LBL Management | Advisory Board Meeting Minutes April 5, 2007

United States Forest Service
Land Between The Lakes (LBL)
Land Between The Lakes

ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES
April 5, 2007

The Land Between The Lakes (LBL) Advisory Board convened at 9:00 a.m. at the Brandon Spring Group Center, at Land Between The Lakes. The meeting was open to the public.

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Vernon Anderson
Mr. Joe Baust
Mr. Ed Clebsch
Mr. Mark Cramer
Mr. James Ford
Ms. Della Oliver (Alternate)
Mr. David Smith
Mr. Robert Smith
Mr. Ben Stone
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.

One member of the public and seven Forest Service (FS) employees attended this meeting.

Alex Faught opened the meeting by introducing himself and reviewing 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 also provided logistics and safety information, and reviewed the agenda for the day.

Patrick Holcomb, Environmental Education Assistant, provided some general information about the Brandon Spring Group Center. Between 100-120 groups visit this facility each year, with group sizes ranging between 15 and 250. Ben Stone added some local history telling the Board that Brandon Spring got its name from the Brandon family, once a fairly large landowner in LBL.

Tom Peterson thanked the Board for their efforts to develop a recommendation for the future direction of environmental education at LBL. During the last three meetings, members accomplished a lot of work developing a definition, core values, desired conditions, strategies, and prioritizing the strategies. The strategies determined to have the highest priority were discussed in detail at the last meeting and today the Board will focus on the next three. Many people are questioning how to reconnect youth with nature and the environment. After the last meeting, Darrin Samborski, EE Interpretive Specialist, recommended a book that might be of interest to the Board. Tom thanked Darrin for this suggestion and gave each member a copy of Last Child in the Woods by Richard Louv saying the book is very timely to the Board's current discussions and might be a topic for the next meeting.

Bill Lisowsky led the first agenda item explaining the process the Board would use to work on the three medium priority strategies. Members divided into three groups. Using the "World Cafe" facilitation technique, each group discussed one of the three strategies for 15 minutes, then moved to the next table to discuss the next strategy for 15 minutes, finally moving to the third table and strategy for the last 15 minutes. After all members discussed each strategy, the facilitators summarized the discussions.

Strategy 5 — Promote appreciation and understanding of various user groups.
(Kathryn Harper, Facilitator; Lindsey Rogers, Notetaker)

Interact with various youth and senior groups to educate them.
Develop information tools and messages on EE for hunters.
Develop programs that foster respect for nature and LBL's heritage.
Arrange user group workshops focused on LBL problem areas; follow up with a workshop addressing the same issues involving representative of user groups with potentially (or actual) conflicting interests. Seek common ground methods

Comments On Strategy 5:

The first item should be more inclusive. Adults should be added, along with youth and senior groups.

Techniques should target different age groups. Understand your market and determine the best way to reach them.
Tend to focus on youth; are they the most important to target?
Adults can have more power on immediate change.
Invest in youth for the future.

Develop a quality program that will attract attention, participation, and support.

LBL needs to shift resources and focus back to the EE side of the mission.
If there is a quality program that attracts attention, it might start attracting corporate support or support from the retired community.
Keep more resources focused on EE.
Educational volunteers to teach workshops.

Policy makers need to be more aware of issues affecting EE at LBL.

Invite policy makers to discuss potential conflicting interests and to help find common ground.
Legislators need to understand where the need for support is.
Educate legislators - tour and meet with user groups.

Get people together to understand where the common ground is between user groups.

Focus on similarities of different groups, not differences.
We're working together for the resource.

Don't restrict tools and messages on EE to hunters.

Strategy 6 — Increase Focus on Funds Development
(Brian Beisel, Facilitator; Wen Yi Lo, Notetaker)

Speak to legislators and groups who can influence more funding.
Obtain additional funding sources.
Establish needs, let people know the needs and get funding.
Develop an annual meeting among contiguous county executives featuring LBL program activities and encourage community funding support.
Seek a corporate sponsor for EE.
Increase sustainability through interagency agreements and partnerships
Enlist help of the LBL Association
Find corporate sponsors
Write grant proposals to philanthropic foundations to support the really esoteric experiments in EE.
Tap the National Wildlife Foundation for funds

Comments on strategy 6:

The three items generating the most discussion were the first, fourth, and last item above.
"Tap the National Wildlife Foundation' for funds should fall under "Obtaining additional funding sources". It will be listed under that action item along with other organizations such as SAF, Wildlife Society (TWS), NFF, National Celebrities, etc.
"Find corporate sponsors" is a duplicate and should be removed.
Determine where we want to go. After we have a good proposal, go after support (financial and involvement).

