So far, our local newspaper( the Chronicle) will not publish anything about the "Wallace Pits" public access issue. Even those they called me an said they were!


I do have new news that may be fun for you to read!

I talked to Ray Croswell from WDFW today (6-11) about the Wallace Gravel Pit public easement issue. He told me that he had talked to Randy Wallace, the owner of the pit on June 1, 2001. He told Mr. Wallace that he had to leave the public fishing area open! (no locked gates)

Apparently, Randy Wallace tried to give him the same BS story about the mining safety issue that he did to me. Mr. Croswell didn't buy Wallace's story either, and told him that he will be out soon to post the area. I also was out their last Saturday morning (June 2,) at about 6:45 A.M.

As you may suspect, the gravel pit gate was locked! Obviously, as many of you already know, the Wallace's carry a lot of weight in out local area. I called in a complaint at 7:03 to our local Lewis County Sheriff Office. Basically, when the deputy arrived, I got the big circle jerk!

If you would like to see how you address being jerked off, read the attached letter to the Lewis County Sheriff Office! It's a little long (no, its real long!), but this is how YOU need to do it when YOU have been "JERKED OFF! This may sound like a lot of work or BS to you, but this is the way to get results! Enjoy!

Sheriff John McCroskey
Lewis County Sheriff Office
360 NW North St.
Chehalis, WA.
98532-1900

Re: Wallace Brother Gravel Pit access complaint.

Dear Mr. McCroskey:

I am very concerned about how your department processed my complaint that was phoned into your office on June 2, 2001 at approximately 7:03 A.M. on Saturday morning. My call to your dispatcher requested that an officer come to my location and verify that a locked gate was blocking my access to a public fishing easement that was owned by the state Fish and Game Department. I also offered the dispatcher a reference case number that was given to me by Lewis County Deputy Fed M. Wetzel. Deputy Wetzel had filed a report earlier concerning this fishing access to the gravel pit area on May 11, 2001. The dispatcher did not want the case number for any reference. I believe that all your calls are recorded and that something very similar to what I have stated will be reflected on your recordings.

Sometime around 7:55 A.M., on June the 2, 2001, Deputy Al Meuchel met me at the locked gate located at 654 Mandy Rd. Office Meuchel asked me what my problem was. I explained to him that the Washington Department of Fish and Game has a 60-foot public fishing access easement that runs from the location that we were standing at through the locked gated area all the way down to the Cowlitz River. In addition, I also explained to him that we have a public fishing parking area located next to the river and an additional 25-foot walking easement that started just north of the gated area that runs all the way down river to the County Line area.

I also told Deputy Meuchel that your office should have on file, a copy of a report that was failed by Deputy Fred M. Wetzel about 2 weeks ago. That incident occurred while I was fishing on the state owned easement. An employee of the gravel pit drove down to where I was fishing and he told me that I was trespassing and that I had to leave right now. I explained to him that I was on a state owned fishing easement and that I had a right to be there. The employee told me that he was going to lock the gate on me if I didn't leave right now. I told him that that would not be a good ideal, and that I have a cell phone in my car and that I would call the sheriff, and have them handle it if the gate was locked.

About a half hour later Officer Wetzel came down to where I was fishing and said that the gravel pit owner had called his office and said that I was trespassing on their property. Officer Wetzel was very polite and handled himself very professionally. After checking with his dispatcher, Officer Wetzel was able to confirm that I was not trespassing and that I was legally within my rights to be fishing the area that I was at. Officer Wetzel had the foresight to see that this problem would be an on-going problem with his Office. He had requested from WDFW, and was told that his dispatcher had received a faxed copy of the easement map from WDFW, and that their dispatchers would now known and be alerted that fishermen did have a right to drive down to the river and fish at the states easement areas. He also gave me the case number for my reference, so if I were to have any more problems with accessing the state fishing area his office would only need to check this case for reference (case #01C5448).

When Deputy Al Meuchel arrived, It became immediately oblivious he had already formed an opinion about my complaint. When Deputy Meuchel pulled up along side of the gated area, I told him that the locked gate was blocking a state public fishing area. Strangely enough, the deputy questioned me, to why I didn't go down river and fish at the other public area. I tried to explain to him that this fishing area was better fishing here and also that it was a much larger area to fish. He then decided that he was not going to make anyone open the gate. In fact, he stated to me, " I am not going to make anybody open this gate today, It will be up to the county commissions to see if they want to open this gate or not". I again told him that another deputy had already gone through this issue, and that he had given me the case number so that other deputies could verify access if there was anymore problems. He told me he did not care about the other case, and that this was "going to be decided by the commissioners".

