 real formal presentation here. This is more of a question and answer point of clarification. There seems to be, let me back up. I'm Chris Matrick, if you don't know me. I'm the district ranger here in Rochester and I'm the responsible official for the Robinson project. So I'm the one who gets to make the final decision on what will be implemented as part of that project. So, do you all know one another? Why don't we go quickly go around the room and have everybody introduce themselves. Just so, in case you're curious and you've forgotten somebody's name, even though you've known them for 15 years, it'll like pop into your head. I don't want to. Okay, so I'm going to start with you and we'll go back by. Kevin McLaughlin. Ruth McLaughlin. Judy McHurrier. Brad McHurrier. Ned Bear. Chris Williams. Harlan McHurrier. I'm Jay Strand and I do work here. You may recognize your name, it's not my face. Jason Miceville. David Hamlin. Eric Baldwin. Walt Wells. Tony DeLaurie. I'll be back there somewhere. William Brockhoff. Rodney. Mason Wade. That was it? Last one in the line. All right. So, now I can go back to where it was. So, and then Desmond is doing our videography for us back there. But he's not pointing at that you. No, he's pointing at me. So, we received, we had our official 30 day comment period for the preliminary EA that went out and we received comments from a number of you, not all of you, but a number of you. And through those comments, it became clear to me that there was some good comments in there, but there also seems to be a little bit of confusion still about what is actually being proposed. Especially related to recreation in the area, but maybe some other general confusion. So, there is not another opportunity in this process for public comment for you to like lodge official comments. We've had the two official comment periods. There is an opportunity to object. If you've made comments in one of the official comment periods, you could object to the project. That opportunity is upcoming within a week or so, right? Okay, something like that, yeah. Probably be notified of that. Will there be a notification about a period of affection? Jay, tell us about that. Yes, it will be just like when we rolled out that okay for 30 day comment, it will be the same. Okay. And you have to counter it. Okay. It'll last for 45 days. And you'll put probably be notified. Yep. Very good, thank you. Bye ma'am. Yep. It is objection, the same thing as appeal. It is a pre-decisional process as opposed to a post-decisional process. So, we will release the final EA and a draft decision notice, which is my decision. And that draft decision notice will stay in draft form awaiting the outcome of the objection period. So, we'll sit there. I don't actually sign it. It just sits there. But it's what I would sign if no one objects. So, it's just, it is like the appeal period, Eric, but it happens before the decision is actually signed. It's trying to keep, because when you appeal, you office. Oh, so you're appealing the decision, that's right. You're objecting to the decision. No, but I mean, the appeal is through the decision, yes. It was. There is no appeal process any longer. You object before, and then we try to resolve the issue related to the objection. And then if... I think we're gonna be done with this, Eric. Okay. Okay? So, you'll all be, if you made, everyone will be notified of the release of the final EA and the draft decision notice. And then if you had commented as part of the one of the legal comment periods, and not all of you have, some of the most of you have, I think submitted some comments, you can then object on, you have to have raised that issue, right, in your comment. Jay, is that correct? Yeah, unless there's something new that's come up. Right. Any new information or no analysis that didn't occur during the first two opportunities for comment, then you then, the ability to object to that. Right. Yeah. What is this? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm in September, or is this what you're talking about? Next week, it'll start. Yeah, it's within a week or so. It starts next week and then it's the final date. 45 days. 45 days. 49, 45 days. Yeah. I've got a problem with my email address. I gave it to somebody a couple of times. Brad forwarded it to me today or yesterday. I can't remember. I did, yeah. So we have that email address now, Arlen. And I would get, I would notify you. Yeah, I like stuff. On the phone, or, yeah. Yeah, my attention. So what happened to the appeal process? It was removed through federal statute. They changed it to the objections process. You got to SJ as to why they did that. And when was that? It's been, gosh, yeah, it's been a while. It's been like five or six years. The reason they changed it was because when people were appealing after the decision was made and changes were being made as the result of trying to address the appeals, then we had, in many cases, those agency-wide changes were being made to the analysis. And even sometimes the decision became very messy because it was already supposed to have been a dumb deal. And also, after a decision's rendered, there became this iron curtain block of communication between people who were reviewing the appeal and those who were actually wrote the analysis and provided information to address the appeals. And so now that they moved the, it's the same process, except they called it an objection because it's prior to the decision actually being made like Chris already explained. But it allows us to fix or change the potential we even address through additional analysis prior to making the decision so we don't have to, like, go back and reopen up the comment period. And also it allows free flow of communication between all parties. So it just makes for a much more transparent process because post-decision administration was like this very strict regulation that kept people from talking transparent from another, it came very laborious. So that's why they changed it. And it seems to be working pretty well actually. I like to change myself because we can get things up front before the decision actually signed by the deciding officer. So we're still able to fight to it? Mm-hmm, yeah. It's a possibility, yeah. It is possible, yeah. Thank you, Joe. Excuse me. Hello. So my thought here was to kind of walk, the recreation proposal seemed to be the ones that there's the most confusion around in Bingo. And I just wanted to kind of go through them one by one so that you understand what is happening, what is being proposed in Bingo. We can talk about other parts of the Robinson Project, but certainly most of the questions and confusion seems to be related to Bingo. Okay, is that all right? Start with? Second. Very good. So I'm going to go, see my little cursor goes around here. So I'm going to start right here because this is one of the current spots where the kiosk is right here, just past Jason's, the road up to Jason's camp, past the cemetery. There's a little roadside pullout there that has a kiosk in it. In our world, it's actually nothing, which is why you see no symbol right there. There is a kiosk there, but in our recreation inventory and infra, what it's called, it doesn't exist as a site. So what we're doing is we're, and it's very strange to us to have this kiosk that introduces you to, you're at now the dispersed Bingo campsites out here, way down here at the end of the road. And we have on occasion had people camp at that spot. Some people pleasantly camping, some people unpleasantly camping. Our proposal is to move it up to here where this P is. Now the P is much bigger on the map than the actual impact on the ground will be, because if we made a little tiny P, you wouldn't be able to see it on the map. This is campsite one, what's currently campsite one, the one that's right off the edge of the road. We're going to install that kiosk or a kiosk that's very similar to it. At that location, do a little bit of site modification to make it able to handle a car pulling in there or a couple of cars pulling in there. And this will be the introduction into the Bingo campground area, the Bingo recreation facility that's down there. There will be nothing back down here. That grassy spot will still remain there. People will probably still, I will still park there when I go to walk my dogs out there, because that's where I park now, but it's not a parking area. It's not maintained by us in any way. It's currently not maintained by us, the parking area itself, Harlem. So exactly what do you have planned for parking at that kiosk? I just said, it's currently a campsite one. You could probably park two cars comfortably there. We're just going to smooth it out. There's some stubs sticking up there on the ground so that you could fit maybe three cars in that spot comfortably. So you could get off the road if someone were to stop and then we're looking at the kiosk. 100 foot long by 10 feet. No, no, it's going to look almost identical to what it does now, except it will be a little, the firing will be removed. Some of the stump trees that people have cut in there, they're on the campsite will be smoothed out. We'll probably put gravel down so that people don't sink in when they park in there, but we're not expanding it beyond its current, really, its current footprint. And it won't be a campsite anymore? It will not be a campsite anymore. Will you post it one way or another? What's that, Eric? Will you post it one way or another? What do you mean post it one way or another? Oh, you'll be posting no camping at that spot, yes. You'll post no camping, but will you post two? I don't know. Will it ever show up as no parking? Well, it wouldn't be no parking. People could still park there. They'll park there. Yeah, they can't park there. No, no, can't. Eric, are you talking about this location? What is now campsite one? No, no, no. No, you're back down here. I understand where you're talking. We won't post this no camping, or no parking, rather. We would post it no camping. We're going to try to just make it go away on its own. Both people will actually have to get on the path to this room all the summer time. Right. And I'd rather go to walk my dogs. Yeah, so you know, people don't want to. And other people park there. You want to park to the road. Right. It's different. Jenny. So you said that we're going for four cars? No, we say 100 feet by 20 feet. That's about what it is now, though. That's not beyond what it is now. If you look at the whole campsite from beginning to end, it's about 100 feet by 20 feet. It's to accommodate four cars, four or five cars, because it's just a wayside, pull in, get your information, and then drive up the road. Is that safe? Parking 100 feet by 20 feet? So if the parking area will be approximately 100 feet wide by 20 feet. And that's about what it is now, Harlan. It's not, I mean, it's not too far removed from that. We're not going to change it considerably from what it is presently in its size. You don't like that one? Oh, I like that one. But 100 feet is a surest. That 20 foot parking lot certainly is dangerous. I mean, well, what happens now is people park in the planters' road, which is where you don't want it, just for what they do. He's up here. He's talking about those trucks, Jason, and I, so I'm going to hop your seat by 20 feet. Figure it out. 20 feet by 20 feet. Yeah, and that's what they're doing before the 10-foot car. That's what they're trying to do. I mean, I just actually find somebody to know that. Yeah. Just figure one other thing, actually, that's a problem, man. So what's the problem? They oftentimes park it in his way, and have it in his road. They just watch when there's road parking there. Right. So an extra couple of parking spots. Especially in the winter. So I know an extra couple of parking spots. Kiosks might not be a bad thing. Right. Should we answer the question? We can't post when parking is the land. They're always going to tell you, right? Can you post a sign directing people where to park? Because I have a problem with people parking right along my property. And they're using their parking there to go walk up in the forest, or to ease the forestless land. And I'd like them to be directed to go use that public parking rather along my road. We can't post anything. We can't post on non-federal land. We can't put federal signs on non-federal land. So we couldn't post like in front of your house. We couldn't put a sign parking. Well, I guess we could if you approved us putting a sign in front of your house. We're also a little more concerned about sign pollution out there to do many signs. But we will certainly try to encourage people to park out where the parking is designated. How will you do that before they get there, though? Because people are parking all on the road. This spot right here is still forest service jurisdiction right here, where the current kiosk is. So we could put a signpost in there that says parking straight ahead. It doesn't do me any good. Back here, we're a little more challenged with putting parking. So people park in front of your house. They park along the road. We have a drive that goes down. We have a separate entryway. They park along in there. And there's trees along there. So they think, oh, it's not a big deal. But that road really isn't wide enough to have two cars pass by a person that's pulled over to park along there. And there's also, you know. I mean, the chitin in the parking at Campgrounds are four miles up. But you want to bounce that right at the roadside so people know they have to go four miles to get there. At Bingo, you come off the road. You put on the road a quarter of a mile. They think they're there. But they're really not there. They've got to go out of three miles. So that would be more of a quick-putting at the roadside. Stand up on the roadside. I think the pull along the road, right here. And, you know, just pull along a lot of miles. If people would get off at 73, they'd see there's their road. They prefer to stand on these two cars. They're here. No, we can get them. I mean, at a roadside, there's not a lot of room for a bunch of people to bring in these houses on board there. But, you know, some kind of a sign that marks a Bingo camping four miles or something, just a brief dig sign that's clear just so that people know they've got to go three miles to get to the recreational area. Well, you have a chip and then off to 73. Right. So I'll say two things in response. One is it would have been great to know that when we were developing the proposed action for Robinson. I mean, we had numerous public meetings and opportunities to come. This is the first time I've heard of that specific thing, Susan, about a sign down in that area. So, you know, that's what we have all those public meetings for and opportunities to come. It's to get that kind of information so we can get it in the proposal. Secondarily, we don't need a NEPA decision to be able to put a sign in along the road to deal with a public information issue. That's not we don't have to go through the whole NEPA process. So we can certainly work with you all on signing the end of the road appropriately so people know that Bingo brook recreation area is X number of miles in. I think the challenge will be what word is being over recreation area as an undefined entity really begin. I mean, I would argue that it probably begins right here. I know that Harlan has property and Brad and Mason have property and a couple other folks have property up in here. But, you know, if you look at the block of Forest Service land, it really it really begins here. So we could work maybe with Andy, talk about putting a sign up here where the road number sign is 42 and put a sign that says, you know, Bingo brook recreation area X number of miles ahead, camping X number of more miles ahead. I