By Nicole Montesano • Staff Writer • 

Brewery appeal held open

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $3. Click here for one-day access.

For all other subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please .



"Friends of Yamhill County", I do tend to agree with your organization on a limited basis on a lot of issues but this is way out of line with what is the right thing to do as far as land my opinion. My impression for what you guys stood for was things such as fighting against sub divisions on rural land, stopping landfills on a floodplain, fighting to prevent quarry pits on valuable farmland and overall good stewardship and responsible land use. Why on earth would you oppose an established working family farm that's trying to utilize every square inch of what has existed for how many decades? It seems this is more responsible land use than the other 100+ wineries around the county that take a way more aggressive and destructive approach on rural acreage. Why aren't you targeting them? Plus, the brewery is almost within city limits. Its not as if this a quiet country road out in the sticks.
The fact that Mr Wells calls into question the safety of the beer that is produced, questioning the legitimacy of the hazelnut orchard, even questions the "American-ness" of the appeals process, draws real skepticism of the merits of his complaint.
Its a shame that "friends" are supporting opposition to what seems to be the very definition of being a fully sustainable family farm, brewery, tourist draw. I think you guys need to regroup on this one. This is the kind of action that will drive people away from your type of activism in this county. Mr Wells personal beef with the brewery is obvious to almost everyone.
"Friends of Yamhill County" You guys lost a lot of points on this one in my book. Not that one person matters, but I personally know a lot of supporters of the brewery and they normally would side with you guys on most issues...they overwhelming do not on this one.

Don Dix

Mr. Wall, who just recently moved from California, apparently bought land near this established farm. And immediately he decides that his little corner of the world needs changes to fit his desires.

What proof does Mr. Wall have of the violations he has presented? It would appear none, just BS foaming from his mouth.

In Oregon, new neighbors usually try to fit the neighborhood, not the other way around. Bullying tactics are seldom tolerated, and are dealt with in many forms and actions.

Come to think of it, he fits quite nicely with the mantra the 'friends' have been spewing since inception. In fact, Mr. Wall has much in common with it's founder, apparently growing up on the corner of p*ss and moan!

Shasta -- By definition, the name of the group opposing this application is the epitome of an oxymoron. There is no, nor has there ever been any, 'friendship' involved in their practices. And notice the name of the 'representative' is not given, I suspect for very good reasons -- as it's always the 'same few regurgitating mouths'.