TOWN OF SUTTON

Sutton Conservation Commission

Approved Meeting Minutes

Special Meeting to Discuss KHR Forest Management Plan

Wednesday, June 1, 2022

Present: Henry Howell, Chair; Don Davis; Debbie Lang; Chuck Bolduc; and Bonnie Hill.

Absent: Barbara Hoffman; Lynn Wittman; Wally Baker; Jim Morris

Members of the public present: Pat Tivnan, Jane Williamson, Sonja Smith Suitor, Glenn Pogust.

 

Call to order: Henry Howell called the meeting to order at 6:35 pm.

 

Review of Wetland Applications and Issues:

• Request by Wally Baker representing Rodney and Ann Sigua for a special exception to allow a structure (stone patio) within a 75 foot buffer of Kezar Lake. T/L# 8-106-159. In addition, a Planning Board conditional use permit is being requested for a 6 foot walkway and steps within the 75 foot buffer. The SCC has hereby been notified of the application and has no comment on it.

 

Discussion of the KHR Forest Management Plan prepared by forester Leo Maslan

Henry turned to Chuck to introduce the topic of discussion, and Chuck said we had decided to get together to discuss whether to move forward with forestry activity at KHR, i.e. logging under the guidance of a forester. Henry said this brings up a big controversy, and he asked Bonnie to speak about an article that she had sent out to the commission in advance of the meeting. Bonnie said it was an opinion column from the Concord Monitor that appeared a couple of weeks ago that she thought offered another perspective on the logging question. She said that although it seems to be widely accepted that timber harvesting is necessary for both the health of the forest and for enhancing wildlife habitat, there are those who present the case that forests are able to manage by themselves just fine, and that wildlife will find habitats there with no need for human intervention. She conceded that in the past there were more natural forest disturbances from floods, fires, etc. than there may be today with more human intervention to prevent those disturbances, and so one could perhaps make the case that humans now need to create artificial disturbances to produce the conditions that allow for regeneration of young trees, etc.  Henry read the article aloud. He said he did not see much scientific evidence cited in it. He then read aloud the list of goals from the forest management plan to remind us what they were. Chuck said these were the goals agreed to by the SCC, and they incorporated some of the goals from previous management plans. Henry then read aloud the goals from the conservation easement document for KHR.

 

Chuck said he liked the article, and the idea of not touching the forest has validity and would save him personally a lot of trouble. However, he said we have other priorities concerning the KHR land, such as protecting Lyon Brook from sedimentation from erosion that would be detrimental to the Kezar Lake watershed.  The alternative would be to use the Conservation Fund money to finance that work, which would cut in to the money that we have to purchase conservation land. By repairing the culverts so they don’t blow out, we can protect the fish. By thinning around the older growth hardwood trees, we can release them to grow. He said according to Matt Tarr of UNH, everything is habitat.

 

Don said he agreed with Chuck. He said of the eight defined segments, some have never been cut before. Segment 1 has vernal pools and the brook, and we need to be very careful to maintain buffers. He said when we acquired the Bean Quarry and had a timber harvest done, it was very nice to be able to say to the town that we were giving back money that was far above the amount of the lost tax revenue.

 

Debbie cited Leo Maslan’s expertise. She said he advised going into segment 7 because of the ash kill from the emerald ash borer and the ice storm damage, and that he said segment 6 would be most easily accessed. Chuck said that 6 has a lot of valuable timber, and that 8 could be thinned if 6 is cut. Segment 7 has a lot of spruce that is getting past its prime. To get someone to work in 7 and 8 we need to let them harvest 6.

Henry brought up segment 5, which was the original area we planned to cut. Chuck said we had considered it because it was a place with no recreational trails. The access is more difficult, but there would be benefits to be gained by improving the Nichols trail and the long access road from the Hominy Pot entrance.  There is also a possibility of accessing 5 via the old logging road from Rt 11 in New London.

 

Bonnie said that although she agreed with the point of view in her article, she supported the logging, as long as it is done carefully and respectfully. She said that KHR is more of a recreational area than conservation land, and that there has been discussion about doing a lot more maintenance on the recreational trails, such as more frequent mowing. A timber harvest would help finance these expenses, and she does not want to see the Conservation Fund money spent on recreational trail maintenance. Chuck said the major expenditures needed are for culvert repair, which are not recreation related and need to be done no matter what.