mean, we can do that without having to get way late in the NEPA process. So I'm going to take a note and work with you all to get that kind of signing. I'm not saying it's going to prevent people from parking where they won't because unless you get the town to post that portion of the road, no parking before the state, for that matter, post that portion of the road, no parking. Can you put a sign, do not block A? We do have a sign there. It's just that people are confused. They finally think they're there when they get there, but then I really don't know. Take risk. Let me just pull and get this note back. It's a fair point. A couple pull off the road and address the area along the side of the road. Is that not a blanket head of lunch? They had, I don't know what their religion was, but they had Danella capsule and clothes on their heavy wool coats. It was 100 degrees outside. Yes, Jeff. I've been thinking about this for a while. You just want to move around a little bit more. Yeah, no, I know. Just so you don't have to delay the parking. I'm sorry, I said a little more. Just so you don't have to delay for yourself to take a note. I didn't want to take a note. OK. All right, very good. I just said one. The parking issue, I think, for some of us, these folks, is post your meeting because there was a fair amount of, I think, attention drawn to parking over the winter. And I think it's that. Can't go there with attention from to parking? Not that place, but further down the road, and I'm sure you're aware of it. Which was unrelated to any forest service activity. I'm just saying parking as something that's a sensitive issue perked up a lot. Again, but I'll push back a little bit. The 30-day comment period opened on June 5th. So there was an opportunity at that point to raise an issue with parking. It's not an issue. I mean, we can manage the signing and try to get people to the right place outside of the NEPA process. Mason. The purple is designating the Joseph Patel Wilderness? No. Why don't you let me just move through. I'm going to try to do this in some kind of stepwise fashion. So we all, we stay on track, and we're not still here at 9.30 or 10 o'clock. But I will be if you want to stay that long. I think I'm going to lose Kevin by that point, though. You bet. So related to, so we're losing this campsite that's here. See the little campsite symbol here? So we're going to lose that as a campsite. We know that this is a popular area to camp. At certain times, it's not full all the time, but there are times when it's busy. So we're going to add, we're adding two additional campsites, because we don't want to decrease the number of campsites there. We're adding two additional campsites further up here. See my cursor moving around. They were former campsites. There were two of the sites that were closed when we did, when Bingo was completely out of hand and people were camping in the river and doing things we don't want them to do in the river. These were closed. They were pretty hard hit. They have rehabilitated themselves. They're already hardened. There is some adjustment that needs to be done to provide for parking, because we don't want to allow people to drive up into them, which is what they used to do. So we'll be making some modification along the road edge to allow for parking and people accessing these two sites. They're way out of the end of the road. They're on the north side. If you drive down there, they're the two sites that are up on the terrace. They say right now they say no camping. Yeah, no overnight camping. It's the trail that you could take to get some water. Most very long. Yeah, there is some gold road up there that goes in that direction. So that's the change, changing to kind of information and camping along Bingo for a road. There's no other change, no other planned use, except, but how do I say it? Site two. Yeah, so site two, I'm going to get some. But as far as addition, this campsite being taken away in the interpretive side put there. These two campsites being added. Site two, which is right here, which is the one that's down away from the road. It's the biggest site there. But it's the site with access. We're expanding the parking down there a little bit to allow someone with a larger camper or a horse trailer to be able to get down in there and park and turn around. So right now you get down there with a trailer you're disconnecting and spinning the trailer around by hand unless it's a real small one to get back out again. Is it dry camping only? Is it, what's that? It's dry camping only, correct? I don't understand. Yeah, the trailer has to sustain itself without any. Yeah, we don't have any facilities or water or anything like that, yes. All of our camping is pack it in, pack it out at this site. It seems funny you call it permanent camping, but they've been in the trailer, isn't it? Oh, it's fine. The house is down there. Yeah, it's actually, bingo work is a developed camp ground. So, is that the definition of permanent? What was the definition of permanent? There's no water, there's no picnic tables, there's no. So let me tell you the story behind what happened with bingo brook. It was a dispersed primitive camping location. And the camping there as the longer term residents who know it's before my time, got a little out of hand at some point in the past and people were camping everywhere. Six, seven hundred people on. Yeah, so pooping in the water, camping in the, just it got ugly. Everybody's camping along the river, everybody's using the facilities along the river and the next rainstorm you got. Yeah. Can you remember when bingo brook had the most coliform militia, any other brook in the state? It was bad. So what happened at that point in time was we did a closure order on bingo brook except at designated sites. In order to designate sites, we have to number sites. Once you number sites in our world, it becomes a developed campground. So although the sign still says bingo brook primitive camping, it's really a developed campground where you can only camp at those sites. No one can come in and park in one of those grassy sites. It looks really lush and nice because it's closed. So will you re-brand this somehow appropriately or will we still brand it as primitive? You can brand it how you, we just call it the bingo brook campground. Okay, that's correct. I think that would be the appropriate description. You can't reserve it at no feet of camp there, there's no facilities of the water. I still say primitive. Yeah, that's a holdover. Yeah, and I think there's a conflict between primitive and the 24 foot trailers coming in. And I don't get it, I just think that it's no longer primitive. But there is no plan for water pumping stations. That was one of the things that was in someone's comment was that he was gonna get developed into be able to come in and pump your sewage out there. There would be something like that out there. No, we're just making it suitable so that you could take a horse trailer or a larger trailer down to that location and camp. How will that be disseminated and made, the information that you made available to the people interested in camping in it? How will people know that that's the site for those trails? Well, we have a recreation opportunity guide for Bingo Brook. So that'll be added, that'll be updated to add once the decision is signed and then that'll be available on our website too. So that they're not in his yard trying to turn around a 40. No, it's just, no, I was just... I mean, I can't prevent that. I don't know. And I'm thinking, you know, people go there now for what it is now. Right. When you start putting the neon sign up that says, trash this, trash this, trash this, you lose it. Right. You know, you lose it. And it just seems like incrementally, that's where we're headed. I mean, we're not changing the use. Well, I guess, I get it. Yeah. The logging will go away in a couple of years, you know, and it'll be better years down the road. Every, some of this development isn't gonna go away. It's only gonna get worse. There's gonna be more people, there's gonna be more people. And then you lose what people go there now for. Well, it'll be there. Like I said, we're not changing the use. You know, we're adding one campsite, modifying another campsite to allow a little bit larger vehicle to get to. And we're not talking about a fifth wheel. I mean, we're talking about, you know, we're gonna do this with it. I mean, already we got bicycle magazines with this proposed trail. Yeah. I mean, I've seen the influx just this summer. People with bikes compared to last year. You know, just for the couple of magazine. You know, so, I mean, it's nice that people could find something pristine and, you know, it gets around enough that way without putting a sign on it. Right. That's all I'm saying. Okay. Thanks. Okay, campsite two. Yeah. We're talking about a horse trailer. Yeah. Okay, adventure horse trailer. Brings in three horse trailers for adventure activity with horses. Now, how many RVs are gonna be able to camp in here? And are generators gonna be not allowed to be run? There's no restriction on generators. Well, it's right down hill for my house. There's no, there's no other house back here, right? What, so, hill from the, from the, So, there's no restriction, there's no restriction now on anyone using a generator. Well, there'll be a gain for the winter on that because of the way that gets used for a high school party down there. The gate that we've got. No, I'm talking about the gate on 42D, which is campsite two. There'll be no, we don't have any plans to put a gate in there. Why not? Because we don't see the need to let a gate in there. Well, what happened last fall, my daughter and I were down there, there was two shit things that were dumped over in November and I came in and reported it. Yeah. But this is because it's too easy to get in there. We need a gate on that location. Well, I would have a hard time justifying a gate on a dispersed campground that you can camp in. Well, I'll tell you why, because when the road is stopped allowed, it's still easy enough to get to 42D. It's a short enough distance to run yourself in there. Okay. There's a problem there. I mean, it's easy enough to get in there. But you're, so, again, I'm gonna have a problem restricting, restricting access to public land. Why? Because it's public land. I know, but you have a gate on 62. That's to protect the road resource. Well, let's protect the river resources. So you think the gate would be closed at the same time and will the 62 as closed? Yes. Closed at the same time as 62. Well, I mean, if we put a gate at the, right in front of our house and close that gate as I offered to. Yeah, that's not my jurisdiction. I understand. But I understand where my point was coming from. That issue needs to be covered. I take the baller way past that and then we should just eliminate all those concerns by letting them rest the gate right there at our house. Yeah, and that would be between the residents and the town. But for you, 42D is a possibility for a gate that would be locked at the same time as 62. You currently have no plans to put a gate at 62, 42, 42D. So you'll be able to have a... Siri, year-round camping if you want to go to camp. You could walk out there and camp in the winter if you wanted to, or ski out there and camp in the winter if you wanted to. But not in a designated site. They could use it as a site, but they can go anywhere in the woods. No, they have to do it in the winter. They're in the closure area. You can't camp anywhere in the closure area. You have to be at one of the designated sites in the winter. Have you issued any in the winter? You can't camp in the winter. Don't you give permits for people for the campsites? No, no, no. Ambulance-free. It's free, but they have to. They don't have a permit. They don't need a permit to camp. For its first come, for its second. For its first come, you don't need a permit to camp. And you can generally camp anywhere on the National Forest. I've had labs that big tail. You can camp anywhere on the National Forest except where it's prohibited. So that's typically developed for places where there's a closure order specifically in place like this location. So for 42D, we're going to let RVs in there. You could drive an RV out there now if you wanted to in camp. If you could get in. And you can run your generators and have your TVs in your everything. And I'm telling you, it's directly downhill from my house. OK, I understand that. But you're encouraging RVs to park in 42D. They already do. You can run your generator in a backwater pickup truck and drive in there now. We're just making it available so that someone could go down there with a horse trailer or a small tow behind trailer and get turned around so that they're not going to get stuck down. Drive in and have a place to back up. It's going to be more like a cul-de-sac. So you're also making it work for a couple of RVs. It's already there. You already could drive an RV down there. You can get it around as easily. If you're not, build it better. If you're not, the only way I can put this to try to make this understandable is we're not changing the use in a way that I anticipate that there's going to be a sudden influx of new use down there. I would guess that you're going to see the same level of use from camping at Bingo Brook. But it's not going to change in any significant way. If it suddenly does change, five years out, three years out, 10 years out, we suddenly see all kinds of RV traffic down there that's unsustainable and having resource impacts will respond to that at that time. Question in with the forest clearing around that campsite. What does that entail? Forest clearing. Yes, the vegetation management? Yes, because now that we marked every tree red on my northern property line, it relates to that cutting, I guess. There's no harvesting proposed anywhere around your house, Mason. Apple tree release? What's the difference? See this green right here? This is just forest. Well, it's not green red where campsite 2 is. If you're down in here, I'd have to zoom into that. Yes. So that's finding the existing apple trees that occur in that area and cutting in the competing vegetation around them to release the trees so that they produce better fruit. It's not a commercial timber harvest. It's definitely by hand. So it makes everything kind of look nicer for the campsite area? Well, it makes it not a sun for wildlife purposes. Is there a set of new precedents or would be somehow illegal to enact a quiet time zone for generators? It does not. There already are quiet hours at campgrounds. I was just camping somewhere else on the state park campgrounds. It was 10 PM. I don't want to say that it's 10 PM for our campgrounds right off the top of my head. But I can look that up and find out. It does not set a precedent. It would be, you know, we don't patrol at night. So enforcing it would be a bit of a challenge unless we had a chronic. If there was a chronic issue with one group of campers, you could then report it. And then we could send someone down. Correct. So I mean, would it be possible in your new signage as you re-sign this area and re-instructional use to create a quiet time for generators and campers? Let's at least get it out there and present it. That's possible, yeah. You know, be courteous, be kind. You know, shut the motors off at 10 PM and don't start them again until 6 in the morning. 