How does language in an easement affect the interpretation of the easement?

"The interpretation of an easement, which does not depend upon conflicting extrinsic evidence, is a question of law." (Van Klompenburg v. Berghold (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 345, 349.) " 'It is fundamental that the language of a grant of an easement determines the scope of the easement.' [Citation.] 'In construing an instrument conveying an easement, the rules applicable to the construction of deeds generally apply. If the language is clear and explicit in the conveyance, there is no occasion for the use of parol evidence to show the nature and extent of the rights acquired.' " (Ibid.)

In Van Klompenburg, the court held language in an easement expressly stating that a roadway was to be "kept open" and "wholly unobstructed" precluded owners of the servient estate from maintaining closed gates across the easement. (Van Klompenburg v. Berghold, supra, 126 Cal.App.4th at p. 350.) The court recognized that " ' "unless it is expressly stipulated that the way shall be an open one, or it appears from the terms of the grant or the circumstances that such was the intention, the owner of the servient estate may erect gates across the way, if they are constructed so as not unreasonably to interfere with the right of passage." ' [Citation.] However, '[w]here an easement under a grant is specific in its terms, "[i]t is decisive of the limits of the easement." ' " (Ibid.)