By Nicole Montesano • Staff Writer • 

County gets nowhere on gates

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $2. Click here for one-day access.

For all other subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please .



I have been hunting and fishing areas in the Trask Mountains for most of my life. However, since Weyerhauser purchased Willamette Industries, they have built new gates and locked them. Mainly on the Toll Road, Turner Creek, Cedar Creek. The land and road in the area around Barney Reservoir, a.k.a, the Trask Damn are posted as public lands, however, the big 'W' owns the land between the gate and the public lands. They did open wome gates last year for Elk Season and some during Deer Season, but not the entire deer season. These gates are blocking recreational lands that the public cannot access. I wish that 'W' would relax the closing of the gates, but I am not counting on it. I understand that when logging activities are going, that is can be dangerous for private vehicles and log trucks outbound. And vandalism to some logging company vehicles have caused a part of this problem. I am not surprised that Mary Starrett is " unclear" of this topic. She has most likely never been up in this area, or on a gravel or dirt road for that matter..


Miata, On Starrett " She has most likely never been up up in this area, or on a gravel or dirt road for that matter". Here we are in the age of the internet and you are not even sharp enough to use it to back up your embarrassingly ignorant statement.
She lives on a dirt road. Dp everyone a favor and don't pain your brain by commenting on topics more complicated than that.

David S. Wall

"Commissioner Mary Starrett said the whole exercise seemed premature and unclear to her."

This issue is really just an enormously "sticky wicket" with Commissioner Starrett heading for a much needed and over-due, thorough paddling of her political behind.

If it weren't for Commissioners Primozich and Olson voting to grant Commissioner Starrett's private gate in her neighborhood over NE Smith Road, a Yamhill County public road sometime ago; the High Heaven Road, a private gate on Bald Mountain and all other gates on Yamhill County public roads could easily have been solved, "No private gates" on any Yamhill County public Roads.

But Noooo...once Commissioner Starrett got a "Conditioned Board Order" allowing for her gate, the issue of prohibition of all private gates on Yamhill County Public Roads became a toxic witches brew accommodating Starrett as she hobbles around the County Court House beating the opposition to this issue with her political broomstick.

Luckily for now, Starrett's "gate" was a "Conditioned Board Order." The "Condition" was Starrett could only gate NE Smith Road, if and only if, Clackamas County-who controls a portion of NE Smith Road would "vacate" their portion of NE Smith Road.

When Clackamas County was asked if they would "vacate" their portion of NE Smith Road-well, the uncontrolled and unrelenting belly laughter can still be heard.

However, the Yamhill County Board Order has not been rescinded. Commissioners Olson and Kulla were told of this continuing atrocity but, they are obviously under Starrett's voodoo and have not rescinded the Board Order.

A special note: the Yamhill County Public Works permit was taken out by Commissioner Starrett's alleged husband and paid for with a check from "R.A.F. Enterprises."

More info on Weyerhaeuser will be forth later...

David S. Wall

Lindsay Berschauer

I'd be curious to see the actual road use agreements that govern these stretches of road and the gates that delineate between public and private property. My understanding is that BLM and FS road agreements with private landowners whose lands are interspersed with theirs are of a different sort. They are not "public" roads in the same sense. If Weyerhauser was willing to open some gates, I'm sure they would require a hefty financial commitment from Yamhill county to help maintain the roads, and we would likely have to indemnify both private and public landowners. I'm sure that agreement would have to be robust.

Web Design and Web Development by Buildable