Andrews Community Forest 10/27/25

Printable version

ACFC Minutes 10-27-25 89 KB

Web version

Andrews Community Forest Committee Minutes
Regular Meeting
Oct 27th 2025 6:00pm to 8:30pm
Attendees: Julian Portilla, Ian Stokes, Brad Elliott(co-chair), Sam Pratt (co-chair), James Cochran, Wright
Preston, Sonya Mastersen, Dan Wolfson (online)
Minutes taker: James Cochran
Time keeper: Ian
Minutes approved from 10/13 (Sonya moved, Wright seconded, all voted in favor)
Wetlands Walk
Tina mentioned that ag and silviculture still require a wetlands permit
Sam’s main take-away: rather than trying to modify the vast trail, route rec traffic to the north
beyond the required buffer and leave the ag right-of-way alone.
Tina would come back to look at any trail corridor and check for wetlands.
Julian wondered if there were any seasonal considerations for looking at wetlands.
Wright: noted that the party also walked to the northern section near Urbanik way, Tina seemed
pretty ok with the use and state of this section of the VAST trail.
ACFC Boundary discrepancy
● Wright and Ian noticed there are some differences in various maps used by the town and the
ACF committee.
● Wright described the walk and where each pin is.
● Next steps, Wright volunteered to speak with the town lister about fixing any discrepancy.
Wright also mentioned that Adam Wood’s field is also incorrectly marked on the tax map.
● Sam wondered if we should visit with the select board about this.
● Wright recommends checking in with Josh.
● Wright will check in with Josh Arneson, and CC Brad and Sam.
● Ian did great work creating this map to illustrate the differences
Rec Section Edits
● Wetlands: Wright proposed a 50’ buffer from Class 3 wetland.
● For class 2 buffer Sam points out that rerouting the existing Vast trail may not be possible if a
buffer is large.
● Brad wonders if the reroute is grandfathered and as such could be done without addressing a
300 foot buffer.
● Ian: the easement calls out certain protection zones (vernal pools, dry oak, etc) but not
wetlands.
● Julian: the easement does mention wetlands in the first provision in the context of riparian
buffers.
● Ian: no mention in the EPZ section about wetlands
● Sam: use the logic of riparian zone: 100’ for class 2 and 50’ for class 3.
● Brad: Natural communities need a larger buffer for wildlife
● Brad talked to John Kart, is the size commensurate with the importance? John pointed out that a
small wetland can be important in times of drought.
● Brad: 50 is fine for class 3
● Sam: class 2 would be fine with 300’ if we are sure that reroutes are grandfathered.
● Sam: the old beaver dam is the main concern for non grandfathered trails.
● Brad is proposing 300’ on class 2
● Sam: the grandfathered clause should be looked at
● Jim: Should we talk to John Kart too
● Sonya moves to establish a 100 foot buffer, Jim seconds
● Wright: proposes 200’ for class 2
● Brad: NH uses 400’ and we shouldn’t retreat from strong protections
● Julian: A 300’ buffer creates a large stain (brad prefers the word “area”) that leaves minimal
places for trails.
● Sonya: withdraws motion, Jim withdraws second
● Sam: it’s hard to defend a 300’ buffer for wetlands without specific details on what we’re
protecting and why 300’ is necessary. Let's discuss at a future meeting when we have resources
to back up buffer claims
● Sonya: Could Brad send references to back up a 300’ buffer on wetlands
● Brad should we keep the language about the state requiring a permit.
● Sam: we should move this language to the trail development parameters
● Ian: wonders if we should put in a large number for class 2 to set up the process for deviating
● Sam reiterates that the buffer for class 2 should be defensible and folks should do their
homework.
● Sam uses his fake gavel to move us along.
● Dan’s rewrite, will get to it for next meeting
● Brad has been compiling maps from arrowwood, ethan tapper, field naturalist program, and VLT
to help guide trail discussion. Sam feels this item should stay red and the committee should
revisit this. Brad wonders if we should rely on John Hedden, Bob Low, or the Regional Planning
Commission.
● Dan: All the shape files were provided by Arrowwood and Ethan Tapper
● Ian: Shares map that does show
● Sam Doesn’t like how this map fits on the screen and is shaped (it’s wider than all other ACF
maps, which isn’t accurate and detracts from credibility).
● Brad: Species of Conservation Concern: Remove this and go back to “Rare, Threatened and
Endangered” Sam changed.
● Brad: Has a hand out with proposed language. Sam changed the management plan to include
revision but not the footnote.
● Looking at the Trail Approval Process, discussion on sequencing.
● Sam: The map should be “fairly accurate” and should work in conjunction with the flagging on
the ground to allow someone to follow the proposed route. Does not need to be a GPS track.
● Committee Review and Public Comment. Change to “ACFC will invite input from the following
groups”
● Wright: Likes the softer version of notifying abutters
● Sam: Should the wetlands permit language be inserted
● “Wetlands” was inserted into section 3
● Julian: Should we eliminate conservation commission, trails committee, and VLT
● Sam agrees they probably don’t need to involve them in a trail process
● Ian: add hyperlinks, to trail building resources, Sam did this.
● Dan: Has the completed rewrite of the header of the trail approval process
● Discussion: Julian is especially concerned about trails being proposed only associated with
management cycles. This might be too long. Dan is trying to strike a balance between trail
proposals coming in too often and allowing time to understand impacts.
● Julian: We should give ourselves the right to pause trail developments
● Sam: Not enough time to complete trail approval process rewrite, can cover it in the next
meeting and will send out Dan’s rewrite to the committee
Matters Arising/Closure
● Sam: Upcoming: Map needs to be created
● Sam received a question about opportunities to give public input/feedback. Communicated that
at this time there would be no diversion from the management plan edits to have a public
meeting. Sam has been communicating with the selectboard about this strategy.
● Next meetings scheduled for Nov 10 and Nov 24 at 6 to 830 pm
Motion to adjourn by Sonya, Seconded by Brad. All in favor.