LBL Trust Fund - Can this be a source of funding? How much is available?
National Demonstration Mission - review and consider proposal by Lynn Hodges.

Demonstrate successes and then think bigger.

Show how we use the money, and why it's important to us.
Determine where the gaps are (for example, special needs children).
Show the benefits; connect home and surrounding area for the kids.
Make kids aware of their natural surroundings.

Important to make legislators aware that what is going on is important.

Bring them to LBL; show them the real surroundings.
Show them the reality; the difficulty.

Donations

Goals should be more specific.
Combine with commercial value; example: Toyota Creek.

Connect to ongoing efforts, such as No Child Left Inside, the Bill Gates Foundation, etc.

Look for foundation support as well as local support.

Partner with school systems.
Communicate message to legislators using a group of people (other than FS).

Not about the Forest Service, it is about the future. Grass roots movement to raise EE to higher level.

Strategy 7 — Create New Interactive and Integrated EE Programs
(Darrin Samborski, Facilitator; Kathy Garmoe, Notetaker)

Create virtual programs that prepare individuals and groups for ongoing daily, weekend nature study interactions involving youth and senior citizens using adults as facilitators.
Create electronic education techniques to "hook" youth.
Let participants view good and bad examples of environmental stewardship in EE to observe and learn.
Go microscopic.
Utilize the land/water interface, not just the land or the water for EE.
Focus on ecological cycles-energy, hydrologic, carbon, nutrient.
Focus on phenological events in plants, insects, other animals.
Study and share the economic impact of LBL on its counties, businesses, etc.
Impact to the participant's psyche of recreation of various kinds at LBL (including the emotional state the day after)
Focus on habitats and relationships of neotropical migrants, mammals and amphibians?
Local universities could promote this through science classes.

Comments on strategy 7:

Integrate EE across university curriculum.

Don't limit to science courses, incorporate in math, social studies, language arts, etc.
Help with integration.

Electronic world is here to stay; we can't ignore it.

How do we encourage visiting LBL and tie that in with electronic options?
Kids are absorbed in electronic activities; how do we use that technology to develop a "hook" to get them excited about an outdoor experience?
Reach kids first with electronics, then shift focus to outdoors.

How do we get families to let their children experience nature?

Make parents/kids feel safe and convince them to come to nature.
Utilize new media technology to reach parents.

Look at other barriers - single family households, grandparents raising children, etc.

Do they have time to engage in outdoor experiences?
Do they have a fear of the outdoors they transfer to the kids?
Do they know where and how to access "green space"?
Consider ADD and problem kids - able to focus better in "green space".

Education

Need to get into classrooms and living rooms; technology is available.
Needs to be fun regardless of what we're trying to convey.
General concepts/specific concepts combine to form education.

Utilize educators.

Pick their brains to find out where kids are today and how to connect with them.
Invite them to visit and gain their ideas on programs.
Teacher workshops.
Ask what they need before they come; get to know the groups before they visit.

Create excitement before kids visit and make them want to come; marketing/awareness.
Outreach program - go to them to get them to come here.

Summary of discussions on strategy 7:

Majority of the discussions focused on utilizing technology as a "hook" or "starting point", but it was clear that technology should not be a substitute for contact/experience in the outdoors.
Before we create new and innovative programs, need to identify our target audience, understand their needs, and any barriers to participation. Utilize teachers, professors to develop programs (align with efforts in their classes)
Do not forget to align strategies with age appropriate concepts

One comment was received from the public, and this paper, submitted by Lynn Hodges, was provided to members prior to the meeting.

Joe said the paper provided two definitions of EE and suggested it might be wise to use those definitions as a summation of where the Board is since it's an international definition.
Della agreed it might be a good idea to use these definitions and noted there were some very interesting points in the paper. Ed made a motion to put this topic on the agenda for the next meeting and invite Lynn Hodges to attend so members can hear more. Ben seconded the motion and the Board voted in favor of inviting Mr. Hodges. He will be contacted to see if he's available to meet with the Board.

Alex asked how the members wanted to deal with the low priority strategies and proposed a few options to consider. The option selected may determine timing of the next meeting. For their consideration, Bill noted the remaining strategies received the fewest votes in the prioritization process, and the Board will have an opportunity to review the complete draft recommendation before it is finalized; additional comments could be considered at that time.

Comments could be submitted to FS staff for them to pull together and prepare a final draft document before the next meeting.
A small group of members could work with the FS staff between meetings to pull together comments and a final draft document.
The remaining strategies could be discussed at the next meeting in the same manner as the medium strategies had been discussed today.

