RYE CONSERVATION COMMISSION TRAIL MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE Monday, April 25, :00 p.m. Rye Town Hall

Transcription

1 RYE CONSERVATION COMMISSION TRAIL MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE Monday, April 25, :00 p.m. Rye Town Hall Members Present: Chairman Mike Garvan, Susan Shepcaro, Shawn Joyce and Ritchie White I. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Garvan called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. II. APPROVAL OF APRIL 25, 2016 MINUTES The following correction was noted: It should be noted that Suzanne Shepcaro should be spelled: Susan Shepcaro Motion by Susan Shepcaro to accept the minutes of April 25, 2016 as amended. Seconded by Shawn Joyce. All in favor. III. TOWN FOREST KIOSKS PLACEMENT, DESIGN, SIGN WORDING Chairman Garvan stated that in putting together the agenda he put in some tasks that the committee should be thinking about. It is important for the committee to take some action on the trails. He continued that the committee has talked about some additional kiosks for education to the public. Member White stated that he was thinking that they would decide on an overarching motion and the committee could make recommendations based on that. He highlighted some of his thoughts: is jeopardizing the intent of the easement granted to Rockingham County Conservation District. There was some discussion on the use of the word jeopardizing. Member Joyce stated that the easement has been in place for fifteen (15) years. For 15 years, there was nothing in there; no foot bridges or kiosks. He asked what has changed where there is a need for foot bridges. He noted that he ran into Danna Truslow on the trails in the Town Forest. Someone had mentioned that people are marking trees to identify the trails in the Forest. He had asked Ms. Truslow if they had permission to do that and who would be responsible. He told Ms. Truslow that there is a group that is talking about the maintenance of the trails and she is welcome to attend the meetings. Chairman Garvan explained that the Conservation Commission authorized the bridges in consultation with the Appalachian Mountain Club. They also allowed the Boy Scout project to occur. If people disagree with the projects, it is important that they come to the meetings to be heard. Member Joyce asked if there is a written plan that shows a map of where the bridges are going to be located. 1

2 Chairman Garvan commented that there is a report from the Trail Appalachian people. The report has pictures and describes different types of bridges that are appropriate. There will probably be two or three more bridges installed. Member White stated that they should start with an overarching goal and decide how the different pieces match the goal. He continued that if it is agreed that the use is infringing on the easements, the subcommittee should consider recommendations that might lessen the use. The bridges might be considered at that time, as to whether more would be an asset or a detraction. If it is determined that access should be restricted for a certain period of time, then the subcommittee should consider what should be done to do this. Chairman Garvan commented that this will be very tough. Member White stated that they need to consider if there is a problem with public increase as it pertains to the easement. He commented that he thinks the increase of dogs in the Town Forest is the piece that impacts mostly on the wildlife. The people with dogs have a big impact. Chairman Garvan asked if this should be added into the mission statement. It is one of the primary concerns. He commented that when they get to wildlife concerns they can zero in on the dogs as being the major contributor. There was some discussion on people who use the woods who do not live in Rye. The subcommittee discussed the statement proposed by Member White. The following wording was agreed to by the members: may be infringing on the intent, ( natural, scenic, undeveloped and open condition as Town Forest for fish and wildlife conservation, native habitat protection, management of forest resources ), of the easement granted to Rockingham County Conservation District. Referring to the words associated recreation, (found in the easement), Member White stated that he interprets this to mean that it is secondary to the intent of the easement. Public use is encouraged if it does not infringe on the natural, scenic, undeveloped piece. Chairman Garvan stated that they have asked for clarification from Rockingham County Conservation District and the Town Attorney. Member White commented that the easement leaves people to make their own interpretation with the way it is written. Motion by Ritchie White to endorse the concept; may be infringing on the intent, ( natural, scenic, undeveloped and open condition as Town Forest for fish and wildlife conservation, native habitat protection, management of forest resources ), of the easement granted to Rockingham County Conservation District. Seconded by Susan Shepcaro. All in favor. Member White stated that anything that they want to make recommendations on will be based upon the adoption of the statement. That gives a starting point for the subcommittee. 2

3 In regards to recommendations, Chairman Garvan stated that they need to have an action plan. Maybe the first thing that the subcommittee does is look at usage. Member White stated that if the subcommittee feels the usage is infringing, the options to manage usage so it is less infringing need to be discussed. Chairman Garvan asked if they should look at activities that they feel are infringing upon the intent. Member White stated that the subcommittee should discuss if usage should be restricted in any way or during certain parts of the year. Member Joyce commented that it is not the whole forest that is the issue. In talking about restricting use, it is during certain times that the sensitive areas are wet. Member White stated that the next piece for the subcommittee to decide is the bridge aspect. Does the subcommittee feel that bridges overall are an asset or a detraction? Asset side would be less impact on wetland soils. On the negative side, it increases usage during the wet season. That is a decision that the subcommittee has to come to. Another piece, should there be an area designated for less activity for wildlife during the nesting season? Is there a trail system which could be recommended or have no dogs during a certain time frame? Member Shepcaro asked where that area would be. Member White commented that it would probably be the area that they walked. It would be excellent because there is a big chunk of land between that and the next trail. Chairman Garvan pointed out that they have the ability to set aside a reserve. The area that is largely unused and does not have trails through it could be set as a reserve. Once it is set as a wildlife reserve, it will be a great rationale for shutting it down during the nesting season. Member White stated that the two areas that the subcommittee should make decisions on is the bridges and an area for less use during the nesting season. Specific recommendations could be made on the area, what period of time and what the restricted uses would be. He continued that the subcommittee could make a decision on the bridges, wildlife area, kiosks and education to the public. Chairman Garvan asked if the people who are doing the bridges should come to the next meeting. Member White commented that he thinks they need to first discuss the easement and how bridges are a component of the easement. Member Shepcaro asked why they would need bridges if the wettest areas were going to be closed down during the wettest times. She feels this is the area that the bridges would be desired by people. She is not sure where else bridges would be needed. Member White stated that they would have to look at the exact timing of when the area would be shut down. Member Shepcaro stated that if bridges are put in, people will be less likely to obey the restriction because the bridges are there. 3

