Members Present: Harold Watson, Ruth Roulx, Janet Cormier, Peter Kahn, Roger Blais, Bill Keating, Susan Sienna, Connie Kreider, Ed Carballo, David Rutzke, Jim Taylor, Lynne Wenz, Cathy Provencher, Gregory Kirby, Andy Powell, Charles Buker, Debra Huffman, Tim Tenhave, Karen Mattor, Newton Coryell and John Buckley.

Also Present: Jay Minkarah, Community Development Director, Todd Szewczyk, Conservation Officer, NH Fish & Game Commission, Nelson Disco, Planning Board Chairman, Scott McPhie, Community Resources Planner and Susan Domanico, Assistant Planner.

Call to Order: Debra Huffman called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM.

Presentation by New Hampshire Fish and Game: Whereas Todd Szewczyk of NH Fish & Game was not yet present, The Committee moved on to Reports from sub committees.

Reports from sub committees: Debra Huffman noted that Task Team #1 – Evaluate the Land, has been very active. Greg Kirby and Debra have been out on the site with GPS equipment to develop an accurate trail map. The Committee was also informed that we now have permission to use engineering data developed by the former owners of the property including soils, topography, and wetland information. For further studies, it was reported that Debra and Andy Powell went out on the site with a biodiversity specialist from UNH and she will be doing a presentation for the Committee at the December meeting.

Karen Mattor informed the Committee that for Task Team #2, she had assembled a wetlands inventory from the Conservation Commission that was done about ten years ago along with some additional information. How the information would be presented in the report was discussed.

Newton Coryell reported that he has contacted PSNH for Task #3 regarding the PSNH easement, but that he has note completed his research due to a recent vacation. Debra Huffman noted that PSNH actually owns land on either side of the easement area that may have potential for access.

Andy Powell reported for Task Team #4 relative to Class VI roads and access points. Mr. Powell noted that they have begun research, but have not met as a group yet. He also informed the Committee that the developers for the proposed Wasserman Heights Subdivision (a subdivision proposed on property that abuts the Greens Pond property to the south) had come before the Conservation Commission and that the provision of a pedestrian access easement/wildlife corridor to connect the Greens Pond Property to Wasserman Park had been discussed. Debra added that the owners would be willing to consider a walking trail from the Greens Pond Property to the end of the proposed roadway, an alternative that provides some access but that is less than perfect. Discussion continued briefly on various aspects of the proposed subdivision related to access and buffers.

Andy Powell reported for Task Team #5 – The Broader Context. He noted that a presentation had been made at the last meeting. The group is ready to put together a report.

For Site Walks, Task Team #6, Debra noted that several have been done, that they have been well attended, but that interest was waning. She asked whether anyone had not yet walked the property. Sue Sienna replied that she had walked part of the property but would like to see other areas. It was decided to cease holding regular walks and to conduct private walks only for those who still want to see certain areas.

Tim Tenhave reported that Task Team #7 on existing Town plans are on track and that they are preparing a draft template. Their scope includes a list of all plans referenced, a list of Town plans that specifically reference the Greens Pond Property, and items that may be of interest to other subcommittees. Tim asked who would be drafting the plan. Debra replied that she would be drafting the plan.

Todd Szewczyk, Conservation Officer with the NH Fish & Game Commission arrived at about 7:30. Discussion of subcommittee reports was temporarily abated so that Mr. Szewczyk could present to the Committee.

Presentation by New Hampshire Fish and Game: Mr. Szewczyk greeted the Committee and commented that he was very glad that the Town purchased the Greens Pond Property. He noted that it gets a lot of use from his constituents. Mr. Szewczyk stated that he would focus primarily on hunting and fishing. He noted that there are a number of programs; supported by state and federal dollars, related to land management, tree planting, waterfowl and wildlife management.

