Meeting+2010+Sept+16

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


 * Attendance Notes**

L Cienek, Snow, Ramsey, Holcombe, Shumate, Lobsinger, Steelman, Hess.

**Introductions as needed**


 * Annotated Agenda Items**


 * 10 Sept workday review**


 * Notes**
 * Lobsinger presented
 * about 14 people showed up to remove Lespedeza and small pine trees from the meadow; and stilt grass from around the edges


 * Raleigh Nature Preserve Task Force Update-- Toddi and George**

Here are the definitions we're working with as of 13 Sept. These are intended to go into the comprehensive plan, amending the ones that are currently there. The Nature Preserve classification is on the same level of classification as Metro, Community, etc parks - as directed by City Council. The change here is that it used to say "Nature Preserves and Parks," which was kind of confusing. This classification is analogous to WakeNature Preserve classification. The Natural Area overlay is intended to be analogous to the WakeWonder concept. Wording is still a tad rough, but we think the spirit is right.

Nature Preserves are entire park units that contain examples of high-quality plant or animal populations, natural communities, landscapes or ecosystems, documented by subject matter experts through local or state programs, that contribute to biodiversity and environmental health. The size of a Nature Preserve should be sufficient to buffer, conserve and protect the target element or area. Efforts should be made to protect and manage significant natural resources in these areas through stewardship and best-practice management that do not degrade the resources present. Opportunities for the public enjoyment of natural resource based recreation and environmental education may be provided that are compatible with the protection and enhancement of the Nature Preserve and the nature experience.
 * “Nature Preserve” park classification**

Natural Areas are portions of park units that contain examples of high-quality plant or animal populations, natural communities, landscapes or ecosystems, documented by subject matter experts through local or state programs. In the case of existing parks, Natural Areas should be identified as part of an inventory process based on the natural resources, buffers, educational opportunities, and consistency with adopted master plans. The designation of a Natural Area should be differentiated from areas reserved for future development. The presence of a Natural Area could result in the naming of a park unit otherwise classified as Neighborhood, Community, Metro, or Special as a “Nature Park” if the Natural Area contributes significantly to the overall character of the park unit as determined in the Master Planning process. For planning and inventory purposes, the original park classification at the time of acquisition will remain unchanged.
 * “Natural Area” overlay classification**


 * NOTES**
 * Steelman reviewed charge and process
 * Showed current definitions (above)
 * "Natural Area" is does NOT include just undeveloped woodland within parks - we don't have a category for just wooded parks that might be called nature parks. Suggestion that in recommendation to city council we specifically mention that we considered the idea of making nature parks a CLASSIFICATION but decided not to do that because it's too confusion - but places can still be known as nature parks.
 * How can we get munis to start using the same terminology? Should we try to get Raleigh to call natural areas WakeWonders in their documents?
 * Possible confusion about difference between WakeNature Preserve and Nature Preserve in Raleigh that does not meet WakeNature criteria.
 * If other munis start doing this, it would be nice if they use similar terms ... but we don't have much control over that.
 * Next time, we'll be taking some parks through the process to see how the criteria work.
 * One lesson - takes a lot of time and need to let people talk through the same kinds of issues we've already done in WakeNature - it's the only way to get buy-in
 * Suggestion that when we present this to city council, presentation includes a brief bit about WakeNature

WakeNature video for Outreach Scholarship Conference will NOT BE READY. Making arrangements for a screening before the conference.


 * Feedback on Sign/Logo** (you can view the logo on the Sept 2 meeting page)

**Charlynne**: I checked my notes from last year on cost of producing signs by NC Department of Corrections - below is info from 2009 09/23: I spoke with Correction Enterprises about signs. There is some variation in cost, but ballpark / base cost below - two color sign with background is $10.25 per sign (12x18) and $20.29 per sign (18x24). Adding a third color increases cost. - there is also an artwork set up fee starting at $25. That is a one time fee for initial print, after that signs are ordered at cost. - Who can purchase from Correction Enterprises? Tax-payer supported organizations (federal, state, county, muni governments, NCSU...), and non-profit organizations that receive government grant funding.

Here is a photo of the Park and Recreation Trust Fund sign that Correction Enterprises produces for our grantees to purchase and display at parks receiving funding.Sign is aluminum, 20" x 35" and cost $59.85. You may [|view the order form] - the local government orders the sign directly for this program. Also note that signs are not produced one at a time, they will run a group for production.

Hi Toddi, I have not been involved in any of your meetings but am on the list serve as a former chair of People for Parks and a longtime park advocate. Jamie has kept me informed of some of the good work your group is doing.
 * Comments on Logo**

The logo is fabulous! I like it in green better than black. The black feels to heavy and less friendly. If you wanted to go with a darker color I'd recommend a deep blue - like a deep cobalt blue - as a second choice. But the range of greens will likely provide lots of appealing options.