6, 7, 8, 9. Does everybody out of bed by 6 o'clock around here? I mean, Jesus. Not unless I hear the generator. Right. Well, then you want to be set to 1 o'clock. My God, you're 1 and 9. All right. He's got your hand up there. How hard would it be to have a 6 o'clock? Wouldn't it have Harlan Erickson had his hand up for a while? I have a question. It's over clarification that with campsite 2, you're saying that the proposal is to enlarge that to some degree so that you can move some sort of maybe an RV in that area and use it for horse parking as well. Are those concurrent uses? I mean, like an RV and a horse trailer down there at the same time? That would be up to wherever the user was. Although, I mean, if you have multiple users, I mean, if you can have somebody driving an RV in there, can you then, is it OK for somebody just to try to park your horse trailer in there as well? You mean like next to the RV? Well, I'm struggling a little bit with what you're asking me, Erick. I'm sorry. I'm being a little sick. Can you bring a horse trailer in there and park it for the day? If you weren't camping? Yeah. If there was nobody else. If there was nobody camping there, yes. Because it's not like one of our fee sites where you can't leave. You can't have an unoccupied campsite. You can't occupy a campsite unless you're camping in it. They don't have campsites. Do you plan to limit the horses? Like 20 people to a site, you plan to limit the horses to that site? There's no proposal to limit the horses to the site, other than what would be limited naturally by the size of the trailer. We're talking like a two-horse trailer size thing, not one of those big ones. Is that in the plan? It only can be a two-horse trailer? Not a four-horse trailer? Again, that's up to the user if they want to get some wedged in down there. You can't see a beautiful Saturday afternoon in October when any number of horse trailers show up once they use their cell phones. They're going to be an area for trailers two through ten to turn around and park. Beautiful fall day. The word is out. There's horse trails. There's no guarantee only one trailer is going to show up. That's correct. But once one person is occupying it, you wouldn't really be able to get another trailer down in there. Well, that's why I'm asking. Where are trailers through to the parking for the day? That is up to the operator of the trailer to figure out where they are going to go with that. And there would be nothing preventing sites five right across from Thresher Hill Road at five or six. It's up Thresher Hill. Six is right at the corner. The one right at the corner, right across from Thresher Hill Road, that big log site where Ellie and Ted were a couple years ago where they had certainly gone. That's plenty big enough to accommodate another horse trailer. So somebody could go there now in horse camp. There's no restriction on bringing a camper or a horse trailer in there right now to camp, park, ride their horse. So that's really not going to change in any way. We're just providing a facility that will make it a little bit easier at that particular site that somebody calls us and says, I got a horse trailer. I want to go camping. Is there a campsite that I can go to that's in the Rochester area? Bingo would be one of the places we can send them to site to that. We know that you could get down there, turn around with a trailer without getting wedged in there. Still first come first serve. Still first come first serve, still free. No camping, but we want to go ride horses all day long. They could do that. There's no restriction. So you can have 10 trailers in there, nowhere. You won't be able to fit 10. I'm not talking about that particular location. I'm talking about Bingo Basics. You can do it now. You can do it now. Where are they going to park? Where are they going to turn? At each campsite. Wherever they find space to turn around. They can drive out to the end of the road. That's the other thing. They can do all this stuff now. They can bike out there. But we're getting my horses out there. But yet, we're going to take that campsite. We're going to be a big oval there. Supposedly, only one RV and maybe a pickup and a horse trailer. Why can't you just have a drive in with a campsite and just a good place where you got a straight shot backing up? Instead of just making this thing huge, then it's going to show up on a map someplace. And it's going to be in a magazine. And then the next thing is going to be 1,000 people up there. And the next thing you know, we got the same problem we had before. Too many people in one spot at one time. No, because it's restrictions, just like we've got. No, it's no restrictions. 14. Yeah, but there's no restrictions. No, I'm sorry. How many people? 20. 20. 14 days. 20 people. You can't have more than 20 people, but that's, I mean, you wouldn't be able to. I've never seen all of us down there in 20 years like that. 20 people. Oh, good. What are you saying? I was always told you couldn't. Well, there you go. But now there's an alphabet on the iPhone. Of course, please. Of course, please. So that's what I'm talking about. One Saturday, the word's out. Everybody pickpile in the bingo basin with your horse trailers and let's have our rodeo. So the answer to that is the same as the camping. So it's going to happen. It's going to happen. The answer to that is the same as camping. If there's no more room, you have to drive out and go somewhere else. If the sites are filled and drive out, what I'm saying is, Virginia, that if somebody has loaded up their horses, driven over a mountain, you know, for God only knows how far to go ride that day, they're just going to pull off to the side of the road, which isn't their culture. We would enforce that they can't block the road. So if they were blocking the road, we would go down. And if they were there, we'd tell them to move. If they weren't there, we would get them towed out of the way if they were blocking the road. And to be completely honest, I think we're overestimating, massively overestimating the amount of abuse from a horse perspective, that this one trail, one trail managed for horse use is going to draw people into this valley to get 10, 20 horse trailers in here on a sunny day on an October afternoon to ride four-mile, five-mile, six-mile loop trail. I am hard pressed to imagine that. They're going to turn on this. That's not really that great. I would just say I've been on the trails over in, what am I sure, a reservoir within our horse trails. And I've biked over there. I've never seen it. Never seen a horse, right? I haven't seen it. We did this proposal. This proposal came out of the Vermont Horse Council that first meeting that we had. They were here. They were one of the partners that was in the room. And they had a request to enhance horse fact riding opportunity within this project area. They had a couple of other proposals that crossed private land. They weren't able to secure the private land permission. I actually don't think they tried to secure the private land permission. We said that we would not pursue something that crossed private land without then first securing that permission. So this is the one remaining horse proposal because it's all on National Forest System land. It's all an existing trail already. So it just needs a little bit of improvement to the water bars and the clearing like to have a horse go up. And really the only portion of the trail we're talking about that needs that is this section right here of the Pinebrook Trail. This little beast up to the end of Thresher Hill Road. And again, I'm hard pressed to think that we're going to get 20 horse trailers in here even on the most beautiful day to ride that very short loop. It's a bunch of your cognizant of their concern. Your enforcement officers do visit the place twice a day or once a day. And so I just know it's got to be a surveillance and monitoring. And if it becomes an issue, it'll have to be addressed. That's correct. And it's wonderful to have another designated trail. Same trail, but another designated use on that trail. Yeah, yeah. So I think we beat site two pretty good. We got some notes. We heard some of the things we were saying. And I think there's some things that we can do. We can even sign the end of that road, probably, even though that there's a limited turnaround that maybe they want to go down and check first to make sure that there's no horse trailer down there already. That's good idea. This pink right here is what we call the Pine Brook Trail. It's made up of portions of, it actually comes back down here to the loop. But that's actually not part of the trail in our world. This is the trail. This portion is Thresher Hill Road. And then this portion is Bingo Brook Road. Bingo Road. Yeah. This is 62, yeah. So this is adding the horse use onto that trail. That's what that pink is. How does that work with sharing that with the mountain biker, so how does that work? We don't end there. It's such a low use trail. We realize that there's, you know, Harlan said there's been an uptick this year. They're probably riding that, although I just walked by it the other day. And it's pretty heavily grown in at the beginning. So they're not riding it too, too much. Again, that would be, we don't anticipate a conflict between horses and bicyclists as long as the trail is wide enough. Certainly the roads are wide enough for that. So the only place that there might be a conflict would be in here. And we don't have any documentation. We've talked to both user groups, and they're not concerned about potential conflicts. How does it work, though, if you have a biker and a horseback rider, and the biker is supposed to just get off? The biker would have to give way to the horseback rider. I just wondered, too, about that section where you're coming down. I biked down. I do that loop. And you've come down. I come down. So if there was a horse coming up, it would be hard for me to stop quickly. I would say the horses should be going that way. Some of the improvements of the clearing width are to provide additional sight lines on that so that you would be able to see each other. Good enough distance to be able to stop or slow down. Or they should just be aware of the biker's coming down. That might not be able to see. So the blue line should be up over Philadelphia. I'm just going down. OK, so this right here, these blue lines, so that one, this one, and this one, I'm getting a little bit outside of Bingo here, but they're all the same. Are decommissioned trails? Trails being proposed to be decommissioned. So the facet basin trail is gone and not coming back. The estimate to recreate that trail in a sustainable manner is up close to, if not over $1 million. It's not going to happen. So that trail is being decommissioned. This is the Smithbrook Road 61. It's also got the Smithbrook Trail overlaid on it. This is an administrative act to take the trail off the road. The road will be there. You can walk on the road. There's no reason for us to have a trail designation overlaid on a road designation. Doesn't make any sense. And then this is the Philadelphia Peak Trail. This was never intended to be in our database. It's an administrative trail only, and it's administrative trail to access the repeater site. And with the repeater being proposed to be removed, there's no need to have the trail. We don't plan to obliterate the road. This doesn't mean you can't walk up there. It just means we are not managing it for a trail, because we never have managed it for anything more than an administrative access point. So the road will there. We're not going to obliterate it. We're going to leave it in place. And it will just grow in over time. The purple up here is all wilderness, so it just doesn't go anywhere for us anymore. This is Battelle. This is Battelle. All the purple eye-lack color is all Battelle wilderness. No Congress could turn the green into purple. I'm good. Oh, shit. You would then have very limited access to your home. I don't ever see it. I don't know about that. And it's who would be other than those forests. Tell me what good they are. They're overgrown. There's no feed for animals. That's the same problem that we've had over in our basin. I can remember every time you went out, you'd see deer. You don't see deer. I haven't seen deer in 15 years or more. You know why? Because there's no growth. They used to come out where they used to be pasture land once a year. National forests that come out with a brush hog and brush hog owners. But they're not. But they don't. And now they've all grown in. It's all woods. You can't find the old animals. What has happened there anymore? What happened to that work? You know? What happened to that work? Don't tell me about wilderness. That's the biggest bullshitting in the whole freaking country. Calm down. Unfortunately, wilderness is important to a lot of people. So it's not good for the land. Well, that's disagreeable, too. But we won't go there right now. That's not part of this. So as I look through here, the only thing that I see that we haven't talked about specifically is this yellow line right here. So this is the proposed route of what's called the Bellamot Trail. So the Bellamot is an idea of the Vermont Hubs Association and the Vermont Mountain Bike Association. For instance, we'll call it end to end, whether it actually ends up being end to end is some looking question. They're not even sure they desire it to be end to end. But a long-distance mountain biking trail, similar to the Long Trail for hikers to the Bellamot Trail for skiers, a single track mountain bike trail that would run essentially from the end of the state to the end of the state. Right now they're talking about from Stowe to Killington. That's the area that they're concentrating on. And it would have huts that you would be able to stay in the huts as you pedaled along. What they're really trying to do is connect pods of existing mountain bike trails, like networks of mountain bike trails, blueberry lake trails, for example. There's a big trail network further up into Wakesfield and then there's one up in Stowe. They're trying to connect them with this Bellamot Trail so you'd be able to ride the trail, ride to the next trail, stay in a hut, ride that trail system, then keep working your way down. This is the proposed route as it passes through this area. So the dashed line right here, you see how this is dashed? So this is all existing. This is an existing. This is the Swansmill Road, Swansmill Trail. It's a snowmobile trail. It's a road for much of it. The black and yellow dashed right here is something that it doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that there's not a trace out there that it would follow. But it doesn't exist as an existing road, a managed road, a managed trail. Because we know that there is some trace of a road here. We do know that there is a trace of a road up here. There's a trace of a road right here if you look real close. So this is what's being proposed in a pro-prose crossing of Bingo Road. There's not a parking lot planned. There's not a kiosk planned in the way of like a trailhead planned in the way of like a kiosk like announcing like here crosses the Bellamot stop here and ride. It's just a crossing. The hub is over here at the parking lot for Chittendenbrook Campground and then up at Chittendenbrook Campground where there's a hut going in on one of the campsites there. So that's kind of the destination and then back this way the destination is here if you're sitting right here because the trailhead is gonna be over here at North Hollow Farm, Martin Farm. And then this or trailing back to the office here the Sappbore of the trail is one of the little features along this long distance. So the access right now on this end is where? Would be here on the North end would be here. Would be here. Would be here. Okay. So you would go from here. Well, Martin Farm. Yeah. So you could park here, you could park there. You would go up, you would go along the old power line on the other side of the river and then up the Rochester tunnel side of that trail. There's some new trail construction to switch back creation so they can get up