LBL Management | Advisory Board Meeting Minutes November 2, 2006

The Land Between The Lakes (LBL) Advisory Board convened at 9:00 a.m. at the Administrative Building, Land Between The Lakes in Golden Pond, Kentucky. The meeting was open to the public.

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Vernon Anderson
Mr. Joe Baust
Mr. Pat Brandon
Ms. Ben Helen Burkeen
Mr. Ed Clebsch
Mr. James Ford
Mr. Steve Morgan
Ms. Della Oliver (Alternate)
Mr. David Smith
Mr. Ben Stone
Mr. Jim Wallace
Mr. Marvin Wilson

ADVISORY BOARD STAFF PRESENT:
Mr. Tom Peterson, Advisory Board Chairperson
Mr. Bill Lisowsky, Designated Federal Official (DFO)
Mr. Alex Faught, Facilitator
Ms. Sharon Byers, Advisory Board Administrative Liaison

*NOTE: FS comments/replies are noted in italics following member's comments or questions.

Three members of the public and eight Forest Service (FS) employees attended this meeting.

Alex Faught opened the meeting with introductions from everyone. Tom Peterson gave a special welcome to Mr. Ford, attending his first Advisory Board meeting. Mr. Ford was given a padfolio containing reference and background information for the Board.

Alex provided general logistics information for the day and reviewed the purpose of the Board, which is to provide advice to the Secretary on environmental education (EE) and a means of promoting public participation for the Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). He briefly went over some of the past work done by the Board, including an Appreciative Inquiry (AI) session where members developed core values, desired future conditions, and strategies for EE at LBL.

Tom started the day's discussions where the Board left off in November by asking members if they still wanted to prioritize the strategies they had developed.

Bill answered that as members look at each strategy they may see a chronological sequence influencing what should be done first. Each individual will have their own priorities.

Sharon Waltrip, EE Interpretive Specialist, explained that prioritizing the strategies into groups of high, medium, and low would be the most useful to the FS. That will provide flexibility, but also direction and focus. By prioritizing, the Board shows where they feel the need is greatest, but this doesn't mean strategies lower on the list won't be pursued; some may be done simultaneously.

A list of the ten strategies developed by the Board was provided for their use in selecting the four they thought should be given the highest priority.

The following four strategies from the above list were given the highest priority:

In a sense funding is always an issue, but we need to know if we're doing the right things. The Board is expressing what is most important; the FS challenge will be to see if we're lining up with that, and if not, why not. We're looking for a mark to tell us where we should put our efforts and then we'll look at options for doing that.

The main focus hasn't been going to schools, but we do teach the teachers and provide facilities at LBL. Educator workshops and teacher appreciation events have been held at LBL and we are involved in the school field grant program.

Jim Rufli, LBLA, said the school grant program has put out extensive info on what LBL has to offer. The program provides the ability for schools to apply for grants that reimburse them for part of their expenses when visiting LBL. Last year, over $20,000 went to schools and over 4,000 students visited.

Dr. Calhoun, attending the meeting as a member of the public, asked the Board if he might raise a question and was provided that opportunity. He asked if the goals being discussed were to improve and enhance what LBL is building on, and would grants received be above and beyond the operating budget? Also, where does the FS apply for grants?

The FS views the Board's recommendation as the right things to be doing, or things that need to be done differently in the future. Grants would be above the operating budget. Often the LBL Association can apply for grants and the FS can supply matching funds. When applying, we have to show how our program fits in to their criteria. The FS has a lot of ongoing partnerships, including ones that helped rebuild the Long Creek Refuge and helped accomplish prescribed burns. We're supporting Murray State with $15,000 for the school grant program. St Stephens Church restoration was a partnership project with former residents.

