- Explore your own back yard. Visit our area's newest website - DiscoverYamhillValley.com
Big Horn Logging Corp. workers were on the job Friday in Dorothy M. Burns Memorial Park in Amity to remove 63 Douglas firs, 45 of which are diseased.
Paul Daquilante / News-Register
The Amity City Council angered residents when it voted unanimously at a Wednesday night special meeting to remove 63 of the more than 200 mature Douglas firs gracing the Dorothy M. Burns Memorial Park, mostly on the north side.
Forty-five of the trees are diseased. The remaining 18 will be removed to give fallers better access to the diseased trees and clear an area for additional parking.
In addition, 15 oak trees will be removed to provide more room for playground equipment.
Amity contracted with Big Horn Logging Corp. to do the work. Mark Stanley of Big Horn said the work began Friday morning and probably will take a week or two.
"We don't want to mess anything up," he said.
Police Chief Dan Brown said the park will be closed to the public until the work is completed. Yellow caution tape is being used to warn people off.
A small council chambers was packed for the meeting.
The decision brought many outraged residents to their feet. Some pointed fingers at Mayor Michael Cape and members of the council, as others loudly voiced their frustration.
The purpose of the meeting was to give the council an opportunity to make a decision, based on public comment received in previous meetings. Thus, no time was set aside for additional input.
However, as councilors discussed the issue, Allen Halloway stood up and began speaking. Cape asked him to sit down, as he had not been called to speak.
"The way the mayor spoke to Allen was rude and arrogant," said Sharon Haggith, who attended the meeting with her husband, Alden. They own Ashes Cafe on Trade Street.
"He's 90 plus years old and had some legitimate questions," she said. "He got shut down."
The discussion leading to the vote took about 15 minutes. Then the shouting and finger-pointing began.
"What a jerkhouse bunch of creeps," one resident said.
Brown was in the audience. He wasn't in uniform, but when the atmosphere started to grow hostile, he told people to "take it outside."
One resident responded, "I have a right to say what I want to say."
City Administrator Larry Layton said Steve Garner of Garner Timber Services in Yamhill determined the diseased trees have contracted a fungus that creates decay, or conk.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture/Pacific Northwest Region:
n When trees have many large conks, damage to the heartwood is extensive and tree failure is likely.
n With a few or single conks, affected trees may have adequate strength to withstand high wind forces, and tree failure is unlikely.
n Large conks indicate more decay. Smaller conks usually indicate less, unless the apparent small conks are remnants of larger conks that have fallen off.
n Decay is a white pocket rot found in rings separated by sound wood until decay is advanced.
Layton said he understands the importance of the park and its trees to residents. He said it's not the intent of the council to remove any more trees than necessary.
The hope is the remaining trees will last longer as a result. The trees being taken down will, in most cases, be replaced.
Councilors Karen Dahl, Walter Homen, John Lines and Rudy van Soolen were present. Scott Ruyle was absent.
Van Soolen moved the city proceed with the project. He got a quick second. Discussion and the vote followed.
Homen said he has been mulling the issue over in his mind for some time. He said he isn't thrilled about removing some of the park's trees, but said the city could face a lawsuit if a diseased tree toppled over on a person.
"I'm concerned about someone getting injured," Lines said. "This is like a no-brainer. Let's get it done and beautify the park in other ways."
Sharon Haggith blasted the council, however, accusing it of "shoving the meeting down the throats of residents without so much as a thank you." She said the council had its own agenda.
"If the trees have conk, show me a report and take care of the problem," Haggith said. "Show me a report of how many trees are affected and where they are located. I was told there is no official report."
Amity is receiving $85.40 per 1,000 board feet of salvageable timber. However, the first few trees felled Friday were in much worse shape than expected, so much of the wood may be beyond use.
Login or register to post comments
Comments (2)
We welcome your thoughts, stories and information related to this article. Click here to read our "Policies and Standards for Comments".
Wed, 09/16/2009 - 6:17pm - Posted by: ace1
Trees are falling in Amity because there's a chance to profit out of something that somehow can harm people "IF we have a bad winter", but In Oregon, when don't we?........ Funny how i got a tree removed from my place (45 foot pine, 36" wide .....3.5 feet away from a fully functional structure and the dudes were able to do it 18" at a time, using a boom and not even a branch landed on my roof....and it only cost me $50.00 and they kept the firewood, leaving me a full Cord for good measure..!!!! The explanation they're giving out as "REASON" would never fly anywhere else. It's Amity, Amity, Amity though, and the city council realizes they can get away with it as long as they mention that the one's that will benefit from dropping 63 Trees will be their children by providing new playground equipment with "Part of the profit". I'm glad the residents are not buying it because that explanation stinks all the way to Mcminnville. Does the Council think they're dealing with local people who've been living there for Generations or a bunch of Imbeciles that don't know jack???. OUTRAGEOUS!!! Board feet mean a huge profit for the city and the loggers if they knock them down full length. Any other way would mean a loss of trees and loss of any profit except for firewood and change. If those trees must fall, The residents of the city should get that timber, Bottom line. (or would that be too fair?)
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 11:25am - Posted by: mother_of_2
I agree that diseased trees need to be removed. It hasn't been too long ago that wind storms blew trees into homes and sadly a life was lost at an RV park because of a diseased tree that fell.
I praise the council members for taking the responsibility for having these removed before someone was to become hurt, however, was it necessary that the other 18 be removed to give fallers better access? I understand about more parking but 33 (18 Douglas Firs and 15 Oak) is a lot. How do fallers bring down tree's that are this tall when they are in a residential area? I have seen them do it with very little room.
It seems to me that this is a bit excessive and that the resident's have a right to be angry. It doesn't sound like their concerns were taken into consideration. I think it is interesting that in the end it came down to "$85.40 per 1,000 board feet of salvageable timber."
Sad