “Collaborative	
  Equitable	
  Solution	
  Building	
  for	
  Complex	
  Rural	
  Sustainability	
  Issues:	
  A	
  Case	
  Study	
  of	
  the	
  South	
  Deschutes	
  County	
  Regional	
  Problem	
  Solving	
  Project”.	
  Master’s	
  thesis,	
  University	
  of	
  Oregon.	
  Neumann,	
  Roderick	
  P.	
  2009.	
  “Political	
  Ecology:	
  Theorizing	
  Scale.”	
  Progress	
  in	
  Human	
  
Geography	
  33	
  (3)	
  (June	
  17):	
  398–406.	
  	
  Purcell,	
  Mark,	
  and	
  J.	
  Christopher	
  Brown.	
  2005.	
  “Against	
  the	
  Local	
  Trap:	
  Scale	
  and	
  the	
  Study	
  of	
  Environment	
  and	
  Development.”	
  Progress	
  in	
  Development	
  Studies	
  5	
  (4)	
  (October	
  1):	
  279–297.	
  	
  Reed,	
  Maureen	
  G.,	
  and	
  Shannon	
  Bruyneel.	
  2010.	
  “Rescaling	
  Environmental	
  Governance,	
  Rethinking	
  the	
  State:	
  A	
  Three-­‐Dimensional	
  Review.”	
  Progress	
  in	
  
Human	
  Geography	
  34	
  (5)	
  (January	
  26):	
  646–653.	
  	
  Robbins,	
  Paul.	
  2004.	
  Political	
  Ecology:	
  A	
  Critical	
  Introduction.	
  Malden,	
  MA:	
  Blackwell	
  Pub.	
  Sayre,	
  Nathan	
  F.	
  2005.	
  “Ecological	
  and	
  Geographical	
  Scale.”	
  Progress	
  in	
  Human	
  
Geography	
  3:	
  276–290.	
  Sheppard,	
  Eric,	
  and	
  Robert	
  B.	
  McMaster.	
  2004.	
  Scale	
  and	
  Geographic	
  Inquiry:	
  Nature,	
  
Society,	
  and	
  Method.	
  Oxford:	
  Wiley-­‐Blackwell.	
  	
  Walker,	
  Peter	
  A.,	
  and	
  Patrick	
  T.	
  Hurley.	
  2011.	
  Planning	
  Paradise:	
  Politics	
  and	
  
Visioning	
  of	
  Land	
  Use	
  in	
  Oregon.	
  University	
  of	
  Arizona	
  Press.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   132	
  
Chapter	
  II	
  
Galt,	
  Ryan	
  E.	
  2011.	
  Counting	
  and	
  Mapping	
  Community	
  Supported	
  Agriculture	
  (	
  CSA	
  )	
  in	
  the	
  United	
  States	
  and	
  California :	
  Contributions	
  from	
  Critical	
  Cartography	
  /	
  GIS.	
  ACME	
  An	
  International	
  EJournal	
  for	
  Critical	
  Geographies,	
  10(2),	
  131–162.	
  Knigge,	
  L.,	
  and	
  Cope,	
  M.	
  2006.	
  Grounded	
  visualization:	
  integrating	
  the	
  analysis	
  of	
  qualitative	
  and	
  quantitative	
  data	
  through	
  grounded	
  theory	
  and	
  visualization.	
  
Environment	
  and	
  Planning	
  A,	
  38(11),	
  2021	
  –	
  2037.	
  	
  Walker,	
  P.,	
  and	
  Fortmann,	
  L.	
  2003.	
  Whose	
  landscape?	
  A	
  political	
  ecology	
  of	
  the	
  “exurban”	
  Sierra.	
  Cultural	
  Geographies,	
  10(4),	
  469–491.	
  	
  	
  
Chapter	
  III	
  Abrams,	
  Jesse	
  B,	
  Nicholas	
  J	
  Gill,	
  Hannah	
  Gosnell,	
  and	
  Peter	
  J	
  Klepeis.	
  2012.	
  "Re-­‐Creating	
  the	
  Rural,	
  Reconstructing	
  Nature:	
  An	
  International	
  Literature	
  Review	
  of	
  the	
  Environmental	
  Implications	
  of	
  Amenity	
  Migration."	
  Conservation	
  and	
  
Society	
  10	
  (3)	
  (July	
  1):	
  270.	
  	