Tom reminded the Board about Ben's suggestion of rewording and possibly consolidating some strategies, and asked if they wanted an opportunity to wordsmith the strategies further. Vernon made a motion to include "community groups" with the strategy concerning building relationships with school systems; David seconded the motion. Tom called for a vote and all were in favor. The strategy was reworded as follows:

Following this discussion, Sharon Waltrip provided feedback on the EE strategic plan telling the Board that as she looked at the high priority strategies they'd chosen, the words in the draft document have more meaning because now there are four areas where she can begin to focus. She said the EE strategic plan doesn't stand alone. It's tiered under a National Plan, also regional emphasis, and the local LRMP. As money becomes available, staff can look at the EE plan, match items with partners, and look for funding. The EE plan will give consistency with key messages; provide continuity and evaluation. It helps improve public involvement, garner new partnerships, and promote community commitment. The EE plan will help staff prioritize, integrate, and adequately fund programs. Sharon hopes the members will want to help build relationships with school systems and community groups, and said the possibilities increase if the Board continues to help outside of the official meetings.

Since the Board was ahead of schedule, they requested Bill provide LBL updates before lunch. After providing the information below, he answered questions from the members.

It is connected. We're looking on how to expand on what we have - education about resource management, birding trails, walking tours, wildlife viewing opportunities, etc.; looking at all possibilities. We have a good opportunity to test some new things in this area.

We are using some of the same people who are working on other items. We are using some of the same skills we use in other facilities, but part of our job is to look ahead and plan. Brian Beisel, Customer Service Department Manager, explained that in looking at "dispersed recreation" we know many visitors don't interact with staff. In the LRMP, we state that we want to deliver an EE message to every visitor. When they arrive they may have a particular area of interest. They'll have information so they can go to specific area, but stops along the way will have a multiple purpose. There may be a historical component, wildlife watching, or it could be a self guided EE experience.

Since the Judge has not ruled, the FS can't comment on the lawsuit. However, staff can talk about what is being planned for this year. In the LRMP, new riparian corridors were identified and those areas are being implemented. Permittees have been directed to adjust to those new standards during the current year. As part of creating those corridors, we intend to plant them, but won't treat with a pesticide and will not harvest them.

The LRMP gives direction to maintain the areas of open lands. These areas will mostly be mowed in the future, though some will revert to forest over time.

Several sales have been conducted in the last few years. In the oak-grassland project, there is a need to thin those forests (about 40%). As we make that decision, those projects will be offered for sale. We'll move back to WA18 now that it's no longer under lawsuit. We're also looking at one site in the northern oak grassland area. Some sales were done due to nature's effort, such as the damage caused by the tornado.

Are areas previously designated under biosphere still being maintained?

Yes they are being left as "core areas" as designated in the LRMP. They are managed the same as they were when designated as biosphere areas.

Ed noted that the FS could do a better job of conveying the rewards of a timber harvest for the benefit of the land and said he was finally convinced there was a need for timber harvest. Before the area was populated, fire maintained the area.

Judge Humphries, attending as a member of the public, asked if timber harvest was a budget item.

Timber is harvested only for wildlife management, scenic vistas, and forest health. Revenue comes back to LBL. Timber harvest is not a commercial program for LBL.

The Board broke for lunch with Alex reminding everyone that no official business would be conducted during the break. When members returned, they broke into three groups and each discussed one of the strategies ranked as high priority, listing possible action items. Notes were taken in each group and a member of the group presented their discussion to the full Board.

Strategy: Promote public awareness of, and involvement in, the environment.
(David Smith, spokesperson; Brian Beisel, facilitator; Regina Weakley, recorder)

Public outreach
a. Development of tools
b. Educational environmental feature articles in local media
outlets

a. Demonstration of best management practices (logging)
— Educate farmers/contractors
b. Involve outside agencies w/demonstration
— Oak Grassland Demonstration Area
c. Field trips-conservation groups (TN Trails Assoc., Sierra Club, etc.)

Sales pitch to public officials

Utilize volunteers (shadowing) PTOs, Kiwanis, etc.

