 |
Date: January 25, 2017
Attendees: Neal Brown, Carol Irvin, Conrad Dumas, Janet Renaud, Stephanie Kokal , Henry Underwood (guest/SWRPC), and Janet Lutkus (minute-taker)
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 pm. The following items were addressed:
- Call to order, organize agenda, mail, etc. – Conrad.
- Conrad reviewed the correspondence – The items reviewed were:
- Intents to Cut – Fletcher Farm Road and Muzzy Hill Road sites.
- The Conservation Commission received $120.00 due to land use change tax receipts.
- Aaron Patt sent email notifying that Crotched Mountain has published a Water Conservation plan that’s available for the commission to review in Catherine Shaw’s office.
- New Business – Henry Underwood and commission members.
- SWRPC – Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) Kickoff – Henry Underwood. Henry presented a short kickoff for NRI to: review the commission’s input to questionnaire, take a look at the time line for the project, review a fairly detailed proposed outline for the NRI, and look at some of the mapping that’s been done so far. From the questionnaire responses Henry noted concerns for terrestrial and aquatic invasives, and asked for clarification, which was provided by several commission members. Henry distributed a proposed outline for the NRI and reviewed the project’s time line. Given a late January kickoff, a draft will be complete on or before the April meeting on 4/26/2017. Henry will attend the 4/26 meeting to present the draft. Henry will allow time for incorporating the commission’s review
comments after the draft is reviewed and then he will produce a revised document. The commission should plan a separate event to publicize the final document in June. Henry noted that Sections 2-5 of outline have subsections for recommendations. These subsections cannot be developed until the draft is reviewed. The question of when to involve the planning board in the review process was raised. Henry suggested not involving the planning board until after there’s a complete document which reflects all of the commission’s feedback. The current outline is based on past inventories and feedback provided to the questionnaire. Janet asked what Section 6 usually entails. Henry says this option wasn’t initially discussed and built into budget but thinks it would be valuable to understand the public’s priorities. He suggested a very short survey (5-10 questions), perhaps internet-based. It would take place in the next 6 months and not be a time-sensitive survey. Conrad
suggested distributing the survey in Greenfield’s bi-monthly periodical, The Spirit. The information from the survey would be compiled after there was a draft. The Spirit has a March 1 deadline for the April/May issue. The commission would have to work on the questions for the survey at the February meeting. Regarding Section 5, Conrad asked if stone walls and cellar holes could be considered cultural resources to be highlighted in this document. Henry agreed that stone walls and cellar holes would fit into Section 5. Conrad noted that Bob Marshall has maps of all the stone walls and photos of the cellar holes. Conrad will contact Bob via email. In Greenfield any Class 6 road is considered a “scenic road” and requires special review and approval from the planning board/selectmen for development such as removing trees or altering stone walls. The commission suggested that Ken Paulsen is the source of photographs of the cellar holes and many other
pertinent sites in Greenfield. Janet will email Henry Ken Paulsen’s contact information. Stephanie suggested that the Forever Wild (private land) conservation easement goes in section 1.5.5. Carol suggested that Koch-Brown and George Proctor areas also be added to section 1.5.5. Although these lands are not in Conservation, they are town-owned recreational areas. Henry emphasized that the outline is a draft, not fully fleshed out but shows the flow of the document. Henry agreed to contact Bob Marshall about the planning Charette done for Greenfield about 2 years ago. Henry doesn’t think the Charette would be part of the inventory but could be a referencing document. Carol feels the questionnaire from the Charette might be of value, especially the open-ended questions at the beginning. Stephanie suggested adding a brief explanation of “why is this important?” in each section (for example, soils). Janet will send Karen email to meet with Henry
because Karen has a package of information that was previously compiled for the NRI. Henry has started writing and distributed drafts of maps. The maps will be fold-outs. The types of maps include: Arial Views, Transportation Network (highways, state roads, scenic roads), Tax Boundaries, Fish and Game Action Plan, and Priority Tiers for Highest Ranked Habitat (looks at quality of certain types of habitats). Those present reviewed samples of the maps. Janet asked Henry to send her electronic copies of the documents reviewed so she could make them available to all of the commission members. Henry agreed to do so.
- Information acquired at NHACC 46th Annual Meeting and Conference in Pembroke on November 12, 2016 – Stephanie. Stephanie reported that she learned a lot at the conference (for example, about corridors, bobcats). She stated that the most important thing she learned was about incorporating young people and involving schools in the commission’s work. Stephanie requested permission to contact schools (Conval High School in particular) to engage students to voluntarily participate in the commission. Janet made a motion that Stephanie will be the spokesperson to engage area schools in participation in the commission. Neal seconded the motion. There was a vote and unanimous agreement by all members present.
- Review of job description of Town Forester – Conrad. This job description was emailed to all members of the commission by Karen on 1/23/2017. Conrad expressed concern about not having an itemized breakdown for the annual $2000.00 invoice for services. It was pointed out that the Town Forester reports to the select board and not the commission. Neal suggested following up with the select board. Janet suggested that before the commission contacts the select board, they ask Karla to come to a future meeting to describe her duties. Conrad would like to see a monthly bill, where the town forester’s services are itemized. Conrad will reach out to Karla about coming to speak to the commission at a future meeting.
- Update on George Proctor Recreation area – Janet. The meeting with the Sportsman’s Club was canceled. The meeting is tentatively rescheduled for February 28, 2017.
- Water Use Guidelines if draught continues (requested by Bob Marshall). Neal feels that it’s good to have guidelines and follow up with the select board. Janet suggested the commission publish the DES guidelines for the town. Conrad suggested the commission revisit this topic in the spring and decide on a specific action at that time.
- Moose Plate Grant Program – Conrad. Conrad suggested that it would be good if one member of the commission knew what grants were available, the calendar for the grants, and the purposes of the grants (for example, creating trails). Stephanie presented a printed list of contacts for grants. Janet volunteered to look into what goes into writing a grant but feels that we need to hire a professional to do the grant writing. Janet will give the commission a report at next month’s meeting.
The meeting officially adjourned at 9:25 PM. The next meeting is February 22, 2017 at 7:30 pm.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Janet Lutkus to Conrad Dumas and Janet Renaud for approval, corrections, and posting.
| |