Mr. Szewczyk discussed issues related to OHRVs (Off Highway Recreational Vehicles), which are commonly referred to as ATVs. He noted that complaints related to OHRVs have tripled in recent years and now make up about 40% of his responsibilities. He urged the Town to be cautious with this issue. There are existing trails used by OHRVs on the property now. Mr. Szewczyk stated that OHRVs are allowed on existing trails on public land unless posted. He added that new legislation has been proposed to further restrict usage. Mr. Szewczyk stated that he had to remain neutral on the issue because his department regulates OHRVs, but that they do cause problems due to noise and erosion.

Mr. Szewczyk described wildlife on the property. He noted that it is one of the best areas for duck hunting in his territory. Duck species include wood, peal, mallard and black ducks. He once saw about 700 geese at the site at one time. Mr. Szewczyk also noted that there are moose, turkey, deer and possibly bear, although he hasn’t seen one yet. He noted that there is abundant upland habitat with good oaks (for food).

Mr. Szewczyk stated that he believes that the property is safe for hunting. He is not aware of any accidents that have occurred. He also stated that the site is good for hiking and that there are many groups that can help make and maintain trails.

Sue Siena stated that she is not a hunter, but is not opposed to hunting. She asked whether he (Fish & Game) sets up rules and regulations for hunting. Mr. Szewczyk replied that they do regulate hunting, that he personally covers ten towns and that the rules are available on-line. He noted that hunting is allowed on any land that is not posted, but that you cannot hunt within 300 feet of a home.

Mr. Szweczyk was asked whether it is legal to target shoot. He replied that there is no law that prevents it but acknowledged that it is a problem. He suggested that the Town adopt a regulation against it as they did at the Landfill. He added that unlike target shooting, hunting typically only involves one or two shots. Connie Kreider asked whether there are time limits. Mr. Szweczyk replied that there are not, but that shooting at night could be handled as a police matter for disturbing the peace.

Greg Kirby asked who the licensing authority is for OHRVs. Mr. Szweczyk replied that they (Fish & Game) were. It was explained that either a driver’s license or a safety class registration is required.

Wildlife was discussed again. Charles Buker asked if there were any endangered species on the land. Mr. Szweczyk replied that he was not sure. Debra Huffman asked for his views on the impacts of development on wildlife. Mr. Szweczyk replied that fragmentation was the greatest threat. He discussed the need for wildlife corridors and the importance of maintaining a diverse gene pool. Andy Powell questioned the desired size of a wildlife corridor. Mr. Szweczyk replied that he is not a biologist, but that it depends on the type of wildlife. Some species are much more adaptable to people. He noted the significant increase in coyotes in recent years.

Tim Tenhave asked about fishing on the property. Mr. Szweczyk replied that there are certainly some fish such as pickerel and brook trout, but not much fishing activity. Debra asked how many deer are taken on the property. Mr. Szweczyk replied that about 80 were taken in Merrimack last year and that these would have been taken mostly on the Greens Pond property, around South Grader Road or off of Back River Road. Mr. Szweczyk was asked about the types of hunting that occur on the site. He replied that there is hunting for deer, ducks and moose (though one has not been taken in Merrimack). There is also bow hunting. Occasionally there is grouse hunting.

The discussion returned to complaints and enforcement issues, especially related to "partying" complaints and shooting. The differences between rifles and shotguns were discussed. It was noted that shotguns are typically used for hunting and that these have a limited range. Rifles can be used for coyotes. Discussion of these and related issues continued.

John Buckley asked about the difference between ATVs and snowmobiles. Mr. Szweczyk replied that they get fewer complaints about snowmobiles. They are, however, subject to the same rules.

Greg Kirby asked if state grants are used for trails, whether the trails would have to be open to everyone. Mr. Szweczyk replied that if you use state money, the land would have to be open to all.

There being no further questions, Mr. Szweczyk concluded his presentation.

Reports from sub committees: The discussion of subcommittee reports resumed.

Debra Huffman reported that Task Team #8 – Current Uses, was doing well and would have a list of uses to distribute for next month.

For task Team #9, it was noted that access across the Wasserman property is in negotiations as previously discussed.

Task Team #10 – Historic Uses, has completed their task and a report was distributed at the last meeting.

