Meeting+2012+Aug+9

**//Wake County Nature Preserves Meeting//**
Thursday 8:30-10 1214 Jordan Hall, NCSU Campus

IRREGULAR MEETING DATE - **second Thursday**
Tweet about this meeting ... media type="custom" key="9797796"

Hammerbacher, Pholman, & Massa cannot attend
 * Attendance Notes**

Attending: Hess (Presiding and notes), Kevin Burke (visiting from U Penn, Philadelphia), Blank, Hoffman (TLC), Ander, Salter, C Smith, Lobsinger, Sullivan, Perlmutter, Cheshire

//**Promotion Committee**//
GOALS: Create more public awareness and appreciation of our highest quality natural areas in Wake County. In 2012 we will: 1) develop a website (completed); 2) maintain/update the website (on-going); 3) promote WakeNature through one or more Stewardship Awards (in process); 4) Promote WakeNature by holding a training session for resource managers (being planned); 5) Create promotional materials to get the message of WakeNature out to a broader audience; 6) Work on fundraising provided key fundable priorities are identified


 * DISCUSSION ITEMS**


 * Signs - we need to make a decision on signs** - we have $3,200 to spend on signs and $1,800 for website development.

Emily Ander has provided some information to help us make this decision ...


 * NOTES**

Salter presented 3 options - see above files for detail:
 * "Old style" information kiosk, made of wood with a clear plastic shield behind which information is tacked to a board. These are difficult to maintain and easy to vandalize, but relatively inexpensive and easy to change content. Raleigh has done signs like this and could move quickly.
 * A newer style of interpretive sign that is "substantial" and relatively vandal-proof. Downside is cost (approx. $2,700) and inflexibility (i.e., content cannot be changed). We could do a sign like this for the meadow at Anderson Point. Raleigh has done signs like this and could move quickly.
 * Mile marker style signs that have minimal information on the post itself (e.g., name of plant community) but link to websites using QRCode technology. Relatively inexpensive, at $200 per post. Downside is minimal information on sign, reliance on technology that is likely to change quickly. Raleigh has not taken this approach, and it could take a bit of time to research and work out details.

Discussion quickly went toward favoring the interpretive sign approach, and doing this at Anderson Point - the meadow is a Protected Natural Area. We have funding for one sign and there was second-hand information that Wake Audubon might be willing to supply funds to help pay for another. Recognition on sign for support for WNPP, TLC, WakeAudubon (if they participate), and Raleigh.


 * Action items**
 * Go with interpretive style sign - notify TLC of this decision, as they will be writing the check from the grant funding (Hess to do)
 * Contact Wake Audubon through John Connors about possibility of leveraging some support (Hess to do)
 * Begin approval process with Raleigh Parks (Salter to do)
 * Begin content design (Salter and Connors to do, after initial email from Hess)
 * Side issue - get Wake Audubon to sign MOU (Hess to ask Connors)
 * Begin research into how best to link to web-based information from sign - QRCodes? URLs? Both? something else? (Hess to contact Holcomb)

//**Inventory Committee**//
GOALS: 1) to compile a list of potential WakeNature preserve sites that contain examples of excellent ecological resources that either are being managed for their sustainability or are in need of management, 2) select two potential sites to focus on resource inventory building and management plan development for WakeNature Preserve designation. Focus sites for 2012 include TLC's Swift Creek Bluffs (nearly complete) and City of Raleigh's Lake Johnson Park. With Swift Creek Bluffs nearly complete, a third site for focus is an assemblage of properties in the Marks Creek watershed near Turnipseed: Beech, Williamson and West tracts.


 * DISCUSSION ITEMS**


 * Swift Creek Bluffs Assemblage review**
 * TLC has drafted a Swift Creek Bluffs Assemblage Management Plan and is seeking WakeNature status for the site. The management plan is linked to the Swift Creek Bluffs page.
 * We need to form a review committee - who will chair?
 * Process is described here


 * NOTES**
 * Application package accepted
 * Salter agreed to chair review committee; Perlmutter will serve; Salter will solicit other participants
 * One issue raised ... do NCDOT and Wake County, the other landowners, know of and OK this application for WNP status? Hold on reviewing until we have an answer from Hammerbacher after she returns next week (Hess to ask)


 * UPDATES**

From Gary P.) I got word from David Carr about the site inventory sharefile cleanup he has worked on. Unfortunately he is away in Arkansas on his next chapter of life, but didn't leave us out in his work, and want's to continue to be active with WakeNature as best as he can, now remotely. Here's his latest e-mail, dated 3 Aug 2012:

//"Charlynne, Gary, //

//Here is a link to the WNP data: @https://velocity.ncsu.edu/dl/cEV0qSz/62808 //

//A while back, Gary P. made a copy of the element occurrences intersect ////open space attribute table and cleaned it up. I took that table, ////stripped out the formatting so a table join would work, deleted all ////element occurrences intersect open space attributes except a primary ////key, joined the table back to the shapefile, and viola! We had a ////cleaner, better organized attribute table. //

