Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Conservation Commission Minutes 05/11/10
Conservation Commission
May 11, 2010
Approved June 8, 2010

Members Present: Katheryn Holmes, Chair; Eric Unger, Vice-Chair; Bill Annable, Chuck Crickman, Suzanne Levine, Deane Geddes, Members.

Ms. Holmes called the meeting to order at 4:36 p.m.

ADMINISTRATIVE

Minutes
The Commission reviewed the minutes of March 8, 2010 and made corrections. Ms. Levine made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected. Mr. Crickman seconded the motion. All in favor.

The Commission reviewed the minutes of March 18, 2010 and made no corrections. Ms. Levine made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Unger seconded the motion. All in favor.

Member Addition/Deletion
Ms. Holmes announced the appointment of Dick Wright, Selectman, as an ex-officio member of the Conservation Commission. She added that Frank Perotta has resigned as a Commission member.

INTENTS TO CUT

Mr. Unger informed the Commission that there were no regular Intents to Cut to report. However, he said he received an Intent to Cut in the buffer zone from Bert Pinard, owner of the Lakeview Motor Lodge. Mr. Pinard requested cutting some trees down in order to open up a view of the lake. Mr. Unger said he made a site visit at the end of April 2010 and discovered the trees in question were 120’ to 150’ from the shoreline. Ms. Holmes noted that the setback is 250’ under the Shoreland Protection Act. Mr. Unger said many of the trees marked for cutting were dead but the smaller trees that were marked were removed from the cut list.  

WETLANDS/SHORELANDS

At 5:00 p.m. Ms. Holmes welcomed Harvey and Nancy Cohen, 15 Fells Cove Road, Newbury, abutter to The Fells. The Cohens were present because of their concerns over the proposed seasonal dock permit issued to The Fells by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES).

Ms. Holmes stated that the Commission is an advisory group, not a decision-making board. She informed the Cohens that the Commission was meeting with them on an informational basis only and that the Cohens’ concerns were not part of a public hearing. Ms. Holmes said the Commission will seek equal information from The Fells and DES concerning this matter.

The Fells Seasonal Dock DES Permit

Ms. Holmes reviewed the history of the DES permit which refers to a request by The Fells for a seasonal dock installation to accommodate the needs of the Lake Sunapee Rowing Club. The Rowing Club last summer utilized The Fells as an access point for rowing activities.

There was general discussion among the Commission members regarding the permit issued by the DES to The Fells which reads as follows:
        April 19, 2010 to The Fells, 456 Route 103A, Newbury, NH, Tax Map/Lot No. 18 / 232-347, a Wetlands and Non-Site Specific Permit 2009-02034 to install a 5 ft. x 40 ft. seasonal dock accessed by a 5 ft. x 10 ft. seasonal dock in a “L” shaped configuration on Lake Sunapee, in Newbury.
This approval is subject to the following project specific conditions:
  • All work shall be in accordance with plans as received by DES on March 22, 2010.
  • This permit shall not be effective until it has been recorded with the county Registry of Deeds Office by the Permittee. A copy of the recorded permit shall be submitted to the DES Wetlands Bureau by certified mail, return receipt requested, prior to installation.
  • This shall be the only structure on this water frontage and all portions of the dock shall be at lease 20 ft. from abutting property lines or the imaginary extension of those lines into the water.
  • The seasonal pier shall be removed from the lake for the non-boating season.
  • No portion of the pier shall extend more than 15 feet from the shoreline at full lake elevation.
  • All activities shall be in accordance with the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act, RSA 483-B, for construction, excavation or fill that will occur within the protected Shoreland.
General conditions that apply to all DES Wetlands permits:
  • A copy of this permit shall be posted on site during construction in a prominent location visible to inspecting personnel;
  • This permit does not convey a property right, nor authorize any injury to property of others, nor invasion of rights of others;
  • The wetlands Bureau shall be notified upon completion of work;
  • This permit does not relieve the applicant from the obligation to obtain other local, state or federal permits that may be required (see attached form for status of federal wetlands permit);
  • Transfer of this permit to a new owner shall require notification to and approval by the Department;
  • This permit shall not be extended beyond the current expiration date.
  • This project has been screened for potential impacts to known occurrences of rare species and exemplary natural communities in the immediate area. Since many areas have never been surveyed, or have received only cursory inventories, unidentified sensitive species or communities may be present. This permit does not absolve the permittee from due diligence in regard to state, local or federal laws regarding such communities or species.
  • The permittee shall coordinate with the NH Division of Historic Resources to assess and mitigate the project’s effect on historic resources.
Harvey and Nancy Cohen presented to the Commission their concerns/issues with the above DES permit issued to The Fells. Their concerns/issues regarding the proposed seasonal dock are as follows:
  • They purchased their property with the understanding that there would be no development on the neighboring property belonging to The Fells;
  • The proposed seasonal dock represents development along the shore line of The Fells property and is in direct opposition to the stated ecological mission of The Fells;
  • The proposed location of the seasonal dock is a primary nesting area of loons, a designated endangered species;
  • The proposed seasonal dock opens the door to increased development on shore land that has been designated natural habitat;
  • The permit application was originally submitted as a “minimum impact” application and, as of April 19, 2010, has been approved as a “minor impact” application;
  • The proposed seasonal dock means increased human presence in a fragile ecological area; and,
  • The proposed seasonal dock would disrupt and damage the natural habitat of the loons and jeopardize their continued survival on the lake.
Ms. Levine read the following letter from the Loon Preservation Committee dated May 10, 2010:
“To All concerned: The Loon Preservation Committee (LPC) has been asked by Harvey Cohen, a Sunapee-area property owner, to summarize monitoring data on loon activity on Lake Sunapee based on his concern about proposed recreational use of the lake from The Fells. LPC monitors the lake through field surveys and a network of volunteer observers coordinated by the Lake Sunapee Protective Association (LSPA). In 2009 LPC recorded the presence of at least one territorial pair, two unpaired adults, and an immature (1-3 year old) loon on the lake. Our field surveys detected a pair near the north end of the lake between Herrick Cove and George’s Mills; LSPA observers recorded some reliable evidence of consistent territorial behavior in the Edgemont/Fells area (the narrows). LPC has not recorded any nesting activity on the lake. Please contact me by email (jcooley@loon.org) or telephone with questions. Best regards, John Cooley, Jr., Loon Preservation Committee.