  	
  Atwood,	
  Kay.	
  1980.	
  Blossoms	
  and	
  Branches :	
  a	
  Gathering	
  of	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  Orchard	
  
Memories.	
  Ashland	
  	
  Or.	
  (102	
  South	
  Pioneer	
  Ashland	
  97520):	
  K.	
  Atwood.	
  Berube,	
  Alan,	
  Bruce	
  Katz,	
  and	
  Robert	
  E.	
  Lang.	
  2006.	
  Redefining	
  Urban	
  and	
  Suburban	
  
America:	
  Evidence	
  from	
  Census	
  2000,	
  Volume	
  Three	
  (Redefining	
  Urban	
  and	
  
Suburban	
  America).	
  Brookings	
  Institution	
  Press.	
  	
  Borne,	
  Lawrence.	
  1983.	
  Dude	
  Ranching :	
  a	
  Complete	
  History.	
  Albuquerque:	
  University	
  of	
  New	
  Mexico	
  Press.	
  	
  	
  Cadieux,	
  Kristen	
  V.,	
  and	
  Hurley,	
  Patrick	
  T.	
  2009.	
  Amenity	
  migration,	
  exurbia,	
  and	
  emerging	
  rural	
  landscapes:	
  global	
  natural	
  amenity	
  as	
  place	
  and	
  as	
  process.	
  
GeoJournal,	
  297–302.	
  	
  	
  Cordy,	
  C.	
  B.	
  1977.	
  History	
  of	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  Fruit	
  Industry	
  (p.	
  30).	
  Central	
  Point,	
  Oregon.	
  	
  Dwight	
  Hines,	
  J.	
  2010.	
  In	
  pursuit	
  of	
  experience:	
  The	
  postindustrial	
  gentrification	
  of	
  the	
  rural	
  American	
  West.	
  Ethnography,	
  11(2),	
  285	
  –308	
  	
  Ghose,	
  Rose.	
  2004.	
  Big	
  Sky	
  or	
  Big	
  Sprawl?	
  Rural	
  Gentrification	
  and	
  the	
  Changing	
  Cultural	
  Landscape	
  of	
  Missoula,	
  Montana.	
  Urban	
  Geography,	
  25(6),	
  528–549.	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   133	
  
Gosnell,	
  Hannah,	
  Julia	
  H.	
  Haggerty,	
  and	
  Patrick	
  A.	
  Byorth.	
  2007.	
  “Ranch	
  Ownership	
  Change	
  and	
  New	
  Approaches	
  to	
  Water	
  Resource	
  Management	
  in	
  Southwestern	
  Montana:	
  Implications	
  for	
  Fisheries.”	
  Journal	
  of	
  the	
  American	
  Water	
  Resources	
  
Association	
  43	
  (4)	
  (August):	
  990–1003.	
  	
  	
  Gosnell,	
  Hannah,	
  and	
  Jesse	
  Abrams.	
  2009.	
  Amenity	
  migration:	
  diverse	
  conceptualizations	
  of	
  drivers,	
  socioeconomic	
  dimensions,	
  and	
  emerging	
  challenges.	
  GeoJournal,	
  76(4),	
  1–20.	
  	
  	
  Guthman,	
  Julie.	
  2004.	
  Agrarian	
  dreams :	
  the	
  paradox	
  of	
  organic	
  farming	
  in	
  California.	
  Berkeley:	
  University	
  of	
  California	
  Press.	
  	
  	
  Haggerty,	
  Julia	
  H.,	
  and	
  William	
  R.	
  Travis.	
  2006.	
  “Out	
  of	
  Administrative	
  Control:	
  Absentee	
  Owners,	
  Resident	
  Elk	
  and	
  the	
  Shifting	
  Nature	
  of	
  Wildlife	
  Management	
  in	
  Southwestern	
  Montana.”	
  Geoforum	
  37	
  (5)	
  (September):	
  816–830.	
  	
  	
  Hayden,	
  Dolores.	
  2004.	
  Building	
  Suburbia:	
  Green	
  Fields	
  and	
  Urban	
  Growth,	
  1820-­‐
2000	
  (p.	
  336).	
  Vintage.	
  	
  Hines,	
  J.	
  Dwight	
  2010.	
  Rural	
  gentrification	
  as	
  permanent	
  tourism:	
  the	
  creation	
  of	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  Archipelago	
  as	
  postindustrial	
  cultural	
  space.	
  Environment	
  and	
  
Planning	
  D:	
  Society	
  and	
  Space,	
  28,	
  509–525.	
  	
  Hyde,	
  Anne	
  F.	
  1998.	
  Nothing	
  New	
  Under	
  the	
  Sun:	
  Continuities	
  in	
  the	
  West.	
  Pacific	
  
Historical	
  Review,	
  67(3),	
  393–399.	
  	
