Questioning legality of a locked gate

I have tried to keep informed on the progress of the locked gate installed on Pine Creek Road. I do not know Mr. McCarty personally, only what I have read in the Herald and a few of locals opinions. I have lived in Baker City all my life, which by the way is a considerable amount of years, and the locked gate he presumes is his right, is not a right at all. His idea that the 2 1/2-mile distance Pine Creek Road runs across his property is OK. We have a law in Oregon called RS 2477, Easements By Prescription. Under Oregon law, a claimant or claimants may establish an easement by prescription by showing that his use of the property over which he claims the easement has been open, notorious, and adverse to the rights of the true landowner for a continuous and uninterrupted period of 10 years. It is true RS 2477 was repealed in 1976 under the FLPMA. That repeal was subject to existing rights. The relevant text (Sec. 701. 43 U.S.C. 1701 reads (a) “Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed as termination and valid lease, permit, patent, right-of way, or other land use right or authorization existing on the date of approval of this Act.” I personally have not been to Pine Creek Reservoir in years, the last time riding in on my horse. But I do know many people still love to go there via 4-wheelers, side-by-sides, horses, hikers, and a really good 4-wheel drive. So I ask you, Mr. McCarty and Joelleen, tell us why you think installing a locked gate on Pine Creek Road is your God-given right?

Glenda Purvine

Baker City