Ravens Lead Rescuers To Missing Woman

In Critical Condition After Being Lost For Nearly Two Weeks In Oregon Mountains

(AP)  Circling ravens and two men who decided not to rest on their day off have led to the discovery of a 76-year-old woman who had been missing for almost two weeks in the Wallowa Mountains in northeast Oregon.

Baker County sheriff's Deputy Travis Ash told The Oregonian newspaper that he and Oregon State Police Trooper Chris Hawkins went looking for Doris Anderson on their day off. They left a Forest Service road and went down a steep, brushy canyon because Ash felt it had not been searched well enough before.

"What alerted us was birds; we heard ravens," Ash told the newspaper.

Ash said they also heard the Anderson talking to herself.

"It sounded real faint, like a child," he said.

That was at 2:08 p.m. Thursday.

According to Ash, Anderson said: "Oh, my God, I'm glad to see you."

Ash rushed to the road to radio for help while Hawkins stayed with Anderson, who has an injured hip and was dehydrated.

A Forest Service paramedic team arrived and rappelled down into the canyon to treat Anderson. The woman from Sandy was then flown to a Baker City hospital, where she is in critical, but stable condition.

Police say Anderson disappeared on Aug. 24th while on a bow hunting trip in the Eagle Creek area with her 74-year-old husband, Harold.

Hope had been fading for Anderson's survival chances, as she was lightly dressed in an area where temperatures dipped into the 30s over the past two weeks. About 70 volunteers a day combed the Wallowa Mountain of Eastern Oregon until the search was scaled back in late August.

The Andersons had driven into the rugged mountains and canyons in a Chevy Tahoe pulling a utility trailer. The vehicle got stuck, and Harold Anderson broke his wrist while unloading an all-terrain vehicle from the trailer.

The couple tried to walk to a U.S. Forest Service road for help but became exhausted. Harold Anderson said his wife headed back for the vehicle. A hunting party later found a disoriented Harold Anderson, but there was no sign of his wife.

A Baker County deputy and an Oregon State Police trooper found his wife around 2 p.m. Thursday in an area that had already been searched.

Iris Anderson, 71, who is married to Harold's brother, Melvin, credits Ora Doris Anderson's survival to prayer and Anderson's healthy lifestyle.

"How she managed to live for two weeks at the bottom of canyon, I don't know," Anderson said.

[kaiyo4u]

By the way, where my property is located, I could truly live off the land....

[kaiyo4u]

Newster1;

I probably wouldn''t use the logs they did for structure, maybe for ambiance. I studied architecture years ago and am an electrician. Back in school again, changing careers. So it will be awhile before I get to that point. It will be interesting and looking at the energy alternatives, I think I can sell power back to the grid (if power gets to my property). I have a parcel of high desert with water at it''s base.
The only thing I will need will be the electrical for the usual stuff. I''ve been looking at different designs for years and this one does appeal to me. Too many of the earth friendly designs didn''t blend well with their environment (asthetically).

[nothappyatall]

kaiyo4u,

That''s an interesting house, though it''s in Wales (assuming you are in the USA) there are likely to be various code and building permit issues as well as INSURANCE to contend with in building such a structure for habitation.

You may not get a permit for certain designs, the insurance company may refuse to give you a policy and so on, but otherwise if you can do it then go for it.

[kaiyo4u]

Some of the last reports I have read indicated we have a negative population growth counting only births in this country. Then we have the immigration issue in this country. Which is among the friendliest of immigrations laws in the world. The immigration was stepped up to keep the current population expanding.
Most people I know, only had two kids. There were a few that had three or more, but they were the minority.
Some reports have said that having lots of kids is now the new status symbol. Are some of our immigrants trying to keep the status symbol?
I understand you fear of Soylent Green and Logan''s Run, I do not wish to live in a society such as those.
How do we implement population controls in a country that is "free".
I''m actually living in an apartment now, but when it comes time to build, it will be an earth friendly house. I even have the site in my favorites for reference...

http://www.simondale.net/house/index.htm

Even though it is hobbitish, it still has charm...