  	
  Jacoby,	
  Karl.	
  2003.	
  Crimes	
  against	
  Nature:	
  Squatters,	
  Poachers,	
  Thieves,	
  and	
  the	
  Hidden	
  History	
  of	
  American	
  Conservation.	
  University	
  of	
  California	
  Press.	
  	
  Jones,	
  R.	
  E.,	
  Fly,	
  J.	
  M.,	
  Talley,	
  J.,	
  and	
  Cordell,	
  H.	
  K.	
  2003.	
  Green	
  Migration	
  into	
  Rural	
  America:	
  The	
  New	
  Frontier	
  of	
  Environmentalism?	
  Society	
  and	
  Natural	
  
Resources:	
  An	
  International	
  Journal,	
  16(3),	
  221.	
  	
  	
  Larsen,	
  Soren,	
  and	
  Craig	
  Hutton.	
  2011.	
  "Community	
  Discourse	
  and	
  the	
  Emerging	
  Amenity	
  Landscapes	
  of	
  the	
  Rural	
  American	
  West."	
  GeoJournal	
  77	
  (5)	
  (April	
  6):	
  651–665.	
  	
  	
  Limerick,	
  Patricia.	
  1987.	
  The	
  legacy	
  of	
  conquest :	
  the	
  unbroken	
  past	
  of	
  the	
  American	
  
West	
  (1st	
  ed.).	
  New	
  York:	
  Norton.	
  	
  Limerick,	
  Patricia.	
  1995.	
  “Turnerians	
  All:	
  The	
  Dream	
  of	
  a	
  Helpful	
  History	
  in	
  an	
  Intelligible	
  World.”	
  The	
  American	
  Historical	
  Review	
  100	
  (3)	
  (June):	
  697–716.	
  	
  Limerick,	
  P.	
  N.,	
  Cowell,	
  A.,	
  and	
  Collinge,	
  S.	
  K.	
  2009.	
  Remedies	
  for	
  a	
  New	
  West:	
  Healing	
  
Landscapes,	
  Histories,	
  and	
  Cultures.	
  University	
  of	
  Arizona	
  Press.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   134	
  
McWilliams,	
  C.	
  1939.	
  Factories	
  in	
  the	
  field:	
  the	
  story	
  of	
  migratory	
  farm	
  labor	
  in	
  
California.	
  Boston:	
  Little	
  	
  Brown	
  and	
  Company.	
  	
  	
  Mechling,	
  Jay.	
  1999.	
  “Oranges.”	
  In	
  Rooted	
  in	
  America:	
  Foodlore	
  of	
  Popular	
  Fruits	
  and	
  
Vegetables,	
  edited	
  by	
  David	
  S.	
  Wilson	
  and	
  Angus	
  K.	
  Gillespie,	
  120–141.	
  University	
  of	
  Tennessee	
  Press.	
  	
  	
  Mitchell,	
  D.	
  1996.	
  The	
  lie	
  of	
  the	
  land :	
  migrant	
  workers	
  and	
  the	
  California	
  landscape.	
  Minneapolis:	
  University	
  of	
  Minnesota	
  Press.	
  	
  	
  Nelson,	
  P.	
  B.	
  2002.	
  Perceptions	
  of	
  Restructuring	
  in	
  the	
  Rural	
  West :	
  Insights	
  from	
  the	
  "Cultural	
  Turn".	
  Society	
  and	
  Natural	
  Resources :	
  An	
  International	
  Journal,	
  15,	
  903–921.	
  	
  O'Connor,	
  J.	
  R.	
  1998.	
  Natural	
  causes:	
  essays	
  in	
  ecological	
  marxism	
  (p.	
  376).	
  Guilford	
  Press.	
  	
  Robbins,	
  William	
  G.	
  1994.	
  Colony	
  and	
  Empire:	
  The	
  Capitalist	
  Transformation	
  of	
  the	
  
American	
  West.	
  University	
  Press	
  of	
  Kansas.	
  	
  Robbins,	
  Paul.	
  2004.	
  Political	
  Ecology:	
  A	
  Critical	
  Introduction	
  (p.	
  242).	
  Malden,	
  MA:	
  Blackwell	
  Pub.	
  	
  Robbins,	
  Paul,	
  Katie	
  Meehan,	
  Hannah	
  Gosnell,	
  and	
  Susan	
  J.	
  Gilbertz.	
  2009.	
  Writing	
  the	
  New	
  West:	
  A	
  Critical	
  Review.	
  Rural	
  Sociology,	
  74,	
  356–382.	
  	
