CONSERVATION COMMISSION

MINUTES OF May 3, 2007

Present: Chris Giordano (Chairperson), Judy Jervis, Sheila Johannesen, Michele Tingley, Jason Holder;

Also Present: Curt Springer, Forestry Committee representative; Bruce Schwaegler, Audubon representative; David P. Ries, Audubon representative; Chris Lauria, Forestry Committee; Carol Baird, Heritage Commission;

The meeting opened at 7:30 and was televised.

Regarding the Easement:

This was a joint meeting to get ever closer to finishing the easement. Bruce introduced Mr. Ries as a retired real estate attorney, a trustee of Audubon who currently heads the Sanctuaries and Land Management Committee.

Bruce was asked if he had any questions or comments. His only comment was to explain that, in consideration of zoning ordinance versus the easement, whatever is more restrictive would apply. For example, in the use of signs, if the easement states a sign of a particular size is allowed, yet the zoning ordinance indicated a smaller size, the more restrictive ordinance would prevail, e.g. the smaller sized sign.

It was stated the town is exempt from its own zoning ordinance, but we try to set a good example. Bruce said it’s up to the town if it’s going to follow its own rules. He explained again that if the easement is more restrictive than zoning, than the easement prevails. He said zoning and boundaries can change, and the easement is not trying to stand in the way of the public using good judgment, but none of that can release the requirements of the easement.

It was explained that if this were stated succinctly in one spot in the easement, how zoning affects the easement, this would be easier than repeating it several times in the document. Bruce will help with putting into words this particular item.

Carol asked if the suggested changes could be reviewed by the Heritage Commission. It was agreed that all Committees and Boards would see the suggestions, this being the purpose of having joint, public meetings.

Bruce agreed that the reference to motorized vehicles was removed from the purpose section. David asked why the reference to the town forest being established by town vote was removed from the first page in the “whereas” section. It was decided that adding the history behind the voting would be too effusive and irrelevant. However, the fact that the public voted to make it a town forest underlines the importance of it. It was agreed that adding a more simple line stating just the fact that it was established by a town vote would suffice.

The stewardship plan was discussed. Curt mentioned the Forestry Committee having voted to disapprove the signing of the easement without the stewardship plan in place. The Conservation Commission had asked Bruce about that before and he restated his answer that flexibility is required. Bruce reiterated that it is more important to decide who, how, and when the stewardship plan would be done, if it will not be finished before the closing of the easement. He referenced a document, “Choices and Challenges in Town Forest Management; Report from a Community Forest Workshop, September 13, 2003, Gorham, NH.”

Bruce explained that this problem Danville faces in finishing the stewardship plan and the easement is not unique. He told about his own property in which three different, knowledgeable people came to discuss what to suggest to Bruce as far as how he’d manage his own property. These three discussed for two hours what to tell Bruce, each having differing opinions, then left Bruce essentially telling him to do what he wanted.

Bruce explained that what he’s looking for is a conservation easement that has a requirement that the forest has a stewardship plan which would include all these aspects of how the forest is managed civiculturally, historically, recreationally, etc. The easement is blind as to who has the responsibility for taking care of the forest, but the easement requires that a stewardship is in place.

Bruce explained that many parties have equal interest in seeing the town forest managed properly, which means more than just letting a forest get old. He explained the difference between patch cutting and just plucking out trees at random. Clearing a section of forest allows certain species of flora and fauna to grow that won’t grow in older woods. Educational opportunities for the town, allowing school field trips or organized walks for the residents is a good way to educate the layperson about what it means to manage a forest and the importance of it. Audubon was especially interested in Danville’s easement because of the educational opportunities.

It was agreed that some sort of arrangement is needed, outlining the steps from here to there that will be taken to finish the stewardship plan. There was a suggestion that the easement would be finished and signed, but with a clause inducing penalties if the stewardship plan is not finished within a certain amount of time. It was also suggested by David that the easement could be finished then put into escrow until the stewardship plan is written. This seemed agreeable to the Conservation Commission and the Forestry Committee.

Bruce expounded on the importance of educating communities. Chris mentioned that Emily Brunkhurst had asked the Conservation Commission to invite interested parties, specifically Audubon, Conservation Commissions and Planning Boards from the surrounding communities, all the boards from this town, and any other interested parties to a workshop which will be held June 7^th. Audubon is of course invited. Sheila and Janet will get an article into the Carriage Towne News about this. Chris will try to arrange for the meeting to start earlier than the proposed 7:30. He will email everyone regarding any change. Later in the meeting Judy read the email forwarded from Chris about the meeting. Judy agreed to find some maps in order to get ready for the meeting.

Questions about the stewardship that came up at the last joint meeting were addressed by Bruce and David. They were asked about fees charged to the town for Audubon reviewing something that is for Audubon’s benefit. Bruce explained an endowment of $10,000 which earns around 5% interest. At a billing rate of $35-$40 per hour, this $500 generated annually only buys so many hours of service. Bruce tried to allay everyone’s concern by explaining that if the easement and stewardship plans are set up correctly, Audubon will only need to do one yearly review. He said every program needs to be self-supporting and, if things are done well from the start, there should be no need for concern about extra fees or more than one annual inspection. He also explained that another community’s money can’t be taken and spent in Danville. Bruce reiterated that all Audubon wants to do is have this set up well so they only need to peek in once a year, because they have plenty of other things to work on.