Della said it might be more beneficial to look again at the first strategies reviewed and do more work on them rather than spending time on the low priority strategies.
Ed thought he was the only vote for the research strategy and suggested he and Joe could work together by e-mail on that item since they both have an interest in this area. He said that "inquiry" might be a better term to use than "research". The type of research he is proposing is not formal scientific research with controls. Ed said he is committed to the theory that you can't do good EE without research (inquiry).
Joe agreed this item could be handled by them through correspondence; he thinks it is important to start out with awareness.

Tom asked the members what they proposed for reviewing the final draft document. Did they want to look at it as a group or on their own time providing comments?

Della said the Board gathered ideas and worked on them better as a group than individually.
Joe said the strength of the group is its diversity. The Board has a vast experience base and it helps to flush out things as a group; helps to find the areas of commonality.

Bill asked if the Board wanted the FS staff to take the notes from today, synthesize them, get comments on 8-9-10, and then turn around the first real final draft plan for the next meeting where the Board would review the full document in large blocks.

Della proposed it might be beneficial to have Lynn Hodges talk with the Board first, then review.
There was general agreement to devote the next meeting working to finalize the document.

Patrick briefed on the pond visit, explaining he would take members through this experience in the same manner as students visiting Brandon. Board members and FS staff, joined by members of the public attending the meeting, traveled a short distance to the pond and participated in the study. After returning, they were asked to comment on the experience:

Would have been wonderful to have an opportunity like this when young.
Even a small area exposes us to many different things; a large area isn't a necessity.
Interesting that even what appears to be junk is important.
Good way to arouse interest in young people.
Reminded them of how much fun a kid would have doing this.

The members ate lunch with seventh grade students visiting Brandon Spring for the week and after lunch shared comments they'd heard and provided their thoughts on the discussions.

Comments from students:

Most had fun at Brandon; enjoyed group activities and being with friends.
Challenge course was popular.
Wanted to get back to electronic games, even though they'd had fun.
Experience was different than expected.
Would like a bigger yard at home; don't live near any parks.
No time to visit park when home; other activities.
Most planned to go to college.
Stream walk was favorite activity; enjoyed more in person than they would have on TV.
Most didn't know a lot about LBL.
Would like more free time during the visit.
Did not expect to incorporate anything from visit into life at home.
Students were very complimentary of the staff at Brandon.

Members' thoughts on the discussions:

It wasn't always easy to get the students to comment.
Interesting that one student was able to describe the challenge course in great detail; but it wasn't as easy to explain why they enjoyed the stream study.
More information about LBL should be provided before students visit; perhaps an instructional video.
Information on historical home sites might be of interest.
The Center of Field Biology developed a guide which might be good information for visiting groups.
The cost to visit for this group (a private school) was $150 per child. All but one in the class attended; cost did not seem to be a limiting factor.

Brian Beisel talked about the next agenda item which was a discussion with students from the University of Wisconsin. The group's sponsor, Don Fields, worked with Brian to arrange a practicum at LBL, which exposes the students to a broad spectrum of public land information -- environmental education, recreation, prescribed fire, trails, vegetation management, archeology, business operations/data decisions, etc. At other locations, students were limited to one area of study for their internship. Don said that LBL offers a unique variety of natural resource opportunities and a wonderful customer focused attitude. Two apprentices on the LBL staff have previously participated in this same program. The Board met with the students near the Fort Henry Trail. After introductions, there was an open discussion, with members asking several questions. The students responded and also provided some general comments to the Board.

What was interesting about this experience at LBL?

Range of opportunities.
Personal experience is great; teaching each other.
Treated like special guests.
Appreciate the strong emphasis placed on education.
Staff focused on take-home messages, and really knows its customer base.
Good link between EE and recreation. For example, during a stream/pond study to compare and contrast, they were able to hike and learned in the process.
Learning about an area you're recreating in, will promote future use.
Important to salvage a connection for younger children to every day life.

What had students learned from other areas that could be brought to LBL?

Students said they were already overwhelmed by the programs available at LBL.

If you acquired a property like LBL, what would be the best model to use - let families stay on the land for one generation, allow no one to stay (as happened at LBL), or let residents populate the park while working and managing the area?

It's good to see people in the area. If you disassociate, you distance EE from the people.
Like the one-generation option; gives families time to make decisions.
Against eminent domain, but sometimes it might depend on the layout of the land, where people are living, and the purpose for the property.
LBL experience might have been especially difficult because of the phases former residents went through - first moved because of the dam, then from the shoreline to the ridges, then out completely.
It's best to focus on not excluding people; if they want to be there they usually will treat the land properly.