//The partners thought that was great, but suggested significant natural ////heritage intersect open space would be more useful. So I did the same ////thing to that data. I hope the order and what I kept and deleted are ////useful. //

//Let me know if you need a better description. //

//This should help identify “sites that contain examples of excellent ////ecological resources.” //

//<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Thx, -dc //

//<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">PS: In the beginning, there was an issue with the way Element ////<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Occurrences were buffered in the original NH data. I don’t remember ////<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">exactly what I did, but Leigh Ann and Scott made some suggestions on ////<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">what to do. It seems like I adjusted the buffers according to a ////<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">certainty attribute and how close the observation was to Open Space ////<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">(from the Wake County website). Then I intersected." //

Frankly, these shapefiles are beyond me. Since David Carr is away, is there someone else with the technical know-how to help create an interactive preserve / site map? Can we enlist someone with GIS capabilities to move this forward? An alternative is to create a map using Google Maps, like I've seen in other websites. Let's discuss..


 * NOTES**
 * Hess to supply a brief statement of need for C Smith's class - they will be working with these data during the fall semester to create a map for use by the public.
 * Cheshire can help with shapefiles as needed

//**Capacity Committee**//

 * DISCUSSION ITEMS**


 * September / October invasives workshop -** We need to set a date and let people know about it.
 * Current thinking is along these lines ...
 * 9-11:30: inside workshop
 * 11:30-1P: lunch and any transport
 * 1-3: outdoor activity
 * Gary Blank has worked with our Forestry Outreach program to get possible dates. They are ...
 * Any day last week of September (24-28)
 * 1-3 October (Mon-Wed)
 * 10 or 11 October, depending on when another group decides to have their workshop
 * Does anyone have insight as best / worst day of week for such an event (e.g., are Mondays typically a bad idea or a good one)
 * Otherwise, I'm (Hess) going to recommend Tues 2 October. The 10/11 date choice depends on what another group selects, and it's not clear how long we'd have to wait for them to decide. We need a date on a calendar far out enough so people can plan.


 * NOTES**
 * Best date for all present was Tuesday 25 September


 * Action Items**
 * Blank to continue planning. Will check for an indoor site near Lake Raleigh Woods (e.g., Alumni Center, Friday Center, etc)
 * Hess to push out notice of date through Snow and others to all parks staff. This will include a query as to what particular species, if any, they would like a focus on
 * Ander to see if Walnut Creek Wetlands Center is available for the date as a backup location

//**Other Business**//

 * Meeting location**
 * NCSU continues to make it more difficult to have visitors. Beginning next week, visitor passes will be $5 each on-the-spot. Our department will no longer absorb that cost (we absorbed the $2 per pass cost) and we won't have hands-full of passes to distribute to all comers.
 * The alternative is that the department would pay $2 in advance which would get you a link by email so that you can print the parking pass and bring it with you. We'd have to know a couple of days in advance who is coming to the meeting.
 * Another alternative is to move the meeting elsewhere, which might be a healthy thing anyway. TLC would be willing to host for the rest of this year - location is near downtown and parking is easy, free, and abundant. Would keep the time slot (8:30-10).
 * What are your thoughts on this?

//Charlynne - my understanding of the parking permit cost is that having them ahead of time to distribute in person (method we've been using) will increase from $2 to $5 per pass. If we request ahead of time and deliver via email the cost is $2 per pass with option to charge to department account or for customer pay. The visitor will receive the pass be email and must print it out.//


 * NOTES**
 * Hess will ask Masten (TLC) if room is available for September
 * Others liked the idea of rotating the location monthly to different park facilities - we'll follow up on this in future


 * Process for elections**
 * We need to start the process of nominating and electing a steering committee and new officers.
 * Our Memorandum of Understandingsays that ...
 * We have a steering committee of three people elected by the voting membership for two-year terms. We have never done this formally.
 * In January, we need to elect a chair from among the steering committee. So it behooves us to create a steering committee ASAP.
 * The voting members are the signatories to the MOU, with one vote per signatory; and "at large" members. We currently have no at large members. (At large members are those not associated with any signatories, and officially designated (through a process that is not spelled out) by the voting members.)
 * I (Hess) recommend that we accord "at large" status to someone from Raleigh, as a good-faith recognition of their continued presence, their work with us on developing nature preserves within Raleigh, and their movement toward signing the Memorandum of Understanding.
 * I (Hess) recommend that we solicit nominations for the steering committee during the next 3 weeks and vote a ballot for those positions at our next meeting (the September meeting). This will put us in a good position for January's selection of officers.


 * NOTES**
 * All agreed that we should accord "at large" status to Raleigh
 * All agreed with the plan to move forward to create a steering committee
 * Hess to follow up with all by email