The problems with ATVs were addressed. Bruce said that a lot of towns have problems with ATVs and as long as the town is doing a reasonable job of supervision, the problem is reduced. Carol mentioned that Atkinson has a program in which people will adopt a trail. With the residents’ input and vested interest, litter and off-trail violations have been lessened.

Bruce said that he doesn’t think Audubon has any plan to spend any of Danville’s money without first talking with Danville and getting approval. He mentioned that Audubon has a number of professionals available if Danville wants to contract their work.

Item numbers 14a and 14b on page 20, seeming to be an open ended deal to charge Danville for anything, was addressed by David. He first said they won’t be charging for something unless they have a real problem and even then it will be a reasonable amount. It was stated that he and Bruce were present tonight as volunteers. He also explained that the first gate Audubon has to go through is they have their own expenses, and they have a low budget as it is.

Item number 11b “Apportionment of Damages” was introduced as potentially a big problem for the town. David explained it is not a real easement if they have no right to damages. He said a piece of land is a bundle of rights and each right has a value, such as the right to excavate, the right to subdivide, the right to put residential hazards on, etc. Some rights are removed by acts of government, which is what zoning tends to do. In the case of a conservation easement, the town of Danville is taking some of those rights and donating them to NH Audubon, so the Audubon then owns those rights. Audubon then has the responsibility to not exercise those rights. Audubon won’t exercise the right excavate or subdivide. Those rights have a value, and some rights remain with Danville, like the right for forestry and public recreation. There are values to the rights donated and those retained. In 20 years, if the government takes the property and makes it a military base, Audubon has to take the money that would come to them and make sure it’s used for conservation purposes that would replace what had been taken.

Item 14f on page 21 was discussed. David explained this means the town understands they are giving certain rights to Audubon and can’t later decide to take the property back by eminent domain. By putting the property in an easement, it’s being locked up forever. If Danville becomes the next New York City, the town forest remains.

Sheila reminded David that he agreed to supply the Commission with the correct verbiage regarding signs to be added to the easement before the final draft.

David pointed out what he thought were missing words on page 8. Putting back into the paragraph “or Amendment” is in order wherever it had appeared previously after the words “Plan, Update.”

It was reiterated that “motorized” should not be under purposes but reserved rights. This would allow for special circumstances such as a motorized wheelchair or maintenance vehicles access to the property.

David mentioned a copy of the draft will be sent to Audubon’s attorney for review. Chris wanted to know if that is covered under the expenses already being charge to the town. Bruce mentioned that there are costs involved that Audubon and Danville will share. So far, Audubon hasn’t billed the town for anything. The attorney fee referred to here is part of the fee given to Audubon separate from the endowment.

Bruce and David were excused from the meeting.

Other Business:

The bids for the survey were discussed. Chris has called other companies and had heard from Ducett Survey. He is waiting to hear from Dennis Quintell from Civil Construction with a bid.

Michele will supply Curt with information for the town website regarding the Conservation Commission. Specific information mentioned that can go on the website are the Alewife Festival this June and the upcoming vernal pool workshop. The membership list has been updated by Curt. There was a discussion about email to the Commission. It was decided that the Conservation Commission’s email will continue to go to Chris who will then forward any pertinent information to the rest of the board.

Michele improved Jason’s chances of winning on Jeopardy by informing him that a group of turkeys is called a rafter.

Chris attended the last Selectmen’s meeting and spoke to them about the beaver dam issue. Lowering the water will be postponed until the research can be done that will determine what short and long term affects this will have. Before the water level is lowered the Commission will have experts come out and evaluate the area. In the fall the heron fledglings will be out of their nests and that may be a more reasonable time to lower the level if necessary. There was a long discussion about the whole situation. Chris would prefer to have the time to do this right, rather than be pressured later to get it done. Sheila explained that there is more than one problem that needs a solution. There will be a walk through the area to assess the situation. One proposed solution, specifically a pipe over a dam, needs to be explained as it seems to defy laws of physics requiring water to go uphill.

The minutes of April 19^th were discussed. There were a few corrections made. Michele made a motion to accept the minutes as amended. Jason seconded and the motion passed.

Judy made a motion to hire Laura Games to put together and write grant proposals. Jason seconded the motion and the motion carried.

Correspondence:

· Address change for Land Trust Alliance now in Washington DC.

· A meeting April 24 for the Exeter River Local Advisory Committee.

· Survey bid from S. E. Cummings.

· LGC meeting June 7, re: Obtain Community Acceptance of Building Program.

· The Source, spring ’07 newsletter.

· UNH, asking for statewide study about outdoor recreation. This is forwarded to the Recreation Committee.

· An invitation to a workforce meeting on May 4.

· From Barry Hautmann; list of specific capital projects for the Capital Improvement Project.

Since the discussion would involve consideration of land purchases which, if discussed in public, might benefit a party whose interests are adverse to those of the general community, RSA 91-A: 3 II d should warrant nonpublic session, Judy made a motion to go into nonpublic session per RSA 91-A: 3 II d and Sheila seconded. The motion was made and seconded. A roll call was completed and the motion passed.

The public meeting adjourned at 10:14 pm.

Sheila made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Michele seconded. The motion passed and the meeting adjourned at 10:45 pm.

*****Next Meeting: May 17, 2007****

THESE MINUTES ARE NOT PERMANENT RECORD AND ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING, AT WHICH TIME, THE ABOVE MINUTES, AS CORRECTED, BECOME PERMANENT.

Minutes are prepared by Janet S. Denison, clerk