Several easements along Lupfer Road that weren’t secured by Flathead County more than 80 years ago are now the focus of an access issue as a state timber sale north of the road is planned.

Located northwest of Whitefish off U.S. 93, Lupfer Road was established around 1914 and the road was extended in segments as time went on.

The County Attorney’s Office researched the road easements a couple of years ago when Larry Funk, a property owner on Lupfer Road who planned to sell his property, asked the county whether the road is a legally declared county road. What then-Deputy County Attorney Peter Steele discovered is that four easements along one segment of the road weren’t finalized in the 1930s as they should have been.

“We didn’t see the paper trail,” Deputy County Attorney Tara Fugina said.

County Public Works Director Dave Prunty told the commissioners last week that he sent letters to all four property owners about two years ago, asking them to grant an easement for the road, with 30 feet on both sides.

Only one of the four property owners has agreed to give the county the easement, Prunty said, even though the county historically has maintained Lupfer Road.

In fact, the county this summer made improvements to Lupfer Road, repairing damage to the paved section between the railroad tracks and U.S. 93 and improving the sight distance on a blind corner just east of the tracks.

The easement issue arose because the state Department of Natural Resources and Conversation has contracted with F.H. Stoltze Land and Lumber Co. for a logging job north of Lupfer Road and wants an assurance from the county that the road has a protected easement. Prunty said the state unit manager has concerns if there’s not a perfected easement.

Based on the county’s history of maintenance, “I would think it’s certainly a county road,” Prunty said, adding that Plum Creek Timber Co. also is interested in a protected easement on Lupfer Road.

Fugina asked the county commissioners last week to formally declare the county has a prescriptive easement to Lupfer Road.

“At the very least we do have the prescriptive right to treat this as a county road,” she said. “I don’t think those property owners would want the county not to maintain” Lupfer Road.

Prunty agreed, saying “this is a classic case of what prescriptive easement is all about.”

After some discussion the commissioners tabled the request for further study.

“Is a prescriptive easement good enough?” Commissioner Gary Krueger asked. “We need [these three] property owners to sign off or maybe we should abandon it. I’m not sure we should call it a county road yet.”

Krueger said he had contacted a title company and was advised problems could arise with banks loaning money to property owners accessing that road if the county doesn’t have a legal easement.

Following their decision to table the matter, however, the commissioners directed Prunty to send an email to the DNRC, advising the state agency that the county Road Department intends to treat Lupfer Road in its entirety as a public road and that the county will continue to maintain it as it has been in the past.

State DNRC officials could not be reached for comment.

Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by email at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com.