  	
  Robbins,	
  Paul,	
  Stephen	
  Martin,	
  and	
  Susan	
  Gilbertz.	
  2011.	
  "Developing	
  the	
  Commons:	
  The	
  Contradictions	
  of	
  Growth	
  in	
  Exurban	
  Montana."	
  The	
  Professional	
  
Geographer	
  (August	
  25).	
  	
  Robbins,	
  William	
  G.	
  1994.	
  Colony	
  and	
  Empire:	
  The	
  Capitalist	
  Transformation	
  of	
  the	
  
American	
  West.	
  University	
  Press	
  of	
  Kansas.	
  	
  Robbins,	
  William	
  G.	
  1999.	
  Landscapes	
  of	
  Promise:	
  The	
  Oregon	
  Story,	
  1800-­‐1940	
  (p.	
  416).	
  University	
  of	
  Washington	
  Press.	
  	
  Smith,	
  Michael	
  D.,	
  and	
  Richard	
  S.	
  Krannich.	
  2000.	
  “‘Culture	
  Clash’	
  Revisited:	
  Newcomer	
  and	
  Longer-­‐Term	
  Residents'	
  Attitudes	
  Toward	
  Land	
  Use,	
  Development,	
  and	
  Environmental	
  Issues	
  in	
  Rural	
  Communities	
  in	
  the	
  Rocky	
  Mountain	
  West*.”	
  Rural	
  Sociology	
  65	
  (3)	
  (October	
  22):	
  396–421.	
  	
  	
  Spectorsky,	
  Auguste	
  C.	
  1955.	
  The	
  Exurbanites.	
  Berkeley	
  Publishing	
  Corp.	
  	
  	
  Taylor,	
  Joseph	
  E.	
  2004.	
  "The	
  Many	
  Lives	
  of	
  the	
  New	
  West."	
  The	
  Western	
  Historical	
  
Quarterly	
  35	
  (2)	
  (July):	
  141–165.	
  	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   135	
  
Theobald,	
  David	
  M.	
  2001.	
  “Land-­‐Use	
  Dynamics	
  beyond	
  the	
  American	
  Urban	
  Fringe.”	
  Geographical	
  Review	
  91	
  (3)	
  (July):	
  544–564.	
  	
  	
  Theobald,	
  David.	
  M.	
  2003.	
  Defining	
  and	
  Mapping	
  Rural	
  Sprawl:	
  Examples	
  from	
  the	
  Northwest	
  U.S.*	
  Measuring	
  and	
  Mapping	
  Rural	
  Sprawl.	
  Geographical	
  Review,	
  1–6.	
  	
  Travis,	
  William	
  R.	
  2007.	
  New	
  Geographies	
  of	
  the	
  American	
  West:	
  Land	
  Use	
  and	
  the	
  
Changing	
  Patterns	
  of	
  Place.	
  1st	
  ed.	
  Island	
  Press.	
  	
  Travis,	
  William	
  R.	
  1997.	
  Atlas	
  of	
  the	
  new	
  West :	
  portrait	
  of	
  a	
  changing	
  region.	
  New	
  York:	
  W.W.	
  Norton	
  and	
  Co.	
  	
  Vaught,	
  David.	
  1999.	
  Cultivating	
  California :	
  Growers,	
  Specialty	
  Crops,	
  and	
  Labor,	
  
1875-­‐1920.	
  Baltimore	
  	
  Md.:	
  Johns	
  Hopkins	
  University	
  Press.	
  	
  	
  Walker,	
  Peter.	
  2003.	
  Reconsidering	
  "regional"	
  political	
  ecologies:	
  toward	
  a	
  political	
  ecology	
  of	
  the	
  rural	
  American	
  West.	
  Progress	
  in	
  Human	
  Geography,	
  27(1),	
  7–24.	
  	
  	
  Walker,	
  Richard.	
  2004.	
  The	
  conquest	
  of	
  bread	
  (p.	
  408).	
  New	
  Press.	
  	
  	
  
Chapter	
  IV	
  
Abrams,	
  Jesse	
  B,	
  Nicholas	
  J	
  Gill,	
  Hannah	
  Gosnell,	
  and	
  Peter	
  J	
  Klepeis.	
  2012.	
  "Re-­‐Creating	
  the	
  Rural,	
  Reconstructing	
  Nature:	
  An	
  International	
  Literature	
  Review	
  of	
  the	
  Environmental	
  Implications	
  of	
  Amenity	
  Migration."	
  Conservation	
  and	
  
Society	
  10	
  (3)	
  (July	
  1):	
  270.	
  	