There was general discussion among the Commission members concerning the appropriate “next step”. The Cohens indicated their intent to file an appeal to DES by May 19, 2010.

Mr. Unger and Mr. Annable suggested that the Commission submit a letter of concern to DES.

Ms. Holmes suggested scheduling a site visit and meeting with Karen Zurheide, executive director, The Fells, on May 17, 2010 at 3:00 p.m. at The Fells. She added that the Commission will meet following the site visit on May 17, 2010 at 4:30 p.m. to review their findings and formulate the Commission’s response regarding the proposed project. The Commission members agreed.

COMMUNICATIONS

Ms. Holmes reviewed the following communications from the NH Department of Environmental Services (DES):

  • May 1, 2010 to Donna C. Flanders, 18 Autumn Lane, Newbury, NH, Tax Map # 007-176-367, a Permit by Notification (PBN) to repair existing dock and boathouse damaged from ice push in January 2010 on main 8 x 28 foot crib and smaller boathouse crib. Project entails jacking up boathouse, removing decking over crib, removing all rock, removing lower planking, straightening crib frame and supports, replacing broken beams, replacing rock to be integral to bed of lake per original dock, re-decking, and lowering boathouse onto dock surface.
  • May 3, 2010 to Betsy P. Deasy, 205 Bay Point Road, Newbury, NH, Tax Map/Lot # 6 / 089-142, a Wetlands and Non-Site Specific Permit 2010-00694 (with conditions) to repair an existing 7 ft. 2 in. x 61 ft. 8 in. dock with a 14 ft. x 10 ft. section at the lakeward end in a “L” shaped configuration, supported by a two 6 ft. x 6 ft. cribs and a 9ft. x 9 ft. crib on lake Sunapee, Newbury.
  • May 6, 2010 to Town of Newbury, P.O. Box 296, Newbury, NH, Tax Map/Lot # 43 / ROW, a Wetlands and Non-Site Specific Permit 2009-02508 (with conditions) to dredge and fill 4,622 sq. ft. (plus or minus) and temporarily impact 8,905 sq. ft. (plus or minus) of Andrew Brook and associated palustrine forested and emergent wetlands for replacement of the Sutton Rd. 38-ft. single span bridge (21-ft. length) with a 48-ft. single span bridge (24-ft. length) and associated road upgrades. Temporary detour bridge construction is proposed.
Ms. Holmes shared with the Commission the March 19, 2010 letter from the Conservation Commission to David Pickman, Old Warner Road, Bradford, NH, concerning timber harvesting on the property. (Attachment A).