across Swans Mill Trail down to the end of 155A Flanders extension next to Jason's. It would probably come up right there somewhere. The exact spot that we don't know it'll be up to the trail design but somewhere in that vicinity and then cross and come up the other side. So Chris, so Bingo is like halfway point roughly? Short cut? Not really halfway point. Halfway point would be somewhere kind of up where Swans is at Swans. If you're, it depends on what work you're measuring from, Jason. You could park to do a short cut to cut down on your loop. It's not a loop. Well, it's not a loop, but you could create a situation where you could shorten the ride by parking at Bingo for a car shuttle. You, I can't say that you couldn't do that. Right. But we're not putting any infrastructure at that location for parking or kiosk. You don't have to, because that's the fact. It's halfway. And a lot of folks aren't gonna want to do the whole thing. They're gonna do half the thing and they'll organize to do half rides and then park to Bingo road. I mean, it's a natural process. Let me just have to get to Jason first. Just to clarify the point I made in my comments that appears on this map that trail does cross Bingo road at Flanders Hill. Right at the bottom. I mean, it's proposed, I think in the description in the project, it talks about one from coming down somewhere in the area where 155A is where you and I walked up that day. And so I'd have to endorse the point that's being discussed. There's a natural parking area there. And we know that people cluster there every day of the week. I don't know if you park at the kiosk, Bruce and others park at Flanders Hill every day. And if that's a known crossing point for that trail, it's gonna be a trailhead, whether you call it a trailhead or not. And I can't argue the point that's so nice. My suggestion was if you have flexibility, I personally would appreciate that you've crossed Bingo road at your current kiosk where you already have natural parking, where you're already using it to walk your dog and avoid adding more people at Flanders Hill. That was my request. If you have flexibility, move it to the west. I'm a little confused, Jason. At the current kiosk, or just on the other side of the bridge, but we still have to get across the bridge. Well, they can walk. Yeah, but for the parking is what I'm talking about. Oh, okay, all right. So, okay, I see what you're saying. So if they're, you're saying to actually designate parking there for that space. If people are going to congregate there, designate the parking for that crossing where the current kiosk is. Okay, I see what you're saying now. And I didn't get that from your comments, so I'm glad that we're able to come up with that. Well, can I go up, Linda was. Yeah, just two more questions. So, what's the timeframe for when you think this is gonna get there? Yeah. And then, how far up the road do you know across the way is the rest of that, you know, parallel to Bingo road? Oh, I see. Do you wanna be in the yards? So, this is conceptual, okay, this drawing, the map is conceptual. It had, no one's been out on the ground. They kind of looked at the topographic map, looked at the connections, and said, okay, this is where we see it going. We've had a little bit of ground truthing of this, but for me to tell you that that would be exactly where. Well, it's not even that. We're gonna say that it's going to be like, you know, here versus being here, we're being there. I can't, I would be making something up right now if I were telling you, and I don't wanna do that. Fair enough, but the timeframe is like. Time frame is also not able to really define that because it relates to funding, and some funding that would come through us, which would be if that was the only timeframe we were relying on, I would say that we probably wouldn't have proposed it in the first place, because funding for trails is on the decline at the federal level, but because Vermont HUDS and Vermont Mountain Bike Association are doing, they can do fundraising, and they can put that money to federal, to trail construction on federal land, it would depend on their fundraising, their ability, and where they're at, so. It's probably, I'm just gonna guess, you know, you're talking about if the decision is signed next week and nobody objects, and we get to a final decision by October, you probably wouldn't see any grounds, new trail ground broken there for at least a couple of years. A couple of years, yeah. Is this coming out in the field at the end of 113? Is that where you, because there is a remnant of a road that dodged that. Yeah, this is following, I believe, that remnant of a road. I haven't walked this portion right here. I've been on a little bit of this, and I've been on a little bit of this, but this portion, I think that is where it is coming up. I mean, it just needs to be clear, it's from, you know, all the hurricanes, the blowdowns and stuff, which you used to cross. Well, it would be, yeah. I mean, the trail would be. The road is very obvious. So the concern is the field. The field is a kind of special place. You keep the trail on the side of the field. It wouldn't go up the middle of the field. Is the field actually on federal land? It's at, oh, yeah, it's at the end of 113. It's a really neat field. I think this is beyond that field then. You think it comes out after the field across the wild end? I think that comes up into the forest, because that field is right on the edge of the end of 113 where it goes from federal to private, private to federal boundary. Yeah, I wouldn't want to see it come through that. That's not where that, again, but I don't know exactly where it's going to go. But you're familiar with the field. I am familiar with the field. Yes. I used to see that thing tripled by a bike trail when you get away. Eric. Well, Harlow, it looks like he's about to run out of the door, so. No, no, no, no, no, I was just getting ready. I got to use the mat for my... You see, he wasn't about to run out the door, but I wish... Did I stepped on your ones already, son? All, in a sense, these are all still proposals, because all the construction, the real construction of the building is dependent on what the archaeologist says. And the botanist and the social scientist. So you still have a fair amount of examination before anything moves, or anything moves on the ground, yes? There will be site-specific examination as yet to be conducted on the Velomont Trail, yes, so. But the point would be that it's not going to go suddenly from here to over here, or here to, oh, we're going to actually connect up here. We're going to propose going through Chase's property, and then running up and through. It's going to say somewhere in this, in the sphere of influence of that line, it's not going to go, because it's been truth enough to know that the ground is suitable for that activity, but whether it's here, or 200 yards that way, or 300 yards that way is not yet known. But yes, arc, botany, soils, everybody would have to go and look at it. And that one particular junction at the bridge and his drive has lots. Has a lot of stuff. Plus, just below the cemetery, there's a site that was excavated by the historical site of the school there. Right, yep, and the spot. And so, I mean, there's a warehouse there one time, too. There was a Rochester's whorehouse, was up there at 1.2, right? It used to be a big place. Oh, no, that was hard. I thought it was Ireland's. We'll go back and look. That's what somebody told me the other day. I was like, really? They used to sell whiskey out of my house to the guys coming down from the mill on Friday nights. Oh, my goodness. My question is, is there any proposal for a spur anywhere between me and here? No. Coming down. Did they go wrong? For what purpose, Harlan? Why do you need your question? No, it would be on there, if it was. No, he just confirmed it when he wanted to come. The reason I asked that is because then I would want to look at this map, because these lines right here, these are proposed hall routes for timber management. So where are we going to go? Are we going to go down? So even with this one, this is that same spot we were talking about, Harlan, there's no proposed hall route that would connect Bingo Road up here. Maybe a few hundred yards. Yes, so it's a bit less. Clever. Well, there's a wall that's cut in. There will be hauling things, skidding things this way, and then hauling things out of the other way. I was wondering about the proposed sign trail. No. But you're seeing that line as you're not seeing any connection. But you were telling me that there was something coming down into the plantation pine below my place? Yeah. Yeah. Just this side here. Where it washed out there where the river's real close to the road towards my place, there's an old skid trail that comes down. And you were saying that there was something coming down. There's no connection. The only connection you're seeing is that the only touch of Bingo Road is back in this area here. OK, OK. So I have one last question about this. Do you have any control over this in terms of permitting? In other words, would they have to come to the Forest Service and say, we've got a ride. There'll be 100 bikers coming through over the course of 12 hours on such and such a date. Do you have to get that request and approve it? Depends. So there's something called non-commercial group use. So if you have a group that's going to gather on the forest, even if you're not charging money and it's over 75 people, you need a non-commercial group use permit. For example, the rainbow gathering that's currently happening up at Texas Meadow, non-commercial group use. They're not selling anything, but they need a permit so they have to get them out. Rainbows are a different case. But what's going on at the end of the 70s? So they would need to come to us, apply for a permit. And we would either have resource specialists and everyone can look at that and then determine whether there was going to be some kind of adverse impact. If there was a business that said, we are going to do a race, and we're going to charge an entrance fee for the race, that would also require a permit. So you have some measure of control over the large crowds? Yes. This sounds like the tour to Rochester already. And all six of us will ride. We're going to need two days. It's on range, you'll be able to just end that line. Yeah, I'm just looking at the relevant article that was in Vermont outdoors or whatever that magazine that happened in that. I mean, they stated themselves that huge, huge demand for mountain biking. And this is why they want to do this trail. And I think it's a really legitimate concern to think. I mean, if I was looking at that map, I would definitely look at, OK, I can park here and do that park. So I just think that, I mean, I feel like the ski area on 73 was very underestimated, the demand and use there. And I'm very concerned that that will happen here. And then we'll be talking about this after the fact, after it becomes a problem, rather than proactively looking at it and saying, really, how can we avoid that? Because I think there is a huge demand for mountain biking. And I would definitely look at that myself, at that map, and say, yeah, that's what I'm going to do, because I'm not going to do that whole trail. But I could do that part and go back again. I'll be back on that. But where are those people going to park? Yeah, so that, I mean, Jason, your point is well taken. We are going to actively, from a Forest Service perspective, and we'll work with RASA to do the same. We're going to actually direct people to here. Another one that I thought of, if it did become just much more popular than you imagined, was directing people to the CCC camp. Park there, right up the road to it. Yeah, that's a great idea. Yeah, that's a, I mean. Where are you going to direct them to? Yeah, that might be a fallback position. Because we really want to get people here. This parking lot's going to get reconfigured as part of this project. The two entrants, why? It's going to get changed to one. The state wants them all changed to a single entry, which is going to give us more space to provide parking at the end there for the winter use, because that's a nightmare in the winter down there. And nobody, not a lot of people park there in the summer, but we'll have more capacity right here. And with the hut up the road, and there's going to be a small little pod of single track kind of nested loop trail right at the campground. That's going to draw people up to the campground. So we're going to, oopsie, you don't want to read my email. We're going to try to direct people here, but you know, that's why I couldn't say that no one is going to turn here, but we're going to actively try to deter people from using this as a rally spot. The idea of providing some limited parking there, that's kind of a double-edged sword, almost. Is it better to say there's no parking there? When people come in, you're not going to go, don't go to Bingo. That's not a good place to access the trail. Go over here to Chippendon Brook and provide no parking where do you say, well, there's limited parking at Bingo Brook. If they want to do the loop, they can do the loop this way. You go down to Bingo Road, right back up, 73 to Chippendon. Yeah, I mean, you could do a loop. They're actively trying to avoid road rides. Sure. They don't want to have to do. So if we don't view this as a loop, this is like destination from here to here, to the campground, to the next spot. It's not, we don't anticipate a lot of people going, oh, okay, a road from the Rochester office to here, and now I'm going to ride back, you know, they're going to keep, these kind of people are going to keep going. Yeah, so what's the vehicle? The other ride, these guys are high court. They don't do anything halfway. So they're going to turn around and go back to their car? No, they're going to stay at the building. No, they're going to stay at the hut and move on. The people who want to ride, like, just ride and then come back, they're going to be more drawn to the Sherburne trails, to Blueberry Lake, to the Sapp Boiler back here, these other, like, pods of trails, like the Blueberry Lake trails, they're going to ride those and then go home. It's going to be the hardcore people who do the Velomont, they're going to do Blueberry Lake, and then they're going to ride down to the office here, and they're going to do this, and then they're going to ride down to the Sherburne trails and do that, and ride to Pittsburgh. Could I ask a question behind here? You may, yeah, I can't see the hands behind, so just throw something at me. So someone mentioned archaeologists, and I wondered what that's in reference to. I know I've walked up there with an Amnaki person to look at the piles of... Cairns. Yep. Cairns, are they known? Is that the issue, or is it what, or are there other remains? I'll defer to Eric a little bit, but it's not cairns, it's this area. What do you think Eric was referring to before? Historic sites, cellar halls, foundations, barns. I don't know about the whorehouse. You might talk to them. I don't know about the whorehouse. And I can put my finger up on that map and show you lots of places. Yeah. And lots of places where that trail crosses, where they're taught where there's parking near. That hasn't been resolved, I don't think, at all. So this is a very historic, rich area from cellar halls, foundations, other post-colonization sites, you know, 1800 sites. Well, some 1800 sites, right? Yes, but the State Historical Preservation Office has told the forest archeologists he is to do a Section 106 examination of every site. Yeah, they are. Now, if you have a site that's got ground disturbance, or if you have a project that's got ground disturbance that means, yes, the guest guest has to know what's in the ground. Yeah, Eric, I mean, not Eric. Andrew is in close consultation with a state archeologist on all this stuff. And they've, the current seasonal archeologist, Mallory, she has been out documenting all of the known and discovering some of the unknown sites that represent the stuff that you've been passing along. I've been with Mallory and shown us what stuff. So we're getting good documentation, much better than what we used to get. We used to have, you know, think of the days before we had GPS systems and things, you get a point on a map and we all know that the archeological site, we've learned the hard way in some cases that it's not just at the point, it's bigger. So we're getting polygons now, which helps us a great deal. I mean, any archeological site has area as space. And that was the one large missing ingredient I think is documentation. Right, and now we're getting that, which is great stuff. If I can digress just the smidge from the general subject matter that I was with Mallory, we are up, must be, have been along the part of the road that goes to Swan's Mill, is that 63? 