Andy Powell reported that task team #11 had some answers, but had not yet met.

For Task Team #12 – Community Input, it was noted that Shannon Barnes was not present to provide that report.

Greg Kirby reported for Task Team #13 and noted that a plan would need to be submitted to the Board of Selectmen. He noted that the only potential hazardous waste issue was the shooting range. At this point, what is needed is a coordinated removal plan.

Greg Kirby reported for the new subcommittee on "Naming". He noted that they came up with a couple of things: first to be amenable to all, the terms "preservation", "conservation", and "recreation" should be eliminated. The term "Park" was also discussed and they concluded that is probably the best term to use. They determined, however, that the name, "Spaulding" was not appropriate since there were several parcels and they were only one of the owners. Mr. Kirby mentioned the name "Naticook" as an option. He noted that five to seven names would be developed at their next meeting and that these would be put out to the public.

Review of minutes: This item was passed over.

Visioning session: Debra Huffman opened up the visioning session and cautioned everyone to remember that we are not clairvoyant. We can’t know what the Town would want to do in fifty years. The Committee should try to avoid having a vision that is too long-term. Ms. Huffman turned the floor over to Jay Minkarah.

Jay Minkarah explained that each person (including Nelson Disco and two members of the audience) was being given a number between one and four so that they could be randomly assigned into four different "brainstorming groups". Each group was given a large pad of blank paper and colored markers. The groups were asked to each choose a "scribe" and a spokesperson.

Copies of the first issue to be addressed were distributed. Each group was given ten to fifteen minutes to identify the most prominent "features" of the Greens Pond property. The groups then had to pick the five most preferred items from their lists. The results were written on large sheets of paper and hung on the wall. The spokesperson for each group presented the results to the whole Committee. This process was then repeated for the subject areas of "Problems" and "Uses".

At the end of the session, the entire group was asked to develop a list of objective constraints, collectively, that would apply to any use of the property. Finally, each Committee member was asked to place one of three self-adhesive colored dots (distributed previously) by their top individual selection under each of the categories of "features", "problems" and "uses". The results of the visioning session are attached.

Adjournment: There being no further questions or comments, the meeting was adjourned at about 9:35 P.M.