Ms. Holmes reviewed with the Commission the March 26, 2010 letter sent by the Conservation Commission to U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service regarding its Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment for the John Hay National Wildlife Refuge. (Attachment B)

OLD BUSINESS

Tree Cutting Application Review
Mr. Crickman presented the second draft of applications for the Commission’s review. Ms. Holmes instructed the Commission to review the draft and present suggestions at the next regular Commission meeting.

NEW BUSINESS

Ms. Holmes introduced for future discussion the subject of creating a form letter from the Commission to applicants who obtain DES permits to let them know of the Commission’s mission, concerns, and involvement in the community’s conservation efforts.

Mr. Geddes made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Unger seconded the motion. All in favor.

The meeting adjourned at 6:59 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Meg Whittemore
Recording Secretary
Attachment A

Newbury Conservation Commission
PO Box 296
Newbury, NH 03255

March 19, 2010

David Pickman
Old Warner Road
Bradford, NH 03221

Dear Mr. Pickman,
~
The Newbury Conservation Commission is contacting you concerning your recent timber harvesting~on your property located on Old Warner Road, Bradford, NH 03221. It has come to our attention that your harvesting activity resulted in significant skid trails that, in the event of a heavy rain storm, has the potential of causing soil and sediment erosion deposits from your property into Lake Todd.
 
As you may know, the Newbury Conservation Commission acts as an advisory board whose mission is to protect the environment while offering property owners educational support in the areas of environmental policy and concerns. It is in that spirit that we are contacting you.

The Commission has environmental concerns about your recent timber harvesting near Lake Todd and the potential for a “stormwater event” into Lake Todd. Stormwater runoff is a big problem since it carries soil deposits directly into our lakes and streams. That means the phosphorus and nitrogen in the soil are “direct deposits” into the water, causing significant damage not only to the water quality, but also to its aquatic inhabitants. Over time, such “direct deposits” will literally kill a lake or stream and everything in it.

With that in mind, we encourage you to review your current erosion control methods and stormwater management strategies on whatever sections of your property are located above Lake Todd to ensure avoidance of a potential “stormwater event” into lake.  

Also, we would like to recommend the following two informational sources:
  • Best Management Practices for Erosion Control on Timber Harvesting Operations in New Hampshire, published by the State of New Hampshire. This contains useful strategies for erosion control. The publication is available through two sources: the New Hampshire Division of Forest and Lands, P.O. Box 1856, Concord, NH 03301, telephone (603) 271-2214; or www.nhdfl.org and type in “erosion control” in the search box.
  • Town of Newbury, NH Zoning Ordinance, Article XXI Stormwater Management. This contains detailed guidance on applicability, landowner’s responsibilities, erosion and sediment control guidelines, and implementation guidelines for permanent controls. You can access the information on the Town’s website at www.newburynh.org under Zoning Board.
If you need further information about erosion control implementation and/or stormwater management best practices, we encourage you to contact us. Please know that erosion installations today could eliminate future problems and/or destruction to our lakes, streams, and environment.
~
We send our thanks for your responsible consideration of avoiding potential environmental damage to Lake Todd.
~
Sincerely Yours,
~~
Newbury Conservation Commission

Katheryn Holmes, Chair
Eric Unger, Vice Chair
Deane Geddes
Suzanne Levine
William Annable
Charles Crickman
Frank Perrotta

cc: Dennis Pavlicek, Newbury Town Administrator
      Newbury Board of Selectmen
      Newbury Planning Board
Attachment B

Newbury Conservation Commission
Box 296
Newbury, NH. 03255

March 26, 2010

Re: John Hay National Wildlife Refuge

Dear Mr. Melberg,

On March 11, 2010, the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service presented its Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment for the John Hay National Wildlife Refuge. At that time, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service requested that the Newbury Conservation Commission review and submit its comments concerning the proposed Plan. The following statement is the Conservation Commission's response to that request.
~
The Newbury Conservation Commission (ConCom) would like to take this opportunity to submit our comments about the Comprehensive Conservation Plan for the John Hay National Wildlife Refuge that was presented by the National Fish and Wildlife Service on March 11, 2010 at the Newbury Town Offices.

