Gunna be a little bit tough if you haven't showed it to anybody yet.

But here it goes, looks like moderate elevation, say 3500'?

And, trail's entering a clearcut or a road prism?

D 2

Isn't that the point of it to make it hard to figure out? The trail does go that high and higher according to the old maps, but this location is 7-800 feet lower, more 27-2800'  elevation. The photo was taken above a road prism just past a creek on a dead end spur road. I followed the trail for a 100 yards or so, but the bad news looks like it enters into a future thinning area with all the new flagging going on. Isn't it bad enough to wipe out a trail once with logging, but to do it again with a thinning operation on the trees 40-50 years later to seal the end of this trail. I don't know, it was my third attempt to locate this trail when I finally found something and followed it into a proposed thinning area. I thought why bother, except for the fact that nobody has found a segment of this trail so far to prove that it actually existed in the first place, other than a dotted line on an old map from 75 years ago.

Don

No takers? This trail is a dotted trail, so not a major route. No clue if it had a number or a name, but I call  it by the name of the creek it follows. The maps show it going down to the Clackamas River and crossing to meet the Upper Clackamas River Trail at a junction with another trail that heads East up a prominent butte in the area.

Don

Well Don, your clues have confused me (which is not hard to do).  I thought you might be referring to Oak Grove Butte, but I don't see any dotted trails that follow a creek that connect to a trail that goes to Oak Grove Butte.  Since you said you just found the trail it can't be Switch creek (and switch creek is a dashed trail, not a dotted trail).

I'm going to need some more clues....

Somewhere near Granite Creek?