ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES
September 6, 2007

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

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Vernon Anderson
Mr. Pat Brandon
Ms. Ben Helen Burkeen
Mr. Bobby Cassity (Alternate)
Mr. Ed Clebsch
Mr. Gary Cook
Mr. Mark Cramer
Mr. Paul Ryan
Mr. Steve Morgan
Ms. Della Oliver (Alternate)
Mr. David Smith
Mr. Bob Smith
Mr. Ben Stone
Mr. Jim Wallace

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.

Two members of the public (Mike Manning and Susan Hawkins, NPS Rangers at Fort Donelson), and six Forest Service (FS) employees attended this meeting.

Alex Faught opened the meeting and provided general safety information. He reviewed the agenda and 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). Alex then asked everyone to introduce themselves.

Tom Peterson reviewed what the board had accomplished since they first agreed to address environmental education (EE) at LBL. After an initial Appreciative Inquiry session, members identified key aspects of EE and prioritized recommendations for LBL staff to consider when developing their strategic plan for EE. The board previously agreed that at today's meeting they would finish this effort. Tom reminded the members they would not be doing another in-depth review of the entire document, and that it was not necessary to "wordsmith" the work they've already accomplished. Today they will put the finishing touches on their recommendation.

First on the agenda was a presentation by Mr. Lynn Hodges, President of L.M. Hodges & Associates, who previously provided comments to the board on EE. Lynn was invited by the board to summarize his comments in person and answer questions. Lynn began by outlining his career in EE. He mentioned two statistics — that there are 650 million acres of land under federal management, of which the BLM, Forest Service, Fish & Wildlife Service, and Park Service manage 95%; and, that current studies show there are 30 million students and 1.2 million teachers in the United States doing EE. Lynn said he thinks a national level demonstration on how to use public lands is needed; a working, successful model, that doesn't come out of an academic atmosphere, but an on-the-ground example of how it should be done. Also, that LBL's move to FS management provides a new opportunity for EE, and the Advisory Board can influence what happens at LBL. Lynn said he thinks it's important for LBL's EE program to be nationally recognized and promoted; that LBL should invest in skilled professionals on staff, reestablish key partnerships, and look at benchmarks, such as the Friends of the Smokies. An experience like LBL can supercharge the education process. He also thinks it's important for LBL to be represented on the U.S. Forest Service Conservation Education Council. He mentioned the No Child Left Behind Act, to which an amendment is being proposed that would provide new federal funding for EE. After his presentation, Della asked Lynn where members could get more information about problems facing LBL, in order to educate themselves and use the information when the board meets. Lynn suggested they ask the FS staff, and associations and not-for-profit groups whose business is EE.

During the presentation by Lynn Hodges, Ben made a motion, seconded by Della, and approved by the board, to take 10 minutes from the next agenda item to give Lynn more time to finish his comments. After Lynn finished his presentation and offered to answer questions, Sharon Waltrip, EE/Interpretive Specialist, told the members she also had information for them on the FS Conservation Plan and the Act before Congress, which Lynn had mentioned, and copies were distributed. Sharon then began an open discussion on Last Child in the Woods, a book by Richard Louv, previously given to all members. The following comments came from their discussion:

Sharon wrapped up this discussion by noting the book has a lot of ideas and examples of big things that can happen, but some things can happen now. LBL has the land; we've got the place for them to come and explore.

After a break, Bill Lisowsky started the final review of the Recommendation for Strategic Planning for Environmental Education, telling the members their recommendation represented a lot of work, and that it will feed in to the strategic plan Sharon Waltrip is developing. The board has based their recommendation on some guiding principles; looking at things from a realistic perspective, while at the same time dreaming. The document conveys a sense of priority, but not an ultimate priority. Some things may happen simultaneously. This recommendation will need to adapt and evolve over time. Today members need to agree they're OK with the document. It will be important not to get hung up on the exact wording. Is there anything missing? Can you "live with" this recommendation? Sharon has been listening and taking advantage of the members' thoughts as this document was developed, and the work done today will feed in with her final product; much of it already has.

Definitions and Core Values: There were no questions, comments, or concerns and the board accepted the definitions and core values as written.

Desired Future Conditions: Discussion included whether to indicate a desire that LBL be nationally recognized and promoted. Also, whether there was a separation of EE and interpretation at LBL that should be addressed. The FS staff explained the two are blended at LBL. They're sometimes separated at other places within the FS for funding purposes, but this is just a way of defining program money within the agency. The FS staff is proud the EE program at LBL is overarching. Some people distinguish and try to make a difference, but EE covers all aspects — informal, formal, and dispersed. Mark added that interpretation is a form of EE, a tool to use. Bob said the difference probably started with a historical interpretation and conflict between groups; LBL is on the right track.