The outcome of our discussions and evaluation of the proposals (Plan A, B or C), the ConCom majority supports and encourages the Plan A. (5 out of 6 Commissioners for Plan A and 1 Commissioner supports some of Plan B). The other Plans are departures from the original mission of the John Hay Wildlife Refuge. Plans B & C will increase human impact and this impact/use will ultimately break the promise of the original Hay Family's intent for the land to be set aside for a migratory bird refuge/sanctuary. We are concerned over the consequences of human impact in Plan B & C. These Plans will open the door into the refuge and in time will get wider and wider leading to environmental degradation, making the refuge unsuitable for nesting birds and/or a resting place for migratory birds. Plan B and especially Plan C, are contrary to the Hay Family's intent for preserving their land and would be a betrayal to their vision and wishes.

Why Plan A?

1) We consider the Refuge our last virtually untouched land around Lake Sunapee. The mile of shoreline is the last undeveloped piece of shore land on Lake Sunapee.
2) The Lakeshore development in recent years has undergone a transformation from the Lake Cottage to the Lake Houses (aka McMansions). There are about 1000 houses on Lake Sunapee. We need a sustainable watershed like the one at the Refuge to safe guard the water quality of Lake Sunapee. We agree with Lake Sunapee Protective Association's Director June Fichter and Lake Steward- Scientist Robert Wood with their concerns over the watershed and possible degradation of water quality by increased human impact and erosion compounding future problems to the vital watershed area.
3) We encourage the F&WS to continue their stewardship on the refuge.
4) Again this area is a watershed to Lake Sunapee and has an important pristine tributary, Beech Brook, to Lake Sunapee.
5) The Fells has many educational programs. The F&WS could initiate collaboration, along with LSPA, on the programs at The Fells. We see no need to develop kiosks, etc., when The Fells already does a splendid educational job. In the Wildlife Refuge a person can directly experience a natural forest and woodland by just being "in" there. Often reading about a plant or a tree or bird is different from just quietly experiencing the beauty of a forest. We need places like this. We do not have to make these eighty acres into a zoo-like environment.

Therefore, Stewardship, Plan A, is the plan we feel best suits the Wildlife Refuge and continue the tradition of being a natural and wild habitat.

Concerns:

1) Who will be overseeing the increase of human activities in the refuge? With increased human traffic, the possible increase in partying, threat of a fire, increase in trash and the overall management will be an extra cost to the F&WS or will the burden fall on the Town of Newbury taxpayers and our law enforcement department? That is why we support 'less is more' adage for the Refuge.            
2) How will this pristine area be able to cope with increased pressure and influences of more human activities and impact? How will F&WS ensure accountability for our Town Buffer Zone Regulations and our state's Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act?
3) What about the birds? How can a high level of human activity sustain the habitat for migratory birds? Birds are private species, especially while breeding. Their activities are usually not compatible with human activities. Recently, a report was published about New Hampshire birds, "One-Third of N.H. Birds Are in Decline" (Please see the attached newspaper article.) The decline in bird population and endangered species indicates that we should be more concerned about protecting the birds and their habitat at the Hay Wildlife Refuge then satisfying the desires of human beings.
4) Plan C is the most radical in development. We are against any clear cutting near the water's edge. It has been pointed out that this area is in the path of prevailing winds and storms could knock down more trees, devastating the refuge.
5) The proposed fishing trail, though innocuous on paper, seems unwarranted because the area that it goes to is shallow and unsuited for fishing. The foot traffic by the meadow would disturb the birds. This Plan blatantly appears as an "opening up" of the shoreline and in the years ahead we could see more development with docks and boat launch, etc. This is definitely not in keeping with the original intent of the Hay Family.
6) The public hearing held March 11, 2010, excluded, due to time of the year, the summer residents on Lake Sunapee, who are major stakeholders in any changes to the exiting Refuge.
                
The Hay Family's giving of the land, as a migratory bird sanctuary is an inspiring role model. They had a keen environmental spirit. Even when, in the early sixties they gave land to the town of Newbury in the Chalk Pond Area, they were attempting to protect and preserve land back then. However, as we understand the history, the town later sold the land to a developer. People just didn't understand how deeply the environmental impact with unchecked growth was to become. Perhaps Alice Hay was looking for a secure organization to steward her property and promote her vision of a natural and wild sanctuary for migratory birds when she gave the Hay Estate to the National Wildlife Refuge. We recommend that you adopt an approach that is similar to the guidelines in other states for addressing protected/sensitive lands. This approach is called "do nothing mandate". With a minimum impact we can continue to uphold the vision and legacy of Alice Hay and her family.

Best Regards,

Katheryn C. Holmes, Chair
Newbury Conservation Commission
Eric Unger, Vice Chair
Suzanne Levine
Deane Geddes
Bill Annable
Charles Crickman

cc:
Newbury Board of Selectmen
Newbury Planning Board
LSPA