Don said that Segment 2, which is on the way to Segment 5 if we use the Hominy Pot trail, is very wet, nearly year-round. He said we have tried to deal with it by hand in the past, but it couldn’t be done.  He said another thing to think about is that the pipes from the old snowmaking system are still in the ground, and he doesn’t know where they are. Eventually these are going to break, and the erosion resulting from that will be terrible.

 

Henry asked the people in the audience for comments. Pat Tivnan said she goes into KHR about 4 times a week, year-round. She said the last month’s minutes stated that the goal of the logging project was to generate revenue. She asked if the forester was asked to give an alternate plan that would improve habitat with less destruction and not make money. She asked how much money it has cost every year to maintain KHR. Chuck said up to now we have not spent money on the big repairs, just on mowing. Pat said she would like to see a plan, with estimates for what needs to be done. Chuck gave the example of the old pump house that had a big washout. He worked on it with Travis Perkins and an excavator and that cost around $900.  He said the edges of the old triple-chair-lift ski trails are growing in, which is impeding the drainage and causing washouts. Taking care of this would involve cutting the sides of the trails with a brontosaurus, and that would cost around $2000 per day for several days. Chuck said that Leo has done a lot of work for the New London Conservation Commission (NLCC). He said a forester will do whatever the landowner asks him to do, and Leo is acting on our behalf and in response to our goals.

Henry read the summary in the plan that Leo wrote about the goals. Pat said that the minutes stated that Leo said revenue was the goal. Bonnie said yes, Leo did say that at our meeting and she wrote it in the minutes. Henry read the schedule proposed in the plan. In answer to Pat’s question about the money, he also read the estimated amounts that Leo came up with for each segment, totaling $240K. He said he wanted to point out in the summary that revenue was not the goal.

Debbie said that Leo gave a guided walk on the Esther Currier property in New London that he had logged for the NLCC, and he spent almost 3 hours with us. He seemed to really care, and wants to do what is right. Henry agreed and said that the thinning had been done so carefully that you could hardly tell some of the areas had been logged. He said Leo was sensitive to the needs of wildlife and had actually saved a particular log because it was a good one for drumming use by ruffed grouse. Chuck clarified that the money from the logging would go to the Sutton general fund, not to the SCC. Pat said we said that the money was going to go towards the maintenance projects. Chuck said some of the needed work can be done by the logger and can be subtracted from the revenue; otherwise we need to ask for money back from the town. Pat said she is not opposed to cutting trees; she is concerned about the infrastructure needed, in particular the big wide road that will be replacing the trail. Don asked her how she accesses KHR and she said she goes in three different ways – Felch Road, Penacook Path and out through the Putnam property. Don explained how we had gotten habitat-improvement grants from NH Fish & Game back when we first acquired KHR, and this was how we paid for the brontosaurus work that was done back then. The brontosaurus use was at the recommendation of NH Fish & Game, to improve habitat for deer and moose. He said enough time has elapsed so that maybe we would be eligible for those grants again. Chuck said, in terms of access roads, we aren’t talking about anything new. We would use this as an opportunity to improve the culverts, etc. Gravel would be put down, then grass. Glenn pointed out that the SCC is asking the logger to do a lot of restoration work which will reduce the amount of revenue but leave things in a good state. Don said one of the culverts on Penacook Path is not safe for heavy equipment to pass over. Also, trout can’t swim upstream through the culvert as it is perched.

 

Sonja Smith Suitor thanked the commission for all the work put into this. She said she was concerned about fire prevention, what with accumulated undergrowth and longer, drier summers. She said studies are currently being done on this topic, and she hopes it is something that we are considering when managing the forest. Chuck said that thinning out the dying ash trees and clearing out the ice storm damage will help remove flammable material.

 

Jane Williamson asked how the size of the proposed project compares to the Bean Hill Quarry operation. Chuck said it will not be as extensive. The Quarry project was a cut-to-length operation, which drives vehicles over the slash and then leaves it behind. It was done more for revenue than for habitat improvement. Answering Jane’s question about whether this would be a multi-year project, Chuck said segments 6, 7, and 8 (about half the area of KHR) would be done in one year, while the other half would be done a few years from now. Jane asked what the aesthetic result would be, coming out on Hominy Pot Road. Chuck said the trail is already wide enough to drive on, and a vehicle can be taken in to the first wet area. Using that trail as a logging access would give us the opportunity to fix the drainages, and create a forest trail that can be driven over. It would be wider but would be a grassy forest road.  He mentioned that there is a possible alternate approach from New London.