64, just right here, 64, right here. There was a site flagged by her, I mean, a polygon of no-fly zones. Then after the establishment of that no-fly zone, there's a flag line running through it. So why is there a flag line running through it? Can you tell me where that is so that we can resolve that? Yeah, I'm certainly not sure. You want me to point it out right now? Well, better if you can send me an email and give me some information where it is and I'll pass that along. I don't know what the flag line is. Yeah, well, I talked to Andrew. His response is, oh, well, it's temporary. I said, yeah, it'll be temporary until it becomes permanent. It's temporary till it's not. It's temporary till it's not. So that's why I want to know. No, it's temporary till it's not. What comes after the flagging, paint, usually. So that's what I want to find out where that is and what the flag line is actually indicating. Okay, thank you, Eric. If you find more of that, please let me know. The sooner the better when you find it. I think we've exhausted the bingo area from a recreation special uses. I can't think of any other special use. So the Philadelphia, okay, so the only other thing related to this is the Philadelphia Peak comm site coming out of the wilderness. This isn't gonna happen tomorrow because what it says in the proposed decision is that once we establish two additional repeaters, one on Corporation Mountain and one back here on the Braintree Range will remove the Philadelphia repeater but that's going to require funding to do that. So we have, we'll have a decision to remove this in the portion of the wilderness, the portion of the removal site that's in the wilderness like the repeater site itself and the road down to here we'll be using stock animals and people power to get it out. Once it reaches here, we've left the option open that we might use a UTV, we might continue to just use stock animals to bring it down to the end of the road. And then the staging site is actually the gravel pit on Thresher Hill. We're not gonna park into a whole lot of equipment up at the end of the road because there's a lot of archeological features right there and we just don't wanna like have stock animals wandering around or some truck backing into something, so. We're always the repeater. The government, honestly. The government. Somewhere over there. Somewhere over there. We'll remove all of this. We haven't specified it would be probably, we wouldn't be looking for a dry, non-throwsing ground situation. Oh, you want a non-throwsing ground? That's safer for the stock animals. Okay, sure. So we'd be looking at the dry part of the year. Which is, like right now. Right now. You should write your notes down. And the reason we're doing that is that we've gone through a minimum, what's called a minimum requirements analysis. Anytime you do anything in wilderness, you have to go through a minimum requirements analysis. It tells you what the, it analyzes what kind of impacts various techniques to do something wilderness would have. So, like taking it up with people, flying it up with a helicopter, we can get authorization to do that. About a one-time occurrence using stock animals. In this case, we determined that using stock animals was probably the best from wilderness and wouldn't break the backs of any people carrying all that stuff out. Let's see. Because that's a non-conforming tool in wilderness. So we can get an exemption, but it was felt at the end of the day that we could comply with the Wilderness Act and use stock animals because the distance isn't all that great. If we were talking about up somewhere in the middle of the wilderness, and it would have been miles and miles and miles to get out the helicopter, it would probably be some turbulence at the top. If they get the funding, if they get all the things worked out favorably from the board meeting examination, and it stays close to target path, would you wait until all the logging activities are complete and skin and logging trucks are done before you open the trail, or would you allow the trail to open in the middle of that logging activity? Yeah, you're hitting on something that's an internal struggle for us at times. It's trying to sequence plan things. So what will happen once the decision gets signed and we know what's approved is we're gonna develop an implementation plan internally, and that'll set forth like, when are we gonna harvest timber here? When are we gonna harvest timber over there? When are we gonna do, some of it won't be a shot in the dark, like when are we gonna remove the repeater? You know, we'll try to establish a target date for that. My, that's, you know, I will look to my timber and recreation staff to have that discussion. My gut would tell me and my inclination would be that yes, you would wanna wait until you've finished harvesting timber because why would you wanna put a bunch of infrastructure in, and then potentially damage that infrastructure with skidding and filing of trees only to then have to put it back in again. So I was thinking more of running over bikers. Yeah, you don't want trouble getting there. Yeah, that's what I mean there. They don't stop, they just don't think. I almost got ran over the other day with two mountain bikes just walking out my road. Wasn't me, was it? No, no, but I was a little shocked by the speed of the bicycles. Was it Susan? Yeah. No, no, no. But they're fully helmeted. I have the feeling Susan, but you don't have to worry about that hill. I'm gonna keep on waiting about three minutes. I'm not helmeted. It's a hill. They were. Yes, right, that's right. So now I gotta wear a helmet to walk to my house. Yes. Yes. Well, if you fall, you won't crack it. I just have a question. My concern is the planter cemetery. And maybe you talked about that earlier. That came a little late. How are you protecting that? Right there. We have on, there's no recreation activity planned anywhere near the Bingo Cemetery. But the road down below, right? I mean, they flander's way. We're not, no, the road that goes right by it is Flanders Road, the town road, Flanders Hill Road. We don't have any activity planned on Flanders Hill Road. Okay, bye. From recreation, I'm gonna look from a timber perspective. But down below. You're gonna do some logging, you'll be excited to. That's all I wanted to do. Yeah. Oh, no. So, let me zoom in way in on this one. So, we're gonna really, we're gonna look at it. Not very far down to your right. Eliminated it. Okay, so you'll see here's the, here's, this is the cemetery right here. Yeah. Okay? Yeah. So there's no activity directly adjacent to the cemetery. It's buffered by this green. It's just gonna remain forced as it is now. This is the road. So we will haul down the road to harvest this unit right here. And the wood that comes out of here and the wood that comes out of here will be at a landing that's a preexisting landing on that road, Jason, you know what I'm talking about, right? Not existing anymore. But it was a landing at one point. Yeah. So that'll be reopened up and that'll be the landing. So all this little bit of wood that's coming out of here is gonna go into this landing and be hauled out right there. So it's a pretty small amount of wood to be going by the cemetery. And that'll be quick. That won't take them very long to harvest. Christian, are there heavy red lines on the logging access? Roads of some sort. These lines right here? Like rated H86. Oh, see, we see this H7, H8, H6. These are harvest unit boundaries. So when we plan timber harvests, there's compartments and stands like compartment 10, stand 258, compartment 10, stand 255. I know you know this button, but so on and so forth. And then we bundle them into these harvest units so that our resource specialists, when they're looking at that area, because as you can see, all of the activity, the hauling landings aren't necessarily within compartments and within those stands. There's activity outside of the stands. So the resource specialists know that, okay, when I need to look at harvest zone six, I need to look at the area within the boundary of that harvest zone. So like the botanist would not just walk through here, but she would also take a walk out here in the green just to make sure that there wasn't some resource of concern out there. Archeologists do the same thing. Isn't that light greenish by name? This is just a not no harvest activity plan. Is it dark green or? The dark green is a thinning. And the purple? The purple, the dark purple is group selection. So that's what's proposed behind your house, Harlan. That's where they create these quarter acre, half acre, one acre openings scattered across the landscape which were for us in between them. What's the view shed? View shed. Oh, you're looking at a documentary? I read it somewhere. Yeah, so in some places, up along the long trail, we're creating view sheds. So we're creating just a little mosh and opening where there's an opportunity to get a view out of the valley. Like just to think of it like a lot. They're good. They're good. And red? There's no red here. Oh, red. It's not that much, I mean. It's drawn greenish. Just to the north east of the blue? C8S 549. The dark brown. No, that's opening. Is that create or, no, you only point to it. Make sure I get this right here. That's either create or expand an existing opening. So that's, there'll be a permanent opening, permanent wildlife opening. I can't think right off the top of my head. Is there an opening up there, Jason, on that side of the road? It's all grown in there now, yeah. Was there one at one time? When they were logging it, those four were just Johnson. That might have been one of the ones that we were talking about before that we used to maintain and we've let go for many years. We're trying to reclaim some of those. There's a cellar hole there too. Yeah. So it's an archeology site. Yeah, so it's an old, old fox. So we might be trying to reclaim what was the old bastard around that art site. So what you're not seeing is we do have a data layer that shows where all the archeological sites are, where all the rare plant sites are, where all the features of concern are. This is just what goes out to them. We like to see that map. For review. Yeah. I like to see that map. But I have to go through a security clearance process to be able to see that. Did they, did you guys find forestry? Forestry, are you going to go home with the Audemann folks? Or do you want to go with the Audemann folks? Forestry, fire, is it? We're done. We're planning to go on record for you guys to forestry. There's all the gate of the area. Also, if we know who the owner of what was used for us, all that information is in there. OK, so that is, if that's the way that it's going to be. Oh, no, we, no, there's just 1,200 sites up there. Yeah, not many of them. There is no better than five. How many, like 1,700 sites there might be in this project area? I've never seen a couple. You mean the entire window or in the harvest zones? Just in general, in this project area. I know I've seen some center chimneys. In the area that they're now designating as harvest zones, which is sort of, you're seeing just the edge of it because actually it extends further, what, northeast from that, yes. That probably, I mean, the number overall is small, but that probably is close to 80% of the number, the total 18th century sites in the forest, in the bingo area. That's a high percentage of the forest 18th century sites in the bingo areas, is that what they were saying? Yes. Is that from the west? This isn't. This is from the west hill, too, Zach Quigish. No, that's not even an old fluster story. Those are later guys. Not yet. Not yet. From a rich perspective like this. I know. Questions? Arlen, the landings, so I'm going to see these little green stars. These are the proposed landing sites. Many of these are actually existing. They may not look like it today because they have trees growing on them, but they were once log landings. That's also true of these haul roads. Most of these are roads. If you were walking in the woods, you would say whether it's designated as a road or not designated as a road, it was a road at one point. We're heavily roaded. Small r. But these are the landings, all these. How much timber will go to that landing kind of depends on the treatment type and then how much volume is in there. What do we talk about for the timber? The landings? They might have a chip van into the landing. That's really up to the contractor. We don't specify what they do with the haul boys that they take off. Some of it will go to firewood, some of it will get chipped, some of it will go to other uses. Do you allow the process of firewood on site to be closed? They'll send it to a process. 