  Angelo,	
  Hillary,	
  and	
  David	
  Wachsmuth.	
  2014.	
  “Urbanizing	
  Urban	
  Political	
  Ecology:	
  A	
  Critique	
  of	
  Methodological	
  Cityism.”	
  International	
  Journal	
  of	
  Urban	
  and	
  
Regional	
  Research	
  (March	
  17).	
  Amin,	
  Ash,	
  and	
  Nigel	
  Thrift.	
  2002.	
  Cities:	
  Reimagining	
  the	
  Urban.	
  Polity.	
  	
  Brenner,	
  Neil.	
  2013.	
  "Theses	
  on	
  Urbanization."	
  Public	
  Culture	
  25	
  (1	
  69)	
  (February	
  18):	
  85–114.	
  	
  Brenner,	
  Neil,	
  and	
  Christian	
  Schmidt.	
  2014.	
  "The	
  'Urban	
  Age'	
  in	
  Question."	
  
International	
  Journal	
  of	
  Urban	
  and	
  Regional	
  Research	
  38	
  (3)	
  (May	
  4):	
  731–755.	
  	
  Cadieux,	
  Kirsten	
  Valentine.	
  2008.	
  "Political	
  Ecology	
  of	
  Exurban	
  'Lifestyle'	
  Landscapes	
  at	
  Christchurch's	
  Contested	
  Urban	
  Fence."	
  Urban	
  Forestry	
  and	
  
Urban	
  Greening	
  7	
  (3)	
  (August):	
  183–194.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   136	
  
Cadieux,	
  Kirsten	
  Valentine,	
  and	
  Laura	
  Taylor.	
  2013.	
  Landscape	
  and	
  the	
  Ideology	
  of	
  
Nature	
  in	
  Exurbia:	
  Green	
  Sprawl.	
  Routledge.	
  	
  Cadieux,	
  Kirsten	
  Valentine	
  2007.	
  “Beyond	
  the	
  rural	
  idyll:	
  Agrarian	
  problems	
  and	
  promises	
  in	
  exurban	
  sprawl.”	
  Yale	
  Agrarian	
  Studies	
  Seminar	
  paper.	
  Carolina,	
  South,	
  Patrick	
  T.	
  Hurley,	
  Angela	
  C.	
  Halfacre,	
  S	
  Norm,	
  Marianne	
  K.	
  Burke,	
  and	
  Norm	
  S.	
  Levine.	
  2008.	
  "Finding	
  a	
  'Disappearing'	
  Nontimber	
  Forest	
  Resource:	
  Using	
  Grounded	
  Visualization	
  to	
  Explore	
  Urbanization	
  Impacts	
  on	
  Sweetgrass	
  Basketmaking	
  in	
  Greater	
  Mt.	
  Pleasant,	
  South	
  Carolina."	
  
Professional	
  Geographer	
  60	
  (4):	
  556–578.	
  	
  Cronon,	
  William.	
  1992.	
  Nature's	
  Metropolis:	
  Chicago	
  and	
  the	
  Great	
  West.	
  W.	
  W.	
  Norton	
  and	
  Company.	
  	
  Davenport,	
  Spencer.	
  2009.	
  “Farming	
  Pears	
  Profitably	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  River	
  Valley”.	
  Master’s	
  thesis,	
  Southern	
  Oregon	
  University.	
  Evans,	
  Nick,	
  Carol	
  Morris,	
  and	
  Michael	
  Winter.	
  2002.	
  “Conceptualizing	
  Agriculture:	
  A	
  Critique	
  of	
  Post-­‐Productivism	
  as	
  the	
  New	
  Orthodoxy.”	
  Progress	
  in	
  Human	
  
Geography	
  26	
  (3)	
  (June	
  1):	
  313–332.	
  	
  Fortmann,	
  Louise.	
  1996.	
  "Bonanza!	
  The	
  Unasked	
  Questions:	
  Domestic	
  Land	
  Tenure	
  through	
  International	
  Lenses."	
  Society	
  and	
  Natural	
  Resources	
  9	
  (5):	
  537	
  –	
  547.	
  	
  Foster,	
  John	
  Bellamy,	
  and	
  Fred	
  Magdoff.	
  2000.	
  "Liebig,	
  Marx,	
  and	
  the	
  Depletion	
  of	
  Soil	
  Fertility:	
  Relevance	
  For	
  Today's	
  Agriculture."	
  In	
  Monthly	
  Review	
  Press.	
  Gosnell,	
  Hannah	
  and	
  Jesse	
  Abrams.	
  2009.	
  "Amenity	
  Migration:	
  Diverse	
  Conceptualizations	
  of	
  Drivers,	
  Socioeconomic	
  Dimensions,	
  and	
  Emerging	
  Challenges."	
  GeoJournal	
  76	
  (4)	
  (July	
  8):	
  1–20.	
  	
