Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Open Space - 08/23/2006Approved as amended 9/13/1006. OPEN SPACE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Tri-Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2006 OSBT Members Present Ken Dunn Kay Tauscher Bill Briggs Bruce Bland Allyn Feinberg EAB Members Present John Putnam Susan Iott Leah Kukowski Su7anne Jones PRAB Members Present Suzamie O'Neill Ed vonBleichert Stu Stuller Norman Murphy Chad Julian STAFF PRESENT Mike Patton Bryan Pritchett Mark Gerslnnau Bev Johnson Jan Geden Jeanne Scholl Alice Guthrie Cecil Fenio CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:08 p.m. AGENDA ITEM 1 Consideration of a morion to City Council on acceptance of the Black- Tailed Prairie Dog Component of the Urban Wildlife Management Plan (UWMP). John Putnam acted as chainnan for this joint meeting of the Open Space Board of Trustees (OSBT), Parks and Recreation Advisory Boazd (PRAB) and the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB). He outlined the process and procedure, indicating that each boazd will be requested to make individual motions. Mike Patton and Jan Geden gave brief preludes to the presentation stressing the collaborative efforts of the Open Space and Mountain Parks (OSMP) and Pazks and Recreation (P&R) departments to fmd the best possible solutions and the commitment to work together. Bev Johnson and Mark Gershman reviewed the memo and the higlilights of the plan. Boazd members questioned staff on various aspects of the plan. Public Participation Deidre Butler, Rocky Mountain Chapter of the Siema Club, said that Tom Watson was slated for removal and no relocation site was found. The barriers there aze excellent. In 2005 a city staff inember said that the city had done nothing to prevent the prairie dogs from going back into the azea. It was preventable and lethal control could be avoided. Interim protection infers removal in the long term but what does that mean if only 1.2 acres have been recently designated as a potential receiving site? The Grassland Management Plan should be developed first.... facing removal and killing is inuninent. No one wants to see prairie dogs killed. It is important to fight Senate Bill #111. If not for politics, prairie dogs would be on the endangered species list. Lindsay Sterling Krank, 3250 O'Neal Circle, Keep Boulder Wild representative, gave a power point presentation that reviewed the contents of the documents that she distributed. Those included a letter from Dr. Erin Lehmer, M.S., Ph.D, Site Assessment of Subject UWMP Prairie Dog Colonies and the Quick Summary of Keep Boulder Wild Recommendations for Prairie Dog Colonies 1-17 in the UWMP. Regional reserves could exist on federal land and through the South Plains Land Tmst. No additional land is available in Boulder County. More possibilities would exist if several communities bought in to the need to purchase land for prairie dog relocation. AGENDAITEM IB PAGE 1 India Wood, 564 Locust Place, spoke as a private citizen and thinks she represents many citizens. She made three observations: Grasslands - open space land is in bad shape and she was glad that OSMP will not manage grasslands for one species. Good intentions - barriers and relocation have not worked at Foothills Community Pazk.... the intentions were good but the cost and practicality were not adequately considered. Kids in pools - Scott Carpenter pool has abbreviated hours because the P&R department cannot fund lifeguazds, ballpazks are closed, tennis courts and a fountain cannot be built due to a lack of funds. Where will the needed money come from? There aze ecological and financial limits. Ruby Bowman, 1512 Lefthand Drive, Longmont, stressed that wildlife belongs to all citizens of the state. People all over the county are concerned with wildlife. She urged development of a humane wildlife management plan. Native Americans believe in preserving nature. Government policies have not been compassionate when removing native species, including humans, from the land. She supported the development of a plan to preserve prairie dogs and noted that it would impact the reputation of the city. She asked to find a compassionate, humane solution. Return to Board & Staff OSBT Comments/Ouestions This is experimental - move ahead but don't get locked in. T'here will eventually be new techniques for repelling and extenniiiating prairie dogs. Overall, the plan is pretty good. It is important Wat everyone realizes that this problem is caused by human population gowth. There are definite impacts to the land where you find prairie dogs; do you see the same kinds of denuding impacts in more natural settings? The denuded states of some OSMP land has not always been due to prairie dog activity... sometimes the land was in poor conditions prior to the prairie