200 horsepower. You can pick up something the size of this building and drop it. I would assume that they would be operating chip resets at some of the sites. I don't know which sites. We wouldn't know that, even be able to wave a flag at that until it got contracted. You can then talk to them about what do you think you're going to do this for? I'm just kind of concerned with the noise thing for months on end. They typically would concentrate the chipping into a shorter period of time because it costs them money to keep the chipper on site. All those from the pile and then run the chip for like a day or a week or so. The question back here again, so will a fair amount of trucks be coming down what you call 64? Is that Wing Farm Road? So if we... It's so funny the colors are on the screen and not at all the colors are on the screen. So, let me zoom out one more step. All of this, these harvest areas will be coming either down Wing Farm or down Maple Hill Road. There's that coal stone culver right here on the piece of the Ancock Town Road. It goes loops around. It shows that this is a haul road. We're not hauling over that culver. We're not driving over that culver. That's one of the restrictions that will be in the contract. We don't feel it can support the weight. So some of this wood, which will come down to here, on Maple Hill Road, but the majority of this up in here will come down Wing Farm Road. If you estimate the number of trucks, it would be very hard because that would just depend on what the volume is in those stands. But yes, there will be truck traffic coming down that road. And the purple area is Clearcutting? Purple area. Is there a group selection? Here we go. That would be a really big Clearcut area. It pretty much gets rid of all the old pine. We're working to get rid of the non-native plantation pine in Norway Spruce. Is there something they're going to take off for logs or they're going to chip off? They will take it for logs. That darker purple is group selections. So that's that little openings in Mature Forest. Chris, could you clarify what the thinning, what they do in the thinning areas? The thinning is that they will go in and they'll take what they're trying to do is release some of the larger trees. So they're going to go in and they're going to take lesser, more poorly formed trees to try to release the trees that have better form and allow them to continue to grow. They're going to go into things that you would, we would look at and say, wow, that's crowded in there. None of the trees are being able to get a good crown development on them. So they'll go in and they'll remove the more formed trees to allow the bigger trees to... So does that mean they still have log in here? It will be pulp, you're saying. In those stands it might be, yes, but it could be firewood, it could be something else. It would be pulp wood, yes, but what they do with that, it would be hard to say. So it still needs logging trucks going in? Yeah, you'd still have logging trucks going into those units because they'll take that wood out. So in a thinning area, would you look at it and not necessarily be able to tell that they've done it or you would say, oh yeah, they've definitely cut there? You can tell. They wouldn't be like... Some areas are proposed for shelter woods like various stages of shelter woods and that's where they go in and they remove most of the basal area that's in there but they leave the best formed trees and the biggest trees behind to act as seed trees for the remainder of the area and then you'll wait 10, 15 years and then go back in and remove those as the regenerating forest has reached a certain age. So those are the ones that you look at and you go, why are there just like... Looks like a park out there. That's the shelter wood. You can tell that they've done something but it's still... It looks like a mature forest. And there's the... Do they do that in the wintertime? So there's a mix of harvest seasons in here. Most of these harvests are winter harvest. Most of the ground is winter ground. We are trying to do more summer harvesting for a variety of reasons. Silver culturally, we can achieve better results if we get some ground scarification. Yellow birch, sugar maple. Some of our more desirable trees like to have the ground scratched up a little bit. It gives them a good seed bed. If you ever walk down an old logging road they usually take with like hemlock or yellow birch or something like that. That's because it's been scratched up a lot. They love that as a seed bed. It also keeps the operators love summer season because they're real busy in the winter and they often fall into a lull in the summer because there's a lot of winter harvesting that goes on. But we just don't... Our soils and the ground condition it really depends on how much rain we get. You know, over the course of the summer whether the ground will stay dry enough for us to be able to harvest in summer. So some units are absolutely winter. Some units are... The majority of units are probably absolutely winter harvest. There are some units that are, yep, they're okay for summer harvest. And then there's a middle ground of units and it's in the document. There's a ray in the middle that's like, well, winter harvest, but if conditions are right there's an opportunity for summer harvest. So you will be plowing and traveling over that road during this one or two years past the Marlins house for... We won't, but the contractor will, yes. That's what I mean. Scheduled for winter... There are some units in Marlin, absolutely. Alright, so the cross-country skiing won't be so good for those couple of years. No, it won't be. We'll have to get up there. So we'll, we have the ability to... In the contract come to terms with the contractor we can also specify to the contractor in certain situations that they can only plow to a certain depth. So there still remains snow back on the road, but it would be if the road is wide enough sometimes you can share the road with them. I don't think that road is probably wide enough. I mean, the reality is it will be compromised for a couple of years as well as going on. Right, the one thing that I have said and I've been working in the document and working with the timber staff here is that in the sequence of harvesting units to not have harvesting going on in Bingo in the Chittendenbrook Nordic system at the same time that there would always be one of those Nordic systems available for people to ski on. So if you're displaced from Bingo you can go over to Chittendenbrook and vice versa. It's not a perfect solution, but it's it's a best you can do. Best you can do. So you're going to maintain your emphasis on keeping that a cross-country ski trail. Chittendenbrook? In the winter, yes. In the summer, it's mountain bikes and four-wheeled wheels. Yes, I'll say it emphatically again for those of you who might be in the back of your minds. There is no motorized proposal in Bingo. Can there be a sign at the end of the road that says that? We spoke about this before. I mean, if we sign things like the camping and things like that we can emphasize that, yeah. Yep. Could you go through the different shelterwood thinning and put a percent on those that in thinning move 40% of the trees or put some percents on the different areas? Off the top of your head. I'm not sure I can do that off the top of my head. Send your pandex of the Environmental Assessment. Pandex A1 It gives you a range. What do you ask me? In a shelterwood what's the percentage of trees removed? Are you asking me what percentage of the overall harvest is shelterwood? No, in a designation like shelterwood. What percentage of the trees are removed? 50, 80 I can't do that. And it also depends on the types of shelterwoods. There's different thinnings. Group selection would depend on how many groups you're putting in would be the percentage. I could like scale you up as far as the least number of trees removed would be like a single tree selection and then you would go up to a group selection probably would be the next one so you're removing the least amount of trees and then a thinning after that and then a shelterwood after that so shelterwood would be the one that would be the most amount of trees but for me to sit here and be able to rattle that off and be able to stand behind it without digging in and asking my timber staff I would want to do that. Some of the information you're asking is in the Pandex A1 Charles are for us to put a lot of time and effort to try to explain exactly what these trees can tell on the ground. He doesn't talk about them in terms of what we're looking for. A percentage of trees can be harvested or numbered to trees but it talks about it in terms of basal area which is the amount of space that's occupied by that actual stem of the tree over an acre basis so you can sort of get an idea. It's at the beginning of each number. The entire Pandex A1 page A1-1 talks about uneven age management and starts talking about group selection. When you google up Shelterwood and look at images they vary vastly from a single tree left to something looking more like a tree. That depends on what basal area you're reducing that stand to. It says right here that group selections would remove trees in a small area from one tenth of an acre to up to three acres. So it just gives you the range right there for a group harvest. A group harvest is like a mini-clearup. All the trees are removed in that circle. I keep making a circle shape but they're not circles. If you were looking at it from above it would look like an irregular checkerboard. They're not spaced on that kind of regularity but you would see an opening scattered across the landscape. Little ones. That's the wild way forward. Yeah. Because they want like that young forest and then the mature forest. Right, but it's also an objective so culturally because it favors trees that are intolerant to the sun. So species that rather shade, they grow better in smaller states. Amazing. There's somebody back there. Go ahead. Susan, go ahead. I had already raised it with on select board about changing the seeing if we can change the speed limit on Bingo. But I want to know if as far as the forest service do you have any say in your contractor saying hey we really you need to go slow. I mean I've asked the town if there's any way to reduce to 25 miles per hour and I wanted to know if there's anything you as a forest service can do with your logging contractors. When they're on a town road they have to abide by the town speed limits. We can certainly request that they go slower for various reasons. You know I'll tell you this if you're driving a 60,000 pound log truck on an icy road you're not going to want to be flying along. You're going to be creeping along. That's not to say that a 60 pound log truck doing 25 miles an hour isn't an opposing site coming your way but it's you know they're not going to be ripping down the road at 50 miles an hour empty or full. There's not enough room in many of those places to cast a pass on one of those logging trucks. They're going to go back and forth and hold the truck. They'll have to be responsible for traffic control and to keep the road open and safe to the public that's written into their contract and we have one staff physician here solely dedicated to interacting with timber contractors. He's a sale administrator and that's what he does. So he'll be out there every day working with the people coming out there. Go for one side. We can also do I don't remember the weekend hauling that's in the mitigation still right. So we did put a mitigation measure in place to double check for me here that doesn't allow weekend hauling so they can't haul timber on the weekdays they can go up and cut timber on the weekend so they can go up and skid and do everything but they can't haul down the road on the weekends that's why I think so it was in there so we can go out on the weekends can you explain the reasonable access for landlocked parcels and how that all works and all this? So there's no we don't have any action in here granting access to bingo anyways anybody who's landlocked there are some special use proposals for access for people of the Hancock Tunnel but there's nothing in bingo and they I can explain the process to you if a landholder is surrounded by or largely surrounded by federal ownership we're required by the Alaska Native Lands Interest Act I think I got my acronym's letters mixed up there but you know what I mean to provide access to that landowner to their property because we can't reduce the value of their property by saying no you don't have access so it has to be reasonable access reasonable access is determined depends on what's there you know if you have a property with no structure on it reasonable access might be then you get the hike you know it will provide you trail access or if you you know it just it runs the gamut um and you don't have to be completely surrounded by national force you just have to demonstrate that it would be a hardship for you to gain access in by any other means like it's a piece that's been sold at in full knowledge ahead of time understood in the Forest Service reasonable access defined as reasonable access is to be four seasons, three seasons well you can't deny someone access to their property in any season it depends on the use of the property that's a case by case basis you're asking me you're asking for a specific answer to the general question I can't answer that access by walkie can be accessed by car can be accessed by snowmobile can be accessed by ATV it all depends on case by case basis so we have a locked gate on 62 for one season for one of the four seasons is that within the reasonable access I'm not going to comment on something that relates to the lawsuit that's currently going on between you and the town I appreciate it so you can try to bait me into it thank you I just I was looking for to understand reasonable access this is the place to come we've had this conversation before too but I'm not going to comment on something that's going to that relates to that lawsuit ok thanks well basically you don't allow snowmobiling in national forest basically no we do allow snowmobiling on the national forest on designated snowmobile of which there are none of which there are none in bingo basin and none proposed and there never will be any designated public snowmobile trail in there because if you look at the context of the landscape with it being the Patel wilderness horseshoe around it there's nowhere to go so it would be an out and back trail and one of the things that we look at very closely is trail connections there's just nowhere to go and there's no snowmobile club in the state that's going to propose a three mile dead end snowmobile trail especially with the way that conditions are going lately in the winter they're kind of shrinking their systems down to a core as opposed to blowing them up big and so I'll take you back around to the seasonal restriction of hauling because you asked hauling activities in fact in snowmobile and ski trail shall not take place on weekends or holidays snow conditions to not allow snowmobile skiing to occur so bottom part of bingo road they could haul out on they wouldn't be able to haul out past Harlan's place on the weekend because that's a that's a special entry because there was much snow but that's not going to work anyway because there are landings well I guess there are a couple of landings on that road but there's not much that yeah this is Eric I I guess then bingo or at least past the four corners actually is not actually a designated cross country ski trail is it no but the bingo road between Harlan's and the four corners is business the Pine Brook Loop Trail that's part of the loop so there would be a restriction in place on that section of the trail which would prevent you from hauling from beyond there past there that's okay I have another question but I forgot it's over you'll quote you on that I want to find that Eric forgot his second question the weekends are free of logging trucks past Harlan's yeah but by that mitigation measure they would not be able to haul down that section make a haul up to right to the edge of it I guess I see was there a question in the back there's no snow there's no snow I don't care still winter still winter but it's related to snow I see over here glad to say glad to say what kind of quantities over what size areas are you proposing so that is all contained in there for me I wouldn't be able to rattle it off off the top of my head I mean I could read you what's written in the document but for me to do that off the top of my head I don't know there's stuff up there that you need to use well there's animal planting going on on the White River Jay's going to look up and be able to get me some I mean the classical invasive honey cycle barbarian so invasive plant control which we do use glad to say for and other herbicides is handled under a different decision it's a forest-wide programmatic decision so we don't have to reanalyze it and make that decision again in this document that decision already exists and so that is a plant control that is in place already what's being proposed in here is one was to control vegetation around the elm planting sites we're planting elms along the White River trying to restore some elms into the riparian areas is to treat the competing vegetation that's one of the things and there was also another Charles wanted to keep it as an option to apply it for site preparation where you would be conducting natural or artificial regeneration of this method so that basically covers anywhere where there's shelter wood clear cut seed tree and green selection so everything minus that would be the maximum area now keep in mind that