This page needs to be proofread.
Land Tenure in Oregon.
83

The valuation of sheep in the United States in 1900 was only 22.5 times that in Oregon; cattle, 96.7; goats, 8.7. On the other hand, the proportional valuation of swine and mules was far greater in the United States than in Oregon. The Western Division received 9.1 times as much as Oregon from the sale of all live animals; California, 2.0; Washington, 0.5. The Western Division had a noticeably large valuation of mules as compared with Oregon, but was weak in swine and goats ; California was strong in the raising of mules but weak in sheep and goats ; Washington was strong in horses and swine, weak in sheep, and raised scarcely any goats. On the whole Oregon was a large producer of sheep and goats, and was well represented in the raising of live stock; she was a small producer of mules and swine.

Let us now examine Oregon's relative importance in the pro- duction of the eight classes of cereals ; corn, wheat, oats, barley, rye, buckwheat, rice and kafir corn. The total value of cereals produced in Oregon and in each of the four divisions, United States, Western Division. California and Washington, and the figures for these divisions compared with those for Oregon taken as a unit will give a basis for comparison.

TABLE 20.

VALUE OF CEREALS RAISED IN 1899 IN THE UNITED STATES, WESTERN DIVISION, CALI- FORNIA, WASHINGTON, AND OREGON, AND COMPARISON. ([1])

United Western Cali- Wash- Items. States Division fornia ington Oregon Value of Cereals. . $1,484,231,038 $ 71,357,916 $ 33,674,733 $ 12,191,397 $ 9,271,500 Comparison 160.1 7.7 3.8 1.3 1.0 Oregon was in 1900 not a large producer of cereals. The United States produced 160. i times as much as Oregon; West- ern Division, 7.7 ; CaHfornia, 3.8 ; Washington, 1.3. The West- ern Division had a small relative production of cereals as com- pared with Oregon, but Washington's yield was greater than Oregon's, and California's was nearly four times as great.


  1. U. S. Census Reports for 1900, Twelfth Census, Vol. VI, pp. 62-63.