Participate in local leadership and civic programs

68/80 environmental education signage

Review TVA environmental education documents

Strategy: Teach the importance of maintaining natural and managed environments consistent with LRMP.
(James Ford, spokesman; Darrin Samborski, facilitator; Janice Wilson, recorder)

Create opportunities for audience to discover their natural heritage (packaged videos, photos-computer/Internet)

Continued development of age appropriate activities (delivery methods)
— Create video resources (computer/Internet) — a "hook" to gain
interest

Create opportunities for audience to have personal experiences within the target environment (hands-on)

Identify consequences to not having good management practices in place and not taking care of the natural environment

Share education techniques w/other agencies
— Communities and schools

Strategy: Build relationships with school systems and community groups within useable distance from LBL.
(Joe Baust, spokesman; Amanda Wilson, facilitator; Wanda Crump, recorder)

Continue at higher level to identify and remove barriers to schools to come to LBL.
a. Provide EE outreach programs that relate to CORE content for kids and teachers.
b. Show EE is interdisciplinary (not just science).
c. Work at top of "food chain" including superintendents and judge executives.
d. Programs for community organizations such as Chamber of Commerce, Rotary, Tourism, Senior Citizen groups, etc.
e. Partnerships with Fish and Wildlife, 4-H, County Extensions, NRCS, FSA, Conservation Groups.
f. Programs/relationship with Parent Teacher Organizations/Associations.
g. Interactive television in classrooms, possibly daily/weekly updates.
h. Show how to maximize pre and post trip activities.
i. Meet with site-based councils for helping schools meet testing goals.
j. Show how LBL can build health and wellness.

Use demonstration mission to export and model EE to other public lands (e.g., BLM, Interior)

Work with local universities to offer college credit/professional development.

No strategies were eliminated during these discussions. The remaining strategies for further discussion are listed below. There was discussion that some strategies listed below might actually be part of one of the three already discussed, rather than separate issues. It was also discussed that the first item listed below might be a desired future condition, rather than a strategy.

Establish LBL as an EE Laboratory and a demonstration site for EE through a diversity of learning styles.

Promote appreciation and understanding of various user groups.

Provide a focus for our communities to get involved in activities that promote an awareness of nature.

Increase focus on funds development

Involve all age groups in "research".

Successfully compete for people's leisure time.

Create new interactive and integrated EE programs.

Tom asked how the members felt about what had been accomplished in these breakout discussions and if the remaining strategies were adequately covered.

Some of the other strategies need more exploration and discussion. (Ed)

You can't do EE without doing research; research is essential. (Joe)

The other strategies should be discussed to see how they might develop. (Della)

Will the other strategies go away if not discussed separately; it might be necessary to keep a strategy for funds development. (David)

Wouldn't the four that received the highest priority form a cohesive mechanism by which all the others can be achieved? (Ben)

The Board serves as an advisor to the Secretary of Agriculture and could provide the Secretary with a golden bullet if we move LBL towards being a national level environmental education demonstration location. Lynn Hodges might be able to elaborate more on this possibility. (Ed)

Part of the original legislation specifically addressed the demonstration mission and we need to continue that emphasis. (Ben)

Lynn Hodges, attending as a member of the public, was asked by the Board to give his thoughts on the role they have in providing advice to the Secretary. He said each new secretary looks for something new to share with other Secretaries. He thinks LBL is in an enviable position as an advisor to the Secretary of Agriculture and can offer a demonstration of how to do EE on public lands.

Tom asked if the information developed today was enough or would members like to work on it further; would they like a chance to review the strategies discussed by the other groups and provide feedback. The members decided the strategy "Establish LBL as an EE Laboratory and a demonstration site for EE through a diversity of learning styles" may need to be elevated to a desired future condition, and that the remaining items should be addressed at a future meeting. Members did want to review the breakout group notes further and FS staff will put together these notes and provide to the members by e-mail with comments requested back by early March.

No comments regarding the mission of the Board were received from the public for discussion.

Alex asked for suggested agenda items for the next meeting; none were provided. Bill mentioned a site visit at LBL had been proposed previously and said one could be done at the next meeting.

Tom asked how long the Board would like to wait until returning to deal with the remaining items. A meeting before the end of April was suggested, and after discussion on available dates, Thursday, April 5, was selected as the next meeting date.

Tom said he appreciated everyone attending today's meeting and noted the work done will be very helpful to FS interpretive/EE staff. He thanked the members for their participation and valuable input. He gave a special thanks to Alex for facilitating, and adjourned the meeting at 3:15 pm.

Certified by:

/s/ Thomas A. Peterson

THOMAS A. PETERSON
LBL Advisory Board Chairperson
USDA Forest Service, Region 8

3/02/07