he's not planning to do that on every single acre he would be specific in areas where he felt like it would be needed and the intent is that it's this control be tree generation so it would be it would be subject to the amount of beach that would be within those areas that are being harvested but he doesn't know where that is until after the fact and so he left it open to be able to use it potentially in any of those stands that's the way it's written well yeah I mean it's the one page I'm looking at here you know 4,383 acres that's contingent on any number of other things restricting that activity so if beach is not a problem in those stands and it would in no way be a problem in every one of those stands and I'm not saying it doesn't exist I'm saying it becomes a problem that's out competing the desired regeneration sugar maple spruce yellowbirds whatever the desire is to a point where okay we need to do something here otherwise we're going to get a bunch of disease beach back that would be a place there's also restrictions on it from within that acreage that would be restricted by the botanist from a plants perspective the soil scientists wetlands all kinds of other things that would come into play that would shrink that acreage down down down down down so it's not it would never be applied to all 4,000 acres might not be one for all we know at this point it's an option for treatment to control beach an option that's looking for authorization yes yes yeah authorization for 4,000 plus acres of application yep within the within the mitigation measures that are contained in the project it has to abide by the mitigations that are written for life to save application and all other activities so that can't be done the winter it's going to be 45 degrees or something I have a question it's hard to apply it I mean to follow all the rules right which is usually applied not following so this is also the site perhaps don't the other thing that you can't think about is don't think about this is a broadcast activity this is a target specific activity like that beach tree we want to kill that beach tree and that little beach sprout it's not you're not spraying over the entire area it's a targeted application so again it's not going to hit all 4,000 acres with that target it's not like you're putting potentially putting life to save on 4,000 acres of ground what's the radius after you shoot one spot what's the radius it's a target specific it's a target specific it travels to where you shoot into that plant it's it's cut stump right Jay so you're cutting the stump and you're spraying the exposed so it's not full of your spray there's a couple things that point out because it does sound more it does sound alarming to applying that nervous side on the larger so it's it's a glyphosate product yes it's not round up it's it's a water base it's labeled to use their water so it's water it's it's a special added type of restriction as far as the type and impact that it could have on water it's not too much it's rodeo so the other thing about it too is that the amount of the application rate would be much more restricted closer to the surface waters around surface waters and so it's worth pointing that out and then the fact that it's not full of your spraying it is cut stump treated so thus those particular products do not need to have surfactants added to them like full of your spraying does have surfactants that tend to be toxic and privacy itself so those are things that are spelled out and assessed in analysis it's the mitigation of yours and we kind of explain the talk about those restrictions except for the unplanted that's trying to kill the polychromatic damage so without the surfactants the mitigation is really maximum it doesn't spread it breaks up right away, it doesn't bind but a little concern that the there are definitional issues here when you refer to the toxicity of something like it's being in the headlines as carcinogens major lawsuits being one or lost depending on who side you are Monsanto has known for decades of the carcinogenic effects of that product why it's not just banned across the board at this point is the question one alone so the products that is being litigated in the lawsuits is Roundup which is a Monsanto product that has life to say in it the carcinogen the issue at the lawsuit is the surfactant that they're adding it to it not necessarily the glyphosate it is the surfactant it is the highly toxic they've been using so these products that we're talking about aquatic glyphosates don't have that surfactant they don't have any surfactant in them because there's no need to stick to a leaf which is what the surfactant does if it's a sticker so basically you can play it um I would have to read the label on that Harlan the harvest of what they're talking about a tree, sure a tomato you wouldn't use it on a tomato because it's an organic you know I mean if you can eat it it's probably safe safe it doesn't kill a rat it doesn't kill a rat you know, it's probably safe at one time you know it wasn't they didn't even think it was you had a question Mr. Word Elm you're going to play Elms a lot yes Dutch Elm disease is done these are these are disease resistant Elms that they have developed we're doing in partnership with the Nature Conservancy they're a trial it's actually more than a trial they know that these Elms are disease resistant in plantations and they're just starting to scatter them around and they've done them out in the wild on a limited basis and they've done very well and so now they want them to plant them in a little bit more concentration than they have in the past in a wild setting so but you're spraying the foliage they're spraying, they're competing because we're planting them with a foliage, with a surfer no, the same the same we're adding a surfactant a non-toxic surfactant so there's non-toxic varieties of surfactant I shouldn't say non-toxic nothing is non-toxic water is toxic with some dose so a less toxic surfactant to the mix to allow it to stick to the vegetation there and we're talking about those are spraying an area like that big around where the Elms are planted basically a different subject more micro on the landings near Harlins up there yep so what will the road look like when you're all done because right now it's also a part of the ski loop it's part of the recreation views so it will be returned to its current way it looks that's your question so landings just in general no, no the turnaround over the bridge up the hill we're going to have truck traffic so we can land the local road look like when all this is over guess this password what password password is so so this way so truck traffic will be on that little section the road right there this wood right here is going to be pulled out this way so there is no road there's this little section of road so it will look essentially like it does today well it won't be grown in with grass right after it's used but it will grow in with grass after you're not gonna need to rebuild it to get that machine up there I mean you're gonna have to do something to it to use it because not well we'll have to go for heavy trucks right now we'll have to improve the road so the truck can go on it you're gonna defrew it after you're done it'll be graded water bars put in turned up a little bit seated and let go it will not be what it is now it will well this is a town road or not a town road that is the old bingo road not a town road it's the old bingo right that section is not a town road so you're talking about this little piece right here of this right here right you know bridge after the bridge bridge and the mailboxes on the road all the fine this is pine brook trail right here so you're talking about this section road will look right after it will look like a row years after it will look like a grassy field and ten years after it will look like a bunch of saplings that's what I'm talking about to Mason when we're doing the harvesting it will look like a road it'll be cleared it'll be great that road will look exactly like it does now with all I need to create a Russian that you currently drive on up to your house yes we'll look just like it does now so if you write it you'll grade it yeah it's in the country after the operation I thought you said beyond like where the brook trail splits now that road will look just like it does now but it has to be improved to that type of truck track it's already to a standard to support that type of truck track that bridge is built to the hill after the bridge yeah no that's gonna be torn up they will grade it and restore it to its current condition while they're doing their work yes they have to get access to the road that's an existing landing right there so if you went there you don't look like a light and then there's a stand probably right here yeah that's that's probably that dog itself okay so most of these landing delay down the road from where you want the basic space yeah they're past that look past the four a couple hundred yards yeah so if you go up and then basically goes this way and the pipeline trailer goes this way they're down this way you know build so I think I know I just thinking that it's going to take some serious road work they will make whatever improvements is necessary if they feel that road is not to a standard they'll make the improvements to the road and then restore it to the condition no I probably think it's better than it is now well that's a question yeah who thinks it's better well I like it the way it is now okay so what you consider or somebody better might be a class 3 with sorry Chris I'm not going to stay till the night you're on your own Kevin here thank you very much you're welcome yes anyone else I don't know what percentage here's what they do okay so there's there are new I didn't the other landings you're just looking at one we're looking only like a third if I zoom out to the complete extent of this map really looking about the project area is there a total number of landings listed in there must be somewhere he's the data guy right that's 48 years of clear there yeah there would be definitely there yeah Chris probably should true that's it doesn't sound right to me it says an estimated 88 landings would be needed eight of them prior from prior to requiring a newly constructed yeah so yes your statement is correct I mean that would be a new landing would be a small clear we'll do a call it's like I'm not too happy depending on what they're gonna know what kind of vegetation you're only going to in some of the years, probably some of the years. Yeah, that's fine, that's all right. Okay, 10 questions. Eric? Even those are sort of land executes, those are proposed land executes. The actual space position or actual place of land will appear when the sale begins to start moving along, yes. Because the landings are somewhat flexible in terms of what you put with them, and a lot of those landings that you have are sitting on archaeological sites. Right, so that'll be true at the time of implementation. Like, oh, we can't put this here because there's an archaeological site identified from here. We're going to put it over here instead. And what we were just looking at where we were just looking at is a way back again. The cemetery. You know, with these two landings side by side there, you know, those two landings are very close together for this, if it's this amount of wood coming out of there, it wouldn't surprise me that when we got to implementation there's only one landing there. Remember, this is the extent of what can happen. If it can go, become less, it can't become more without a further analysis. I have a suggestion too, because you have two landings on Flanders Hill, one on either side, if you could aggregate it all on the east side of the existing landing, that would save the archaeological logic site above the cemetery. Yeah, and some of them will get filtered out because of that reason, and you know, the timber contractors are going to want to limit the amount of landings that they create as well once it goes under contract because every landing that's constructed is an expense to that. They have to pay for it, and then they have to put it to rent at the end, so they want to reduce that number as well. Would that mean that there'd be more traffic to the landings, the fewer landings? No, I mean when they're side by side like this, just using this as a conceptual example right here, you know, like with those two so close together, what's the reason to have two landings close together? Maybe there is one, I just don't know what it is, but that could be a case where they would say, we're just going to haul everything to this landing and we're not going to construct this landing because there's no need to do that. And it could be also, going back to Eric's point about archaeology, I don't know if that's the case here, again I'm talking conceptually, it could be that there's two landings here that are smaller because there's some feature around them that they can't intrude upon. Or be in or something, yeah. Chris, I had made a suggestion that the project recognize Robinson as an entity, does the Forest Service have any reaction to that? Yeah, I mean we talked about that and that'll probably, that would become part of the historic what we do when we get to the CCC camp and the other things that we talked about, the Heritage Resources section where we work with Andrew and archaeologists on trying to come up with something to recognize that it will probably be at the CCC camp itself or maybe on an interpretive side or one of the kiosks that goes in down in that area like we moved that kiosk to the camp ground so far away, but yeah we did take note of that. Joey seems fine. Yeah, again being private property we probably wouldn't do anything there unless Andy wants to give us a pond and land around it which probably doesn't But you're going to fix the dam for us? I'm not sure, we are going to try to help out with the dam a little bit. It's actually the dam, it's actually the side wall. Where was it recognized as Robinson anywhere other than the topographical map? I've never seen that. Where's Janice? Robinson was the mill. He was the owner of the mill, right? One dollar. It was more appropriately Janice came out of West Rochester. Yeah. The post office was West Rochester. Yeah. But the idea of putting that information on one of those kiosks I think is really very nice. You see you're entering a historical area the area that's been used I was thinking if we could reconstruct the pot map of where the sawmills were and the church the stagecoach in and the dance hall. We have been working a lot about that kind of interpretation lately so we will definitely We will leave that out We will bring in the historical society when we get to that phase as the partner we work with in developing it. We have some talk the Civil War guy Just a quick question I'm having these visions of wing farm road just getting rich. It's not a good road as it is and then upper maple hill and down maple hill and logging trucks Right now they're working on the culvert and that's not a pretty picture right now. That would be a great improvement. Yeah, but anyway I'm just thinking of equipment logging trucks and whether is there some agreement with the town that they'd be road repair That's an agreement between the contractor and the towns and our responsibility with that is to ensure that the contractor is aware that he needs to reach out to the town have all the required permits if he's an overload respecting the time of year restrictions on roads in the month of season that relationship is entirely between the town and the contractor Rochester is probably in a better position they're a little more aware than some of the other we have a lot of towns that just they don't engage with the contractor