Group 1

1. Size/ecological diversity

2. Wetlands/vernal pools/hydrology and geology

3. Proximity to other open space

4. Sand pit

5. Spaulding foundation/historical features

6. Variety of wildlife

7. Bedrock

8. Trail Network

9. Limited potential access points

10. Changes in elevation

11. Power lines

12. Trail erosion

13. Hunting potential

14. Potential learning experiences

15. Aquifer recharge area

16. Fault zones/structural lineaments

Group 2

1. Wetlands

2. Hiking/Walking/Riding Trails

3. Possibility of creating/connecting a wildlife corridor

4. Aquifer watershed

5. Wildlife habitat

6. Powerline easement

7. Large tract of undeveloped land

8. Two elevated scenic views – Horse Hill and Blodgett Hill

9. Heron rookery

10. Historic foundations

11. Logging trails

12. Old Kings Road

13. Central open space

Group 3

1. Very boney/fragile; large expanse of land; recharge area for aquifer

2. Diversity of wildlife vegetation; potential for wildlife conservation

3. Existing hiking trails

4. Highlands and wetlands

5. Springs

6. Relatively landlocked

7. Power lines

8. Historical landmark – foundations

9. Old Kings Highway

10. Two hills – Horse Hill and Blodgett Hill

11. Sand pit

12. Beaver pond

13. Open space and forest

14. Abuts White Pond and Wasserman

15. Some trails eroded by ATVs

16. Existing trash on site

Group 4

1. Aquifer recharge area – watersheds

2. Biodiversity

3. Community involvement opportunities

4. Beaver dams – turtles

5. Belongs to Merrimack’s citizens

6. Varied topography

7. Wildlife habitats

8. Cultural significance – stone walls (foundations)

9. Historical and Native American significance

10. Natural noises and ambiance

11. Blodgett Hill and Horse Hill – geologic significance

12. Hiking trails

13. Water fowl – geese and ducks

14. Potential for varied uses

15. Accessibility

Group 1

1. Limited parking

2. Safety concerns due to conflicting multiple uses

3. Noise from recreational usage and lack of enforcement

4. Trail erosion

5. Trash (existing and future)

6. Lack of wildlife habitat plan

7. Residual lead from shooting and batteries

Group 2

1. Trash

2. Limited access

3. Indiscriminant target practice areas

4. Power lines

5. Trail improvement for handicapped/physically limited people

6. Limited parking

7. Potential for overuse of trails by motorized vehicles

8. Trails crossing wetlands

9. Teenage gathering place

10. Access by emergency vehicles

11. Hunting caution

1. ATV usage (fuel spills, trail erosion, hiker safety, negative impact on wetlands, impact of turtle nesting, liability, overlap of trail uses)

2. Unmarked and unmaintained trails (including Old Kings Highway)

3. Lack of access and parking

4. Target shooting

5. Trash

6. Party

7. No rules or regulations on usage

8. Bridges needed over wetland areas

 

 

PROBLEMS

1. Parking accessibility

2. Erosion

3. Competing agendas for property and resources

4. Board of Selectman

5. Motorized vehicles

6. Trash – hunting shells

7. Encroaching development

8. Lack of education regarding the property

9. Money

10. Inappropriate uses

11. Public access outside Merrimack residents

1. Hunting

2. Non-Motorized Trail Use (hiking, walking, x-country ski, track)

3. Field Classrooms, Nature Observation, Forestry/Wildlife Management

4. Multiple Use Recreational Fields

5. Playgrounds

6. Camping

7. Skateboard/BMX Park

8. Performing arts center

9. Dog park (fencing in)

10. Community Center

11. Municipal Uses (i.e. police, fire, schools, library)

1. Hiking

2. Nature center for education

3. OHRV

4. Playgrounds

5. Observation Tower

6. Handicap trail

7. Cross-country skiing

8. Hunting

9. Ballfields

10. Horseback riding

11. Mountain biking

12. Nature walks

13. Birdwatching

14. Community garden

15. Skateboard park

16. Camping

17. Scout jamborees

18. Bike racing

19. Cross-country racing

20. Fitness trail

21. Volleyball court

22. Multi-use trail

1. Walking and Hiking – all abilities, all seasons

2. Hunting

3. Mountain Biking

4. Nature observation/education

5. Wildlife conservation

6. Horseback riding

7. Cross-country skiing

8. Snowshoeing

9. Target shooting – archery/guns

10. ATV/Dirt Bikes

11. 4 wheeling

12. Blueberry picking

13. Ice skating

14. Sledding

15. Power line maintenance

16. Partying

17. Camping

18. Snowmobiling

Group 4

1. Sporting Activities (snowmobiles, hunting, fishing, x-c skiing, sledding, snowshoeing, equestrian activities, hiking)

2. Outdoor education

3. Town water supply

4. Wildlife Refuge

5. Sustainable Forestry

6. Target practice

7. ATVs and dirt bikes

8. Photography

9. Scout projects

10. Partying

11. Wildlife corridor

12. Bird watching

13. Wildlife and cultural trails

14. Athletic fields

15. Wheelchair and walking trails

16. Dog park

17. School

18. Wildlife viewing areas

19. Habitat improvements

20. PSNH easement

21. Selling gravel

22. Transfer station

23. No usage

1. Wetland regulation – state and local

2. Money

3. Local vs. regional use

4. Management/maintenance on a continual basis

5. Neighborhood impact

6. Accessibility

7. Wildlife

8. Ecological impact

9. Impact to water

10. Board of Selectmen

11. Bedrock/ledge

12. Ability to get equipment on site

13. Area

14. Zoning

15. Sewer and water availiability

16. Electricity

17. Public support

18. PSNH easement

19. Aquifer protection district

20. Weather/climate

21. Topography

22. Soils

Send e mail to admin@hhnp.org with questions or comments about this web site.