Before lunch, Alex reminded everyone that no official business would be conducted during the break. When members returned, Ben made a motion that the designations of high, medium, and low be removed from the list of potential strategies, leaving the items listed numerically one through ten. Ed seconded the motion. The following discussion took place before the vote:

• Mark reminded members that in earlier conversations there was a desire to prioritize because of possible funding issues; however, he agreed the board wouldn't want someone thinking lower priorities don't have merit. Mark asked if budget would be tied to these potential strategies; would this document be referred to for priorities if budgets were cut.

  The FS will be guided by the ranking strategies were given.

• Pat said when LBL gets resources to do one project or another, priorities may become important.
• Gary indicated that, in comprehensive planning, many funding options are based on priorities.
• Della asked if Sharon's document would be worded exactly as the recommendation.

  The final FS strategic plan may not be written exactly as the recommendation is written.

• Paul Ryan clarified that members were to consider taking off the three labels, leaving the items listed in numerical order, which would also indicate a priority.

Before beginning discussions on the strategies, members clarified that changes discussed and made to this document would not require an official motion and vote by the members. Also, changes strictly to "wordsmith" the document would not be necessary, but would be left to the FS staff to finish.

Strategy 1: Discussion included whether to indicate LBL would be a "national" laboratory and demonstration site, and it was agreed this was already covered by the addition of the new desired future condition. Members also discussed whether the terminology used was adequate to ensure goals could be achieved if decisions were made based on available budget, and it was agreed the FS staff would develop their plan using wording they felt was appropriate.

Strategy 3: Discussion included the type of tools referred to under public outreach, whether "logging" was necessary in the second bullet, and if "best management practices" should be clarified as forest management or vegetation management.

Revisions agreed to by the board:

• First sub-bullet under "Public Outreach" was changed to read: "Development of communication tools."
• Second bullet was changed to read: "Demonstration of best management practices."
• Second sub-bullet under the second bullet was changed to "Vegetation Management."
• Sixth bullet was changed to read: "Promote and utilize volunteers (shadowing) PTOs, Kiwanis, etc."

Strategy 4: The only revision was to replace "natural and managed" with "diverse". This strategy now reads: "Teach the importance of maintaining diverse environments consistent with LRMP."

Strategy 5: The only revision was to replace "various" with "all". This strategy now reads: "Promote appreciation and understanding of all user groups."

Strategy 6: It was agreed the words "the really esoteric" in the last bullet were unnecessary and they were removed. Strategy now reads: "Write grant proposals to philanthropic foundations to support experiments in EE."

Strategy 7: The board agreed some items should be rearranged to show a better flow of how actions could be taken to best achieve the goal, and also that some actions would be more accurate if listed as sub-bullets under a different action item.

Strategy 9. This strategy is now strategy 8.

Strategy 10. This strategy was completely deleted because the information listed here had been incorporated in other strategies or was no longer needed.

The members signed the document giving their approval of the Recommendation on Strategic Planning for Environmental Education, with the revisions noted above.

In preparation for the next meeting, the board discussed possible agenda items. Bill mentioned previous discussions about the struggle connecting with educational processes, and asked if the members might like to look at how to take the strategy about EE connecting to schools and consider what they could offer in the way of time, effort, or ideas to make that happen. Tom mentioned they also had talked about the loss of parental knowledge (parents today often being two-three generations removed from the land), and suggested a possible discussion on what we can do to replace a step previously taken for granted, that parents would generate the connection to the land for their children. Possible agenda items for consideration:

• More discussion on the Last Child in the Woods.
  • Suggested members give a copy of the book to their school superintendents.
• Consider merit of having a panel of students/teachers/parents discuss EE with the board.
  • Consider inviting kids from an urban environment.
  • Superintendents may be able to recommend students/parents.
  • A questionnaire might be needed first, then build on the responses for discussion.
  • Use a blog to obtain information.
• Discuss value of sending a letter to school systems about test scores and nature.
• Possible discussion with focus groups.
• Having Louise Chawla, an environmental psychology professor at Kentucky State University referenced in the book, attend a meeting; possibly to talk with students/parents.
• Look at the correlation between LBL visitation and hunting/fishing licenses.
• Discuss whether the board should communicate with the Secretary and if so, how.
• Discuss representation on the FS Conservation Education Council.
• Discuss the issue of whether LBL should become a national EE model and demo area.

The board selected Thursday, February 28, 2008, for the next meeting.

Tom thanked the members and FS staff for their work at today's meeting, and he complimented the members on the document they had finalized.

Meeting was adjourned at 3:15 pm.