One of the things I like about the logo is that it is distinctive and will be hard to replicate. Thumbs up to the designer (s).

Marsha Presnell-Jennette

NOTES
 * Shawn brought 11x17" versions
 * Cienek noted that she shared it with TLC staff, and they really liked it
 * Would like it to be a cheery green
 * Need to know if county / munis have sign size requirements before creating
 * Chris has run the sign by the design shop, and they liked it.
 * Rodney's sign shop in Apex does quality work for the county.
 * Shawn will get a few quotes for 18" x 24" signs


 * Comments on the MOU** -- Toddi

Mou is here: [|WakeNature Preserves Partnership MOU Draft Aug26, 2010.doc]


 * Holcombe reported and noted that this MOU contains no governance guidance or information - consensus that we should add this kind of information
 * Noted that we really can't have organization names on the cover sheet before people sign it - Chatham has signatory pages appended to their document
 * Nothing about what we expect of members


 * Volunteer work day Sept 24**

Action required ...
 * decide go or no-go
 * set meeting site and hours
 * define tasks and get that info to NHP
 * decide if we are inviting students, and to what end (eg, observe, help, what-have-you)
 * get emails out to appropriate people with tasks or cancellation
 * get RSVPs and arrange transport

Note the list of names below from Scott - this is a good opportunity to get NHP involved, but it must be well-organized and these people's valuable time must be put to good use - otherwise we'll leave a bad taste. george

I don’t know what was accomplished on Sept 10, so I don’t know exactly what we are being asked to work on. But right now, we have Steve Hall, Harry LeGrand, John Finnegan, Linda Pearsall, Eric Galamb, me, and maybe Mike Schafale. Scott Pohlman

Toddi and John,  I won’t be able to make the meeting this Thursday, but I got feedback at yesterday’s staff meeting that Sept 24 might not work out well as a community service day for several folks. I haven’t talked to you about plans for that day, so depending on what is lined up, (and what expertise is most required), it might still work. Scott

Hi Scott and Toddi. We are open to any help on Sept 24- we have minimal plant inventory done, and have no data at all on fw crustacean, mollusks, fish. Also, other than butterflies, we haven’t sampled invertebrates. IF there are NCSU students scheduled to help it would be important to have NHP staff on hand. If NHP staff can’t attend on Sept 24 then I would prefer we re-schedule with the NCSU students. I don’t have the time to take them on by myself. JC

Toddi, others,

I've been pursing the critter interaction angle with Judy Lassiter, and the short version is that they are cleared to help - we do not need to go through any approval processes for an event like this.

Once we determine that students are needed, we can push out a request to the Leopold Wildlife Club - 20-some-odd indicated interest in helping with WNPP. We just need to know that this event is ON!

george

Further discussion from george ... Per my conversation with Judy Lassiter at NCSU, we do not need Animal Care and Use Committee approval for students to work with Wake County on Turnipseed. Approval is need if (1) activity is on University-owned land OR (2) involves University-owned animals OR (3) is part of an NCSU course OR (4) is considered research, with intent to publish, as opposed to management activities. #4 could get a little fuzzy, but for workdays involving faculty and students, even if it's a club activity, on places like Turnipseed, we do not need to get approval EVEN IF we are trapping or handling animals. If we are ever in doubt, I can always run a specific activity by Judy to confirm. OF COURSE, it's incumbent upon us from an ethical perspective to follow established procedures and to do everything we can to ensure that animals are not harmed by our activities.

I don’t know what was accomplished on Sept 10, so I don’t know exactly what we are being asked to work on. But right now, we have Steve Hall, Harry LeGrand, John Finnegan, Linda Pearsall, Eric Galamb, me, and maybe Mike Schafale. Scott


 * NOTES**
 * Discussion of whether county is ready for this
 * County will discuss today after meeting and decide whether or not to do it


 * [|WakeNature.org] domain name** ... (george)

The cost is about $20/year, including a privacy option that the InfoTech guys recommend (keeps spam to the registrant - me - to a minimum). No good deals from the main domain name registrars (also recommended by InfoTech) to get .net and .com, so the price essentially triples. Advantage of buying all 3 is to cover common entry errors and other organizations taking similar names with different suffixes.
 * Cost for 1 (.org) for 1-year approx $25; for 2-year approx $40.
 * Cost for all 3 (org, com, net) for 1-year is approx $65; for 2-year approx $100.


 * NOTES**
 * Definitely get .org and .com - could save money by skipping .net
 * After the meeting, Hess purchased .org and .com for one year for $48, including privacy - working on forwarding to our wiki site for now.