they wait till the end and the contractor reaches out to them and they don't do anything Rochester I'm sure will be more on top of that they can enter into agreements and bonds and things like that they're supposed to have a bond with the town if there's any damage to the road that that bond is then utilized to make the repairs to the road I can't imagine it's not having some damage with the heavy equipment When does it start? Well we haven't signed the decision yet so the decision has to get signed and we're that's probably at the best we would reach a final decision probably in October if it gets objected to and there's a process there it could be out further into November early December before we reach an outcome and then the first sales the first timber sales are planned scheduled at this point to be sold sold not harvested in our fiscal year 19 so that would be our next fiscal year and then most contracts have a lifespan of three to five years so they have to be in they can take up to five years to harvest the area most of them like to get in and out a lot quicker than that as long as there's no hold of the you know if it's a winter harvest winter harvest units they're sort of at the whim of the winter you know if you don't get enough snow cover and the ground never freezes up they can never get in there so contracts can get that's when they take this over I got an email from a citizens tax person named we're saying that the amount of money from the sales was going to be in other words we're not going to be making a profit on the sales and this is going to be costing taxpayers to harvest it no they pay us there's no cost to the taxpayer from this where the timber is sold but the value of the timber wasn't equal to the cost the value of the timber isn't equal to the cost but the cost isn't borne by the public because it's the timber purchaser that's bearing that cost so all timber sales are appraised at a certain value there can be minimum bids on timber sales you have to reach a minimum bid otherwise it won't be sold and so what happens with the money that results from the timber sale it depends on the kind of sale it is typical traditional timber sales that money goes just back into the treasury and it's utilized for any number of programs throughout the country some of it comes back to the forest service some of it would go to health and human services some of it would go to you name it there are other sales that are called stewardship sales or there are other ways that we can kind of keep some of the money that locally that comes out it's called the Knudsen van I'm going to call it KB can't say J help me out Knudsen van denberg Knudsen van denberg act there are senators from the 1950s that's why you can't remember and so it enables us to keep some of the receipts for us to do local work to do watershed restoration water protection soil protection some of them allow a little bit of like infrastructure work on roads and trails to restore roads and trails that are impacted by timber sale activities and then stewardship contracting is a goods for services exchange you harvest this timber and in exchange for you getting to harvest this timber and keep this timber rehabilitate this road we want you to you know do work like you do at the CCC camp hire a contractor to do large woody debris placement pay for this aquatic organism passage culvert it's even you never used to be able to do recreation oriented work with it but there's now some bills churning through congress that would allow a more expansive look at how you can use stewardship contracts stewardship receipts for it so it would allow you to use it for restoration infrastructure as well trails and bridges yeah we stay here on this forest and we would use it in this project area to do work they're also explaining that where we could use it outside the project area now if there's a specific need that's identified so what would be the minimum bid for this project it's whatever it's appraised at Timbersale I can't answer that it's appraised at by Gordon Feed or how would that appraise it by the value of the timber I'm not a timber appraiser I can't answer that question CCCF which I don't relate to they assign a value to it but there will be a minimum bid it depends on what that minimum bid might be it depends on the species too it really depends on the market if you're a farmer and do you add to that your cost for the project I mean I can't imagine what just a hundred and five pages and environmental impact statement and all the research must have cost do you have any idea what the project has cost so far just in the analysis we have entirely the cost we could take a ballpark I can't go to you now but we could sit down and put pencil in the paper and try to figure that out I mean just be ashamed to cut all the trees down and not at least make a monetary profit to me it's not all about monetary profit I mean there's a forest health component to this as well if we have all mature over mature old growth forest the diversity of the forest is very very low it fits only one suite of species that like that particular forest type and most species need early successional habitat they need mid successional habitat even species that occupy old forest research has found that they forage and feed in openings and early successional forests and they nest there so it's not only a monetary thing I mean yes you're right if it was costing us millions of dollars to put on a timber sale and you're getting nothing in return for it yeah there would be but there's a balance in ecological health as well that we're trying to achieve through forest management it's wildlife management recreation management there's other things that are at play other than the bottom the bottom line is that also including climate change yes we're we're looking at climate change very closely that you're going to in the final EA there's a new we've done some additional analysis on carbon that's going to be in the final EA that our researchers are coming out next week next yeah Jay and I are hoping to finish everything up by Wednesday of next week and then by the end of next week so you guys are working all weekend we're trying to finish it up we're trying to finish it up today and we both realize that we would have to work all weekend to be able to do so and neither of us really wanted to do that so we punted to next week I gave him the lead yeah he gave me the lead did that just for whatever it was where I found on page 48 of the of the old EA and this isn't going to change in the final one coming out next week but it does provide at least a cursory attempt of economic analysis from the timber portion of the project the cost of preparing the sales and expected amount of receipts but it's again very cursory because we don't know all the specific details so it's general but because it's federal land you could never benefit from selling carbon sequestration by your acreage because your federal property you can't gain from that correct we couldn't be in a cap and trade system that's what you mean whereas with a private land owner putting 100 acre blocks together and then the nature and service team just had that big article that came out about that and it's a shame because that would be a great revenue stream but they can't build the federal property and we can still contribute to it we just can't get paid for it we own a ton of sulfur when they were selling the sulfur what did they call them the sulfur emission whatever yes we have a ton you bought a ton of sulfur does it smell does it smell well I'm glad to hear that there was further analysis done on the carbon sequestration and the release yeah there's more coming all the time is that research advances and it gets more fine tuned there's more coming out all the time yeah I'm not even going to pretend to understand it all but we had a couple of soil sorry carbon scientists research branch of the forest service I was at the office working with us they put together this pretty extensive peer-reviewed scientific literature based report on the carbon stock influx of the Green Mountain National Forest and what that means I specifically had that in mind is that public? yeah it'll be part of the record it'll be available it'll be available it'll be available once this is it'll be available next week because this document estimated that within seven years the carbon sequestration would be equivalent to what it is now which is beyond my ability to believe that carbon sequestration would be equivalent to my ability to believe that seven-year-old scrub can be sequestering the same as a mature tree but there's more of them well you're getting rid of some of the stuff that's going to die and give up more carbon than a sequestering anyway so you're balancing that forest health so that in seven years you're back to a point that you'll never achieve if you don't do anything right now if you do nothing you'll never get there yeah in your reference specifically the document that addressed it in relation to the prescribed fire on a pretty small portion of the project area and that's what our fuels ecologists put together as far as the amount of carbon emissions from that burning that's what that was about this what I'm talking about you gotta say that it would take seven years just to recoup the carbon released in the burning that's what that was specific to this addition to the analysis that we're talking about now talks about carbon carbon sink carbon source carbon influx influence of this project on that dynamic here on this forest from timber harvesting so you can look at that and see what you think when it comes out I'm just not a believer that when you cut down the tour tree and you lose all that carbon sequestration that that tree is doing every day well during the leaf season every moving that times thousands that you're not contributing to climate change by leaving all that carbon in the atmosphere that otherwise would have been sucked out that's what the report's about right this is new stuff that you guys have been working with because we're at a crucial point and everybody's sweating in here I'm sweating in here we gotta start deciding exactly how to manage this would relate it to this issue everything could change safe to assume that a healthy forest would take care of more carbon than what we presently have I'm saying like six, seven, eight years down the road I mean this is to improve the forest the thing and all that I mean it would seem that you're getting a better standard timber that would be capable of getting more carbon out of the scientists are going to be letting this in on right oh I mean that's what they're in the process of figuring out based on what I've read that's a true thing that you're healthier more resilient forest you have to kind of be taking more carbon out of the atmosphere what's storing it is a stock that you're mature forest once the region's state of maturity is done it's not really taking much more of that I don't think it has anything to do with growing each one of those leaves on that mature tree no matter how mature it is rip it as a tree matures it then like all of us do it starts to senesce a little bit, branches die you lose some of that crown you lose some of the bigger that it has at that point it's not mature healthy robust teenager might be doing that's what the research is going to tell us I understand your question we can debate and talk about it for the rest of the evening hold your thoughts if there's something in that report that just doesn't sit well with you you know I'm sure we'll hear from you but the point is there's a lot of research that substantiates what's in the report so dive in I'm going to look at that and I'm going to go through it see what you think come as one of those things where you want those questions to look at it'll be part of the final review it'll be online so what's that part called not analysis but what's the next step so you have on your Robinson project scoping analysis we'll release the final EA so what the final EA means it's all the we've taken into consideration all the comments that were received on the draft either preliminary EA we've looked at those we'll respond to those comments and we put out the final EA it will look something like this there will be maybe small changes to this based on the comments that were received and then what we're just talking about is the big change that will be in it relates to the carbon and then the draft decision so the final decision but in a draft form unsigned we'll go out accompanying it okay and then that will go out for a 45 day objection period and then once that 45 day objection period passes if there are objections then we will go there will be a 45 day objection period and an objection team separate from this office floor service specialist probably in our regional office in Milwaukee will review it and provide feedback to Chris as the responsible official on what may or may not need to be addressed it's a 45 day review process and then Chris to say just for sake of argument there's issues that need to be addressed because of the objection or objections then Chris would have to have his through source team address those final rendering of the environmental assessment before he can sign a decision and then we can probably comment in your hand process but other publics individuals can be involved in that objection process and that's the difference between the appeals process and the objection process which you were talking about before and the appeals process there was no involvement it was like that hard wall you appealed okay now you're the appealer on the floor service we're not going to talk we're going to have separate things we're not going to deal somebody else would with the objections process we can talk we can work together we can bounce things back and forth we can make small changes we can make changes to the decision based on what we find out and then at the end of that if there are no objections then the decision would be signed and we'd be final and we'd work on the implementation plan to start implementing some of the things we need to wait for funding depends on what some things we need to wait for funding or special use permits things like that we would just go ahead and start to issue those it's not really low hanging fruit but the low hanging fruit and then some of the things will certainly take longer the repeater sites some of the trail work would take longer because we'd be looking for funding and then anything that would need further that's conceptual like the trails some of the other things we talked about today they're in the decision what we want to do within a sphere of influence where we want to do it but they need to be ground truth that would happen prior to any implementation so you get archaeologists, botanists soil scientists, whoever out on the ground wildlife biologists to check those areas before it got implemented even once we had funding at least as far as the archaeologists go that means then you have that consultation that means then you're subtracting area out of the sale I wasn't talking about the sale area Eric I'm sorry in that context that I was thinking more about the trail like the recreation they need to get out on the ground and like truth exactly where the trail is going the timber things that will have to be worked out before it goes to contracting before it goes out you would have to have all the archae sites reserved out well you said you weren't going to work this weekend you're not working this weekend right now great thank you thank you very much so there are the ladies who came in late I think there's four of you if you wouldn't mind coming over here just writing your name down so we know who is here tonight that would be very helpful you need help putting chairs back together no