[nothappyatall]

Good kaiyo4u, correct, and as you can see from those numbers, the population impact is the problem, and you can clearly see how rapidly it''s grown and WHY we have the problems we do.
My house is 1100 sq ft.

"Until then, we are going to keep destroying our resources at an alarming rate. "

It absolutely can''t continue as it has, the system will break down at some point, that is 100% certain. The freewheeling days of having 8-10 kids per couple are OVER, even China is limiting couples to ONE now but it''s too little too late.
Soylent Green and Logan''s Run are coming, and this won''t be science fiction like the movie versions were.

[kaiyo4u]

Posted by newster1 at 01:34 PM : Sep 08, 2007

Clearly... I completely understand. I used to have a "big" house. Two stories and about 2000 sq. ft. I am much more comfortable in something smaller. The environmental footprint is smaller and it takes less resources to manage.
When the population gets tired of keeping up with the Joneses and realizes it''s ok to live within your means, then we''ll have progress...
Until then, we are going to keep destroying our resources at an alarming rate.

[nothappyatall]

1790 Census 3,894,000

As you can see, the USA had under 4 million people NATION-WIDE in 1790 (excluding natives)
4 million people is nothing on a land this size, 4 million people can waste, burn, overuse, destroy and their impact on a country this size is like a dot on an entire sheet of newspaper- the USA has 3.7 million square MILES of land- one square mile per person back in 1790. Now with over 300 million people it''s almost a hundred people in that same square mile. Instead of ONE house in that square mile it''s 100, instead of one horse and buggy it''s 100 cars.
Instead of one cord of firewood cut to heat the one little cabin it''s the equiv of 100 cords plus a lot more because homes today are far larger- 2500 sq feet on average. (around 1900 it was less than 900)
Getting the picture?

[kaiyo4u]

It is unfortunate that greed is what drives our system. Modern civilization has lost it''s roots and it is people like you and me who will be the ones to remind them of what they have lost and hopefully help to bring about that which is needed. I am all for balance and do not like to see the pendulum swing very far in either direction.

[nothappyatall]

no census at that time it would be unlikely that your figures would be accurate.
Posted by kaiyo4u

There have been census counts of US citizens since 1790, not natives but this can give SOME idea of the overall population of the nation and its growth

US Population Timeline

Jamestown 1600-1619 est. 210
Pilgrims land at Plymouth Rock in 1620
1620-1629 est. 2499
1640-1649 est. 27,947
1650-1659 est. 51,700
1660-1669 est. 84,800
1670-1679 est. 114,500
1680-1689 est. 155,600
1690-1699 est. 213,500
1700-1709 est. 275,000
1710-1719 est. 357,500
1720-1729 est. 474,388
1730-1739 est. 654,950
1740-1749 est. 889,000
1750-1759 est. 1,207,000
1760-1769 est. 1,610,000
1770-1779 est. 2,205,000
1780-1789 est. 2,781,000
1790 Census 3,894,000
1800 Census 5,309,000
1810 Census 7,239,000
1820 Census 9,638,453
1830 Census 12,866,000
1840 Census 17,069,453
1850 Census 23,191,867
1860 Census 31,443,321
1880 Census 50,156,000
1890 Census 62,948,000
1900 Census 75,995,000
1980 Census 226 Million
1990 Census: 248 Million
members.aol.com/ntgen/hrtg/census.html

Tribal Indians werent included in any early federal censuses. When plans for the first census were made in 1787, they specifically excluded "Indians not taxed" There was no reference to Indians in any census until l860 those few who were counted before that were probably numbered among "free colored" and it wasnt until 1890, that an attempt was made to include all Indians in it.

[kaiyo4u]

Newster1, I agree with you on a lot of our "debate". The old growth forests of today are second growths. That I know for sure from research. About the hardwoods, I''m not sure as I haven''t researched it. I lived east of Portland for many years and the Northern Cascades were my stomping grounds. I would think the hardwoods grew better in the valley than they did in the mountains just because of the elevations. Most oaks that I had seen there were on windswept ridges, gnarly and stunted by the extreme environment they were living in. While the oaks in the valley grew nicely.