dogs moving in. When prairie dogs are gone IPM must move in so that non-natives don't take over. We have a reasonably good shot at establishing something manageable; stafJ`'has done a good jab. Are there some grasslands that should not be considered? It is important to focus on humaue treatmenUremoval of animals. The financial and ecological realities must be considered. As a trustee it is necessary to look forward to future generations. Prairie dogs impact their environment and we shouldn't risk OSMP land by having too many prairie dogs. As with TSAs, the plan should be evaluated, consequences studied and adjustments to the plan made as needed. There appears to be approximately 3500 acres of HCA land not presently occupied by prairie dogs and about 2500 acres of land not designated HCA aze occupied. The majority of this land is in the Southern Grasslands and by the Beech property. Some land is high on a slope and probably not suitable; some is agricultural and some is intended to be undisturbed. Some is also riparian. HCA acreage should be lowered to consider colony growth. Occupation outside HCAs create significant issues with nearby private property owners. Does the Visitor Master Plan (VMP) say anything about relocation? Are we restricted to relocate within the VMP HCAs (different than prairie dog HCAs)? We try not to facilitate conflicts with wildlife. The county considers 20% occupancy as "full " in HCAs. The only site that has not reached that leve[ is the Southern Grasslands. There is 56-94% capaciry in other places and they continue to function as normal. The prairie dogs occupying the 2500 acres of non HCA land probably need to be relocated. What information will the Grassland Plan contain that needs to be known tonight? We should be careful about taking too big a step tonight; we should proceed incrementally until we lrnow. The Grassland Plan wlll be completed,- maybe it would make sense to postpone action until that time. There will not be a sudden increase in the availability of land for relocation sites so this could be approved without first completing the Grassland Management Plan. There aze strong feelings about using OSMP and P&R lands and there is a question about the availability of land. A concern about the plan is AGENDAITEM lB PAGE 2 where the funding will come from and how it will be staffed. Hopes aze that it comes back for implementation in 2007. OSBT individual comments (smnmarv urepazed by Bev Johnson): •'There has been a great deal of thought put into the plan as presented. Although iYs experimental, iYs a reasonable first step and we need to move ahead with it. • Look for new ways to exclude prairie dogs and control their populations humanely. • All of these problems are caused by population growth in the region - we need to look at how to control that. • The city needs to be economically viable as well as environmentally sensitive. • We need to focus on humane removal. The loss of grassland habitat is the big issue. • The reality is we don't have an unlimited supply of resources. We need to set financial and ecological limits and to balance our use of staff and financial resources. • We have to be cazeful and not endorse a plan that has long-term impacts on OSMP land and resources. • Be prepazed to make adjushnents to the plan as needed if it doesn't achieve the right balance. • The plan is a good approach. The short-term steps are reasonable. • It is okay to approve this plan without an updated Grassland Plan because stafjknows the land very well and if there was any place for prairie dogs it would be known. Chances are the Grassland Plan would not change anything. • There is some concern that the long-term costs haven't been adequately identified. • The long-term staffing and organizational options are a concern. We need to pay close attention to the costs and implementation issues. OSBT Motion Ken Dunn moved that the Open Space Boazd of Trustees recommends that City Council accept the Urban Wildlife Management Plan - Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Component as shown in Attachment B of this meeting memo, accept the staff recommendation to continue with the eacisting team (Planning, Pazks and Recreation and OSMP) to complete the #1 priority items in 2007, listed on page 11 of the memo, and that a detailed budget for implementation of the plan, together with options for long-term staffing and management of the implementation of this plan be brought back to the Open Space Boazd of Tmstees for review and discussion at the eazliest practicable date. Bruce Bland seconded the motion. VOTE The motion passed unaziimously. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting adjoumed at 11:10 p.m. These minutes were prepared by Cecil Fenio. Iff~y ~~, DATE APPROVED BY: r'~~j~- Ken D`unn Boazd Chair AGENDA[TEM 1B PAGE 3