 

Glenn said if we expect the town to purchase more conservation properties, people will be more supportive if the properties are sensitively self-sustaining. He said the perception is that it is expensive to maintain such properties. If we could make KHR sensitively self-sustaining, that would help. He said segment 5 abuts a 31 acre piece of private land, and the New London Outing Club (NLOC), which owns Mountainside, is interested in buying at least part of that land.  The NLOC wants to develop trail access to KHR. This land, plus the two abutting properties in New London on Rt 11, could possibly provide an alternate logging access. If this worked out, then the recreational areas in KHR would be able to be kept open during the logging. It would take longer to get this all worked out than it would to log segments 6, 7 and 8, but logging those first would require closing recreation for a while. Bonnie said the closure would only be for a month or two, according to Leo. Glenn said Leo said it would probably cost around $6000 to get access put in across those properties, but it might be well worth the expense. The alternate access to 6, 7 and 8 would be through the Bean Quarry.

 

Pat pointed out that KHR was given to Sutton for recreational use and wildlife habitat, not to make money. Chuck said all the money gained goes to the town. The purpose is to extract some revenue in order to make the improvements we need. Pat said it looks like the SCC doesn’t want to spend its Conservation Fund money on maintaining its existing property, but wants to buy more property instead. She loves KHR and hopes that we can keep it the way that it is.

 

Henry closed the public discussion at 8:07, and asked what we should do next. Debbie said she would like to get some input from the members who were absent. Henry said we need to decide if we are interested in pursuing the logging of segment 5 using the NLOC access, because Glenn needs to know whether to pursue it. Don said, as the one member who has spent his whole life in Sutton, he would hate to see KHR taken over by the NLOC. Chuck said we would need to make it clear at the access point to KHR that it is SCC land and not NLCC land. Don said he thought taking the logs out that way would make a lot of sense. Bonnie said she liked the idea because there is a huge parking lot at Mountainside that people could use to get to KHR, and we wouldn’t have to waste any more of our land and money on parking lots. Glenn said even if they didn’t buy the land, he thought we could get an easement to get the logs out.

Henry asked if one, we should do forest management at all, and two, should we do segment 5 or 6? Debbie asked how long it would take to work out the access for 5. Glenn has been trying to talk to Osa Fitch, the landowner. Don said he is afraid the value of the timber in 6, 7 and 8 will drop if we wait too long, but he doesn’t see why we can’t start that while working out a way to get the logs out of segment 5. He said Tom Paul wants us to open a snowmobile trail across the Bean Quarry, and we could take the logs from 7 and 8 out that way. Henry said logging in 6 could start as early as September, but we don’t want to lose the opportunity of working with the other landowners around segment 5, so it would help if we made a commitment to log segment 5. Chuck said that the NLOC deal is a whole separate thing, and there are lots of different things that can happen. Debbie said that September is awfully soon. Bonnie said she thinks we should log in the winter, for less harm to the ground and the wildlife. Debbie said Leo did not advise doing segment 7 in winter. Chuck said there is a lot to be done before we can start, including talking to the public and walking the site.

All members present agreed to go ahead with the logging, and to start with 6, 7 and 8, sometime in the next year. Chuck said it should be up to Leo which season. Bonnie said that any disadvantages to doing it in winter are outweighed by the minimizing of damage to the forest. Don said, at the same time, we need to do what is necessary to get the access to segment 5 worked out. Glenn said, as long as we’re not ruling it out, the discussions with the landowners can go ahead. Chuck is going to talk with the Outing Club president.

In conclusion, Henry said he wanted to make it clear that revenue is not the most important issue here. The trails will get tuned back into trails, and the operation will be conducted with care for the aesthetics and the environment.

Debbie asked if we need to draw up another contract with Leo, and Chuck said he would talk to him.

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 PM.

Next Meeting:  Wednesday, June 8th, 2022, at 6:30 PM, at Sutton Town Hall.

Respectfully submitted,

Bonnie Hill, Secretary