I told him that this is not a county road easement issue, and that this was a state public fishing easement. I could see that this Deputy, for whatever reason, was not going to do anything about opening the gate that day. I specifically told the deputy that I wanted him to file an official complaint with the sheriff's office, stating that a locked gate was

blocking my access to a public fishing area. I then requested the Deputy to give me his name and the case number of my "complaint". The deputy then called his dispatcher and got the case number. The deputy gave me his card with the case number on it (case #01C6454). He then left the area. I also left the area, knowing that I was not going to be able to drive down to the river that morning. About 40 minutes later, when I had returned from fishing another area, I noticed that I had received a call from an unknown number to me. I redialed the number and your dispatch office answered. I told them who I was and they told me that "the gate was now open and I could go back if I wanted to". I assumed that Deputy Mechel must have contacted the pit owner and had him open the gate. I did not return to the area that day to see if the gate was open or not.

Since Deputy Mechel appeared to be so reluctant to act on my complaint, I decided to see what was really reported as record. On Monday, June 4, 2001, I went to your Chehalis Office and requested to see both case # 01C5448 & #01C6454. The clerk at the desk told me that I would not be able to see the reports today. She said that they were right in the middle of moving all there files and that it was going to take between 1 and 5 days to process it. There was a bunch of Deputies Moving files cabinets around so the delay sounded reasonable to me.

On Tuesday, June 5, I received a call from a lady named "Kathy". She told me that my requests were ready. I arrived at your new office around 10:AM. It took about 20 minutes before I received service. Kathy gave me copies of the reports. The first report was case #01C5448, which was filed by Deputy Wetzel. After reading Deputy Wetzel report, I believed that he did and excellent job on recording the events that had occurred at the Wallace Brothers Gravel Pit that morning. In fact, I would consider his report as a credit to both you and your office.

I cannot say that about the complaint that I reported to your office on June 2, 2001 (#01C6454). In my opinion, there are serious problems how Deputy Meuchel and other staff handled the filing of his report and the second report that was generated on June 5, 2001. I say this with great caution, but the facts will speak for themselves. When Kathy gave me the 2 reports she told me that only one case (01C5448) actually had a written report filed. She told me that the other case (01C6454) was not really handle that way and that it didn't really have any written report attached to it. I asked why it didn't have anything attached to it, because I specifically told Deputy Meuchel that I wanted my complaint filed with the sheriff office in writing. That is why I came in an asked for a copy of it. The deputy told me that he would file my complaint.

I asked Kathy if I could speak to Deputy Meuchel, since I saw him walking around the office, out of uniform. She said that it was his day off, but I was in luck because he was there in the office, right now. I saw him go into a back room. She took
back my copy of this so-called report and went to the same room to give it to him. She told me that he would be out to see me in just a few minutes. Well, about 30 minutes later, after watching Kathy go back an forth several different times to the back room Sergeant Patrich C. Smith came out and introduced himself. He was holding a bran-new report that was not there just 30 minutes ago. How could that have happen? The clerk personally told me that there were no other documents filed under case 10C6454. Now, out of nowhere, up pops a new complaint form that had obviously just been generated. There was no explanation to why Deputy Meuchel didn't come out as requested. There was no explanation as to what had happen to my signed copy of the "other" report.

Sergeant Smith was very polite and very professional and I have no complaint to how he represented your office. Your staffs were very professional, but the facts show that my demand for a written complaint was not done as requested and that the new document was generated after the fact. The Complaint as now written, says nothing about any access to a public easement being blocked, nor does it even mention the Wallace Gravel Pit as the location where the complaint took place. Why is that? Is this policy of your department? I do understand that there is some very long standing names involved in this access issue but that does not change the law, or how the law should be applied.

I now understand that there is some fancy legwork going on by your office saying that it really isn't your offices responsibility to enforce issues concerning state easements such as the one that exists at the Wallace Gravel Pits. I am sure that your office has history of responding to both Civil and Criminal issues that occur on state lands. We can debate that at a later time. The point is, that was not at issue when I requested Deputy Meuchel to file my complaint on June 2, 2001. It has always been my understanding that a deputy must file a written report when requested by a complainant. It now has the appearance that may not have been done as requested.

For all of the reasons that I have address above, I am requesting that you personally do an internal investigation of why my complaint was not filed as originally reported, and how a second report appeared out of nowhere. Your immediate attention to my complaint will be appreciated.

Sincerely,

Bob Reid,
CPR-Fish

Cc: Lee Van Tussenbrook, WDFW regional Director,

Ray Croswell, WDFW Regional Lands Program Manager