If you were part of an agency that acquired a property like LBL from another agency, what would you propose to make a more positive experience?

A facility like The Homeplace can be a great middle ground to bring people together. Even though an area like The Homeplace might be of more interest to some groups than others, it still provides a good message for visitors to leave with.
Where people have participated in deciding options for the land, a more positive experience was created. Expect this scenario to happen more in the future, rather than land being taken completely away as it was at LBL.

Multiple opportunities bring user conflicts. What would the students suggest to help with this problem?

Having separate areas such as the equestrian use and OHV areas in LBL is a good idea.
LBL has the luxury of space. If space is limited, let user groups meet and make a deal.
Cut off problems before they occur; let user groups be part of the decision process.

Do public lands have to give equal opportunity to all groups?

No. Need to look at the resource and what it can accommodate.
No. EE at LBL is unique. People have to be responsible for their actions.

How do you feel about commercial timber removal on public lands?

If it benefits the land, yes.
LBL has done a good job of concealing timber taken.
Education can be helpful in explaining why this is good for a sustainable forest.

If you were standing in front of Congress, why would you say EE is important?

For preservation; start emphasizing the importance at a young age.
Important to keep a connection with the natural world; link it to the practical.
For those having trouble sitting in a classroom, EE allows students to re-examine social connections. They're not being given something they're resisting. They're learning while enjoying.

What could LBL or the Advisory Board do to maximize the experience?

There were no suggestions to make the experience better.
One student said it was an eye-opener to be at LBL.
Bill Ryan, FS staff and a previous apprentice, said the transition point after the apprentice program is not always clear. There should be a better route to the next step. He suggested the Advisory Board might be very helpful in finding jobs for individuals finishing the program. The members have a lot of experience and contacts in the right areas. They may know of or hear about available positions and Bill would be happy to get that information to the students.
Amanda Walker, FS staff and a previous apprentice, said that being an apprentice provides a hands-on experience that some colleges don't promote. LBL really encourages education and cross-training.

What experience "turned you on" to nature?

Boy Scouts
Grew up with a river in the back yard.
Spending summers at grandparents' cabin; outdoor community.
People met through other experiences.
Friends
Father took to national parks; didn't allow video games and TV was restricted.
Field science class held by high school football coach.

General comments from the students:

Disconnect from electronic media.
Get EE in the face of youth when they're as young as possible.
Responsibility lies with the parents; many are disconnected.
Most of the students in this program grew up outdoors.
Some kids need the opportunity to get away from an overly cautious parent to "get" the EE experience.
Capture IPOD technology - use it to supplement what is done at LBL. We can't fight it so use it.
One student knew of an MP3 program of bird calls.
Teaching, but not appearing to be teaching, is important. (LBL staff does this well.)
It's good to be removed from the student/teacher roll.
Enthusiasm is a big part of the learning experience.

Ben suggested a project the students might consider that would use electronic skills and also benefit visitors to LBL. Many people have a genuine interest in their family history. There is no complete oral history of LBL; however, old land deeds could be used to make a GIS overlay showing the original homesteads over a current map of LBL. This would be great information to have available for future generations.

The members returned to Brandon to wrap up the day and Bill asked them to provide one take-home message they got from today's meeting:

Joy, excitement; everyone seems to be on the same page.
First real link to the folks that actually benefit from EE; planning and reality.
Contrast between seventh graders and college students. What clicks between these ages?
Big challenge is to figure out how to merge technology to EE and get youth outside.
Don't let electronic technology drag down other efforts; build on those you can connect to.
Interesting that the university students were so ideally suited for LBL, but hadn't heard of LBL before coming.
Would be good to use these students as advocates.
Students may be able to help us find good examples of how to use electronics; challenge them.
We're seeing a grass roots role developing; students are telling people about LBL.
Impressed by confidence and maturity of the university students.
More going on at LBL than previously thought.
FS staff is serious about EE, taking it as a major role. Applauds the staff for that and encourages them to continue.
Experiential education is important. It takes people to make links.
LBL needs to be known across the US.

The Board committed to read the book, Last Child in the Woods, and have a discussion.
Bill proposed September 6 for the next meeting and asked if there were any conflicts with that date. There were none and September 6 was selected as the next meeting date.
Lynn Hodges will be contacted to see if he's available to do a brief summary of his comment paper.

Tom thanked the FS staff for their work on today's meeting and thanked the members for their participation.

The meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m.

Certified by:

/s/ Thomas A. Peterson

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

4/30/07