  Gosnell,	
  Hannah,	
  Jeffrey	
  D.	
  Kline,	
  Garrett	
  Chrostek,	
  and	
  James	
  Duncan.	
  2011.	
  "Is	
  Oregon's	
  Land	
  Use	
  Planning	
  Program	
  Conserving	
  Forest	
  and	
  Farm	
  Land?	
  A	
  Review	
  of	
  the	
  Evidence."	
  Land	
  Use	
  Policy	
  28	
  (1)	
  (January):	
  185–192.	
  	
  Gustafson,	
  Seth,	
  Nick	
  Heynen,	
  Jennifer	
  Rice,	
  Ted	
  Gragson,	
  J.	
  Marshall	
  Shepherd,	
  Christopher	
  Strother.	
  2013.	
  "Megapolitan	
  Political	
  Ecology	
  and	
  Urban	
  Metabolism	
  in	
  Southern	
  Appalachia."	
  The	
  Professional	
  Geographer.	
  	
  Hines,	
  J.	
  Dwight.	
  2010.	
  Rural	
  Gentrification	
  as	
  Permanent	
  Tourism:	
  The	
  Creation	
  of	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  Archipelago	
  as	
  Postindustrial	
  Cultural	
  Space."	
  Environment	
  and	
  
Planning	
  D:	
  Society	
  and	
  Space	
  28:	
  509–525.	
  Hoggart,	
  Keith.	
  1990.	
  “Let's	
  Do	
  Away	
  with	
  Rural.”	
  Journal	
  of	
  Rural	
  Studies	
  v.	
  6(3).	
  
	
  	
  
	
   137	
  
Holmes,	
  John.	
  2002.	
  “Diversity	
  and	
  Change	
  in	
  Australia’s	
  Rangelands:	
  A	
  Post-­‐Productivist	
  Transition	
  with	
  a	
  Difference?”	
  Transactions	
  of	
  the	
  Institute	
  of	
  
British	
  Geographers	
  27	
  (3)	
  (September):	
  362–384.	
  Hurley,	
  Patrick	
  T.	
  and	
  Peter	
  A.	
  Walker.	
  2004.	
  "Whose	
  Vision?	
  Conspiracy	
  Theory	
  and	
  Land-­‐Use	
  Planning	
  in	
  Nevada	
  County,	
  California."	
  Environment	
  and	
  Planning	
  -­‐	
  
Part	
  A	
  36	
  (9):	
  1529–1547.	
  	
  Johnson,	
  Brian	
  E.	
  2008.	
  "Nature,	
  Affordability,	
  and	
  Privacy	
  as	
  Motivations	
  for	
  Exurban	
  Living."	
  Urban	
  Geography	
  29	
  (7):	
  705–723.	
  	
  Kaika,	
  Maria.	
  2005.	
  City	
  of	
  Flows:	
  Modernity,	
  Nature,	
  and	
  the	
  City.	
  1st	
  ed.	
  Routledge.	
  Keil,	
  Roger.	
  2005.	
  "Progress	
  Report	
  -­‐	
  Urban	
  Political	
  Ecology."	
  Urban	
  Geography	
  26	
  (7):	
  640–651.	
  	
  Keil,	
  Roger,	
  and	
  Douglas	
  Young.	
  2009.	
  “Fringe	
  Explosions:	
  Risk	
  and	
  Vulnerability	
  in	
  Canada’s	
  New	
  in-­‐between	
  Urban	
  Landscape.”	
  Canadian	
  Geographer	
  /	
  Le	
  
Géographe	
  Canadien	
  (August).	
  	
  Kitchen,	
  Lawrence.	
  2013.	
  "Are	
  Trees	
  Always	
  'Good'?	
  Urban	
  Political	
  Ecology	
  and	
  Environmental	
  Justice	
  in	
  the	
  Valleys	
  of	
  South	
  Wales."	
  International	
  Journal	
  of	
  
Urban	
  and	
  Regional	
  Research	
  37	
  (6)	
  (November	
  23):	
  1968–1983.	
  	
  Larsen,	
  Soren,	
  and	
  Craig	
  Hutton.	
  2011.	
  "Community	
  Discourse	
  and	
  the	
  Emerging	
  Amenity	
  Landscapes	
  of	
  the	
  Rural	
  American	
  West."	
  GeoJournal	
  77	
  (5)	
  (April	
  6):	
  651–665.	
  	
