The Eightmile River
Wild & Scenic Study Committee
Meeting Minutes – April 25, 2005, East Haddam Grange Hall
Present: Anthony Irving, Eric Belt, John Rozum, Linda Krause, Sue Merrow, Walter Smith, Nathan Frohling, David Bingham, Sally Snyder. NPS - Kevin Case.
Absent: Larry Reitz, Randy Dill, Brad Parker, Jamie Fosburgh, Bill Koch
1. Call to Order 5:10 PM.
2. Acceptance of March 28, 2005 Meeting Minutes – Unanimous
3. Subcommittee Reports
a. Management –
There was a lengthy discussion regarding outcomes from the land use commission Summit meeting held on March 31. Everyone felt it went well and was a successful first step in communicating with the commissions on the Plan. Some of the needed homework as an outcome of the meeting includes gathering detailed examples of how the tools have been implemented elsewhere, develop more detailed tool proposals with adequate science to support them, and develop a clear definition of the level of desired protection and be able to show how the tools would meet the level of desired protection. Krause noted it would be helpful to develop model tools and go through each one in detail, having a justification for each decision point in the tool.
It was agreed that in the context of the overall study time line we should not expect the communities to be able to adopt any substantial management tools during the study process. However, it seems appropriate to identify a first tier of tools the communities agree with, support and make a commitment to attempt their implementation with a year or two upon the study’s completion. A second tier of tools that are more general in description and content could then be included for the communities to consider implementing over a longer time frame.
Rozum suggested that it would be helpful to the process to first work with the local communities in amending their Plans of Conservation and Development to reflect the town’s support of protecting the Eightmile River Watershed and the goals of the outstanding resource values. Everyone agreed this is a good approach that should be pursued with the communities.
Next steps include setting up a meeting with board chairs and staff to: get post-summit feedback; show the homework we have completed and that we have listened to their concerns; and discuss what the components of a second summit meeting should include. Everyone agreed our timeline is tight and we will work to achieve a fall timeframe for town meeting votes, at the same time not sacrificing the quality of the Management Plan, and the importance of sufficient local involvement in its development.
b. Outreach & Education –
Smith reported that the Subcommittee met a few weeks back. The primary discussion was on the outcomes of the Summit meeting. It was recognized in the meeting that all the communities are going to need time to digest and become comfortable with the challenging parts of the Management Plan. We can only have a successful study outcome if the community commission are in agreement with and supportive of the Management Plan. The subcommittee realized there has not been a great deal of focus put on promoting the benefits of a designation, and as such more resources and time should be put towards such an effort. Rozum suggested it would be a good idea to publish a newsletter that focuses on the Summit outcomes and what the next steps are. The newsletter should include recognition that we are listening closely to what the towns are saying and we will incorporate their input. As well, we should take the opportunity in the communication to promote the benefits of designation.
c. Natural Resources –
Case reported the Moorhead Watershed Ecosystem report is coming… The Committee agreed to pay a $100 stipend to a mammologist at UCONN for assisting with Moorhead’s research. The UMASS Phase I instream flow study needs final comments from the Committee. Frohling asked if the report could provide more discussion of why fish species rarity and diversity is at the level found. The Committee agreed to provide an additional $500 to UMASS to cover some of the graphic design costs for the report. It is hope we can 20 final printed copies when it is completed for distribution to town halls and libraries.
4. Other Old Business
a. Fox Hopyard Diversion Permit – No new information at this time.
b. Lyme Gravel Pit – The Inland Wetland Commission has denied the application. No new information to report on the Planning and Zoning process.
c. Growth Study – No new information to report.
d. CT Support Legislation – Merrow reported the Eightmile bill passed the CT General Assembly’s House of Representatives unanimously. It now has a final hurdle in the Senate, which also appears to be prepared to pass it unanimously. If and when the Senate passes the bill Merrow will help in trying to get a bill signing ceremony with Gov. Rell.
5. New Business - none
6. Next meeting date is Monday, May 23, 2005 at the Lyme Town Hall.
Meeting Adjourned 7:10 pm.
Submitted
K. Case