4 Referring to a map, Member Joyce pointed out the area that is all water between bridges. He asked if it would be better to put in more bridges or to cut the trail. Chairman Garvan stated that maybe the trail should be moved upland. It would get the trails away from private property. The wet spot near the marsh is just going to get trampled. Member Joyce stated that he understands the bridges; however, they will have to be installed in a lot of places because there are many sensitive areas. Member White stated that he has gone through the easement. In section 1 number 3 it says, the premise is used year round by many residents of Rye for recreational activities, such as, walking, biking, bird watching and horseback riding and require a large block of undeveloped, open space and habitat land. Protection of the premises in its natural condition, will enable these public activities and enjoyment in Rye there from. He pointed out that this is one piece that he thinks would eliminate the bridges. He continued that in section 1, it refers to any temporary or permanent structure. Those two pieces need to be looked at in putting this together. Chairman Garvan noted that it states, will enable these public activities to continue in perpetuity. The easement is saying that the public activities need to be allowed to continue in perpetuity, in keeping with the protection of the land. He pointed out that when the easement was written, there was already year round use by many residents. They are important uses and they need to be maintained. Member White stated the intent is for public use. The bridges were not there when the public started using the forest. The public has used it in that manner for more than ten years. He interprets the easement as no bridges; however, the bridges are now in place and he will not recommend the removal of the bridges. His thinking is no additional bridges. Member Joyce stated that the bridges are increasing the use on the areas that don t have the bridges. There needs to be a lot more bridges in order to have an impact. He does not think the bridges are serving anything. They are just encouraging more use in the area and pushing people over areas that don t have bridges that need bridges. Member White asked how adding more bridges would impact the statement that was just adopted. Member Shepcaro commented negatively. It would bring more people. Member White stated that increasing the amount of bridges from what is there now has a negative impact on the intent because of increased usage during the wet season. Motion by Ritchie White to recommend that the bridges that are there be left and there are no further bridges because it increases the infringement on the intent of the easement with increased public use during the wet times of the year. Seconded by Susan Shepcaro. Chairman Garvan asked about trail location. He asked if they could recommend that whatever areas are being adversely impacted a trail relocation to a drier area should be considered. Member White stated that this would add to the motion because the volume of bridges that would have to be done. There would be a tremendous amount of bridges that would have to be done. After some discussion, Chairman Garvan proposed the following motion: 4

5 Motion by Mike Garvan that in order to protect the resource and spirit of the easement, it is recommended that no further bridges be constructed and instead trail relocation be considered; it may also be necessary to consider closing certain trails, or sections of trails, to protect the natural state. Seconded by Ritchie White. Member Joyce stated there are a lot of good gravel trails in the forest. The issue is only with a fraction of all the trails in the forest. The main trails are fine. They are not wet. Member White stated he has not seen the type of damage in the forest that warrants doing the bridges. He does not think it is a huge amount of damage that warrants changes. Chairman Garvan pointed out that it is to consider closing and consider relocation. Chairman Garvan called for a vote: Vote: All in favor. Motion passed. In regards to the wildlife reserve, Member White stated that if the Conservation Commission is going to have the Forest Management Plan updated it could be a request to have the forester designate an area necessary, in keeping with the recommendations of the easement. He could designate the acreage and whether there should be any restrictions on the trails in that area. This would provide something that is professionally laid out. IV. RE-MARKING TOWN FOREST TRAILS Member Joyce asked who is responsible for marking the trees in the forest. Chairman Garvan stated that the commission let a boy scout take responsibility for that. Member Joyce commented that he is kind of confused as to what is marked there now, as compared to the maps. Chairman Garvan asked if they should look at remarking the trails. Member Joyce noted that they should make sure the markings are correct. Member White stated that addressing the kiosk, the trail marking and education of the town may be the discussion for the next meeting. Chairman Garvan asked for the members to note their thoughts on these points for the next meeting. V. NEXT MEETING Next meeting Monday, May 16 th, 4:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Ritchie White to adjourn at 5:09 p.m. Seconded by Susan Shepcaro. All in favor. Respectfully Submitted, Dyana F. Ledger 5