easement granted to the Tri-Peak Ranch (D-7412) in April 1980. This 

 easement, 60 feet in width included permission to build and use the 

 current road, including the harvest of the trees within the clearing 

 limits of the road. The easement specifically provides however "... 

 that the right of way granted herein is not exclusive and does not 

 interfere with the grantor (state) and its successor, assigns or 

 purchasers of state forest products ... their right, at all times to 

 go upon, cross and recross the land ....", it further provided that 

 the grantees rights "... shall not interfere with the grantor' s use 

 of adjacent land". As such, it appears that the state has a legal 

 right to use this existing road in Section 26. The state allows the 

 easement holders to maintain a locked gate approximately midway 

 through Section 26 for their security. 



The existing Gladstone road then passes through the extreme 

 northwest corner of Section 35 (Anderson) . As before, the state 

 would need a right-of-way agreement from this landowner to use this 

 road for logging. 



The road then enters state land in Section 34. The existing road 

 and easement situation here is the same as described for Section 26. 



The road next enters the SM of Section 27. In this section, the 

 road lays on several private lots, all owned by one party (Turk, 

 Baldwin) . The state would need a right-of-way agreement from this 

 landowner to reach proposed harvest units in Section 28 and 34. 



The landowners in the Gladstone Creek drainage frequently commented 

 that they liked their relative solitude. Many recounted the 

 difficulties they had with trespass road use when the area was 

 initially subdivided, as well as the expense they incur for weed 

 control, litter control and road maintenance. These were the most 

 often listed reasons expressed by the landowners in favor of their 

 route vs . a state route. They felt that trespass, littering and 

 increased maintenance and weed control would again be needed if the 

 state built and left open a new road into the Gladstone drainage. 



At French Creek, the existing road starts on state land in Section 

 14 and proceeds up the French Creek drainage to private lands in 

 Sections 15 and 22 . There is a locked gate at the state/private 

 property line, maintained by the private landowners. These 

 landowners hold a similar permanent easement for ingress and egress 

 across state Section 14 . As described previously, a potential 

 access route to the proposed harvest area exists, utilizing private 

 roads in French Creek. Two key lot owners forbid the state from 

 crossing their land, so that access option is no longer considered. 



Because the state technically has legal access to parts of this area 

 via the county road and the state owned portion of the French Creek 

 road, an access proposal for a new state owned road was examined. 

 It was discovered that a new road could be built to connect this 

 existing legal access with other existing roads in the proposed 

 harvest areas in Section 23 and 26. This access proposal was 



24 