  Lefebvre,	
  Henri.	
  2003.	
  The	
  Urban	
  Revolution.	
  University	
  of	
  Minnesota	
  Press.	
  Lefebvre,	
  Henri.	
  2008.	
  Critique	
  of	
  Everyday	
  Life.	
  London;	
  New	
  York:	
  Verso.	
  	
  Luke,	
  Timothy	
  W.	
  2003.	
  "Global	
  Cities	
  vs.	
  global	
  Cities:'	
  Rethinking	
  Contemporary	
  Urbanism	
  as	
  Public	
  Ecology."	
  Studies	
  in	
  Political	
  Economy:	
  11–33.	
  	
  Nelson,	
  Lise	
  and	
  Peter	
  B.	
  Nelson.	
  2010.	
  "The	
  Global	
  Rural:	
  Gentrification	
  and	
  Linked	
  Migration	
  in	
  the	
  Rural	
  USA."	
  Progress	
  in	
  Human	
  Geography	
  35	
  (4)	
  (October	
  8):	
  441–459.	
  Nelson,	
  Arthur	
  C.	
  1992.	
  "Preserving	
  Prime	
  Farmland	
  in	
  the	
  Face	
  of	
  Urbanization:	
  Lessons	
  from	
  Oregon."	
  Journal	
  of	
  the	
  American	
  Planning	
  Association	
  58	
  (4).	
  Parés,	
  Marc,	
  Hug	
  March,	
  and	
  David	
  Saurí.	
  2013.	
  "Atlantic	
  Gardens	
  in	
  Mediterranean	
  Climates:	
  Understanding	
  the	
  Production	
  of	
  Suburban	
  Natures	
  in	
  Barcelona."	
  
International	
  Journal	
  of	
  Urban	
  and	
  Regional	
  Research	
  37	
  (1)	
  (January	
  2):	
  328–347.	
  	
  
	
  	
  
	
   138	
  
Robbins,	
  Paul.	
  2002.	
  "Letter	
  to	
  the	
  Editor:	
  Obstacles	
  to	
  a	
  First	
  World	
  Political	
  Ecology?	
  Looking	
  near	
  without	
  Looking	
  up."	
  Environment	
  and	
  Planning	
  A	
  34	
  (8).	
  Environment	
  and	
  Planning	
  A:	
  1509–1513.	
  	
  Robbins,	
  Paul,	
  and	
  Julie	
  Sharp.	
  2003.	
  "The	
  Lawn-­‐Chemical	
  Economy	
  and	
  Its	
  Discontents."	
  Antipode	
  35	
  (5):	
  955–979.	
  	
  Sayre,	
  Nathan	
  F.	
  2009.	
  “Commentary:	
  Scale,	
  Rent,	
  and	
  Symbolic	
  Capital:	
  Political	
  Economy	
  and	
  Emerging	
  Rural	
  Landscapes.”	
  GeoJournal	
  (July	
  15):	
  437–439.	
  	
  Sieverts,	
  Thomas.	
  2003.	
  Cities	
  Without	
  Cities:	
  An	
  Interpretation	
  of	
  the	
  Zwischenstdt.	
  Routledge.	
  Smith,	
  Neil.	
  2008.	
  Uneven	
  Development:	
  Nature,	
  Capital,	
  and	
  the	
  Production	
  of	
  Space.	
  University	
  of	
  Georgia	
  Press.	
  Swyngedouw,	
  Erik.	
  1999.	
  "Modernity	
  and	
  Hybridity:	
  Nature,	
  Regeneracionismo,	
  and	
  the	
  Production	
  of	
  the	
  Spanish	
  Waterscape...."	
  Annals	
  of	
  the	
  Association	
  of	
  
American	
  Geographers	
  89	
  (3):	
  443.	
  	
  Taylor,	
  Laura.	
  2009.	
  "No	
  Boundaries:	
  Exurbia	
  and	
  the	
  Study	
  of	
  Contemporary	
  Urban	
  Dispersion."	
  GeoJournal.	
  	
  Theobald,	
  David	
  M.	
  2005.	
  "Landscape	
  Patterns	
  of	
  Exurban	
  Growth	
  in	
  the	
  USA	
  from	
  1980	
  to	
  2020."	
  Ecology	
  And	
  Society	
  10	
  (1):	
  32.	
  	
  Walker,	
  Peter,	
  and	
  Louise	
  Fortmann.	
  2003.	
  "Whose	
  Landscape?	
  A	
  Political	
  Ecology	
  of	
  the	
  'Exurban'	
  Sierra."	
  Cultural	
  Geographies	
  10	
  (4):	
  469–491.	
  	
  	
  
Chapter	
  V	
  
Acklin,	
  Patricia	
  J.	
  1995.	
  Settlement	
  Patterns,	
  Historical	
  Accident,	
  and	
  Land	
  Use	
  
Regulation	
  in	
  Jackson	
  County,	
  Oregon.	
  Central	
  Point:	
  Rogue	
  Valley	
  Council	
  of	
  Governments.	
  Brown,	
  Beverly.	
  1995.	
  In	
  Timber	
  Country.	
  Temple	
  University	
  Press.	
  Cadieux,	
  Kirsten	
  Valentine,	
  and	
  Laura	
  Taylor.	
  2013.	
  Landscape	
  and	
  the	
  Ideology	
  of	
  
Nature	
  in	
  Exurbia:	
  Green	
  Sprawl.	
  Routledge.	
  	
  Cloke,	
  Paul,	
  and	
  Nigel	
  Thrift.	
  1987.	
  "Intra-­‐Class	
  Conflict	
  in	
  Rural	
  Areas."	
  Journal	
  of	
  
Rural	
  Studies	
  3	
  (4)	
  (January):	
  321–333.	
  	
  Darling,	
  Eliza.	
  2005.	
  "The	
  City	
  in	
  the	
  Country:	
  Wilderness	
  Gentrification	
  and	
  the	
  Rent	
  Gap."	
  Environment	
  and	
  Planning	
  A	
  37	
  (6):	
  1015–1032.	
  
	
  	
  
	
   139	
  
Gosnell,	
  Hannah,	
  Jeffrey	
  D.	
  Kline,	
  Garrett	
  Chrostek,	
  and	
  James	
  Duncan.	
  2011.	
  "Is	
  Oregon's	
  Land	
  Use	
  Planning	
  Program	
  Conserving	
  Forest	
  and	
  Farm	
  Land?	
  A	
  Review	
  of	
  the	
  Evidence."	
  Land	
  Use	
  Policy	
  28	
  (1)	
  (January):	
  185–192.	
  Helms,	
  Douglas.	
  1992.	
  Readings	
  in	
  the	
  History	
  of	
  the	
  Soil	
  Conservation	
  Service,	
  Washington,	
  DC:	
  Soil	
  Conservation	
  Service.	
  .	
  Hines,	
  J.	
  Dwight.	
  2010.	
  "Rural	
  Gentrification	
  as	
  Permanent	
  Tourism:	
  The	
  Creation	
  of	
  the	
  New	
  West	
  Archipelago	
  as	
  Postindustrial	
  Cultural	
  Space."	
  Environment	
  and	
  
Planning	
  D:	
  Society	
  and	
  Space	
  28:	
  509–525.	
  Jones,	
  Greg	
  V.	
  and	
  Lea	
  Light.	
  2001.	
  Site	
  Characteristics	
  of	
  Vineyards	
  in	
  the	
  Rogue	
  and	
  
Applegate	
  Valley	
  American	
  Viticultural	
  Areas.	
  Oregon	
  Wine	
  Advisory	
  Board	
  and	
  the	
  Rogue	
  Chapter	
  of	
  the	
  Oregon	
  Winegrape	
  Growers	
  Association.	
  	
  Phillips,	
  Martin.	
  1993.	
  "Rural	
  Gentrification	
  and	
  the	
  Processes	
  of	
  Class	
  Colonisation."	
  
Journal	
  of	
  Rural	
  Studies	
  9	
  (2)	
  (April):	
  123–140.	
  	
  Smith,	
  Neil.	
  1987.	
  "Gentrification	
  and	
  the	
  Rent	
  Gap."	
  Annals	
  of	
  the	
  Association	
  of	
  
American	
  Geographers	
  77	
  (3):	
  462–465.	
  	
  Walker,	
  Peter,	
  and	
  Louise	
  Fortmann.	
  2003.	
  "Whose	
  Landscape?	
  A	
  Political	
  Ecology	
  of	
  the	
  'Exurban'	
  Sierra."	
  Cultural	
  Geographies	
  10	
  (4):	
  469–491.	
  	
  Walker,	
  Peter	
  A.,	
  and	
  Patrick	
  T.	
  Hurley.	
  2011.	
  Planning	
  Paradise:	
  Politics	
  and	
  
Visioning	
  of	
  Land	
  Use	
  in	
  Oregon.	
  University	
  of	
  Arizona	
  Press.	
  Walker,	
  Richard.	
  2007.	
  The	
  Country	
  in	
  the	
  City:	
  The	
  Greening	
  of	
  the	
  San	
  Francisco	
  Bay	
  
Area.	
  Seattle:	
  University	
  of	
  Washington	
  Press.