Dragon Run Steering Committee Special Area Management Plan Planning Forum January 9, 2002
- Topics -
1. Welcome	Chairman	Steering Committee
2. Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) project director	Dave Fuss	MPPDC
3. Introductions	Forum Participants	Stakeholders
4. Visions for the Dragon Run Watershed	Forum Participants	Stakeholders
5. Issues from 1^st Planning Forum	Forum Participants	Stakeholders
6. New Issues	Forum Participants	Stakeholders
7. Invitation to Participate in SAMP Advisory Group	Dave Fuss	MPPDC
8. Next Meeting – February 13, 2002?	Dave Fuss	MPPDC
Minutes

Welcome

Vice-chairwoman Dorothy Miller welcomed all participants to the Special Area Management Plan Planning Forum on January 9, 2002 at the Middle Peninsula Planning District Offices in Saluda, Virginia. Attendees included: David Birdsall, Mike Anderberg, John Munger, Patricia Tyrrell, Marv Hohenberger, David Clements, Davis Rhodes, Cathy Wilson, Robert Major, Elvin Miller, Neal Barber, Anne Ducey-Ortiz, Willy Reay, Andy Lacatell, Rebecca Wilson, Garrie Rouse, Jerry Horner, and David Fuss.

Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) project director

David Fuss introduced himself to the group and explained the reasoning for the planning forum and its sponsorship by the Dragon Run Steering Committee. Dragon Run Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) Fact Sheets were distributed to explain the concept of the SAMP planning process.

Introductions

Participants were given an opportunity to introduce themselves and to share visions for the watershed and issues of concern.

Issues from the First Planning Forum

A list of issues from the planning forum on December 12, 2001 was displayed and used as a guide for discussion. David Fuss reviewed this list and opened the floor for discussion. A summary of issues discussed follows:

Habitat/Wildlife Management

• Preserve Dragon Run’s condition/species
• Hunting and fishing
• Water quality deterioration
• Anadromous fish populations

Farming and Forestry

• Open space preservation – traditional uses
• Economic/Tax forces – fragmenting working farms and forests
• Watershed focus – past focus mainly on stream itself
• BMP’s

Development

• Tools – zoning, subdivision, BMP’s
• Cumulative impacts
• Landowner rights
• Land use changes affect tax revenues/public services
• Sewage disposal
• Conservation easements

Access

• Fear of “loving the Dragon to death”
• More public access – paddling
• Education programs – organized/supervised

New Issues

During the open discussion, new issues were discussed. A summary of those viewpoints follows:

Education and Public Access

• Educate public about unique resources
• Education to change how watershed is perceived
• Landowner education about land management options – easements, inheritance tax issues, etc.
• Personal experience with Dragon – Boards of Supervisors
• Citizen education – example of Bay Journal
• Land-based Dragon experience/opportunity
• Personal ownership/connection to Dragon
• Education vs. publicity – how much is too much
• Carrying capacity of access/recreation
• Future ecotourism pressure
• Educate young people about value of Dragon resources
• Provide access so that citizens can see what is happening in watershed (e.g. shad decline)

Local Government and Policy

• Comprehensive plan/ordinance consistency across watershed
• Consensus building – governmental bodies
• SWAMP program as model (Chesapeake/Va. Beach)
• Bay Program as model (Bay states)
• Landowner rights/independence
• Carrying capacity of development
• Population change agents – Retirement? Families with school-age kids?
• Tax revenues change with land use changes
• Could SAMP activity drive/accelerate activities that are trying to be prevented?
• Role of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act
• Disclosure of property development limitations – old vs. new landowners
• Uncertainty about lawmaking process at local government level
• Industrial development along US 17 corridor

Habitat Management

• Essential wildness/sense of wilderness – cumulative impacts
• Assessment of Dragon health – changes over time
• State agency participation – information/data
• Natural area preserve in Dragon – voluntary private or public land program
• Assessment of success of BMP’s for forestry and agriculture
• Certification program for loggers through Dept. of Forestry
• GIS information/data from forestry

Invitation to Participate in SAMP Advisory Group

David Fuss explained the next steps for the SAMP process and invited participants to express their interest in participating in an advisory role. Mr. Neal Barber suggested that the hierarchical approach (Advisory Group to Dragon Run Steering Committee to Middle Peninsula Planning District Commission) could limit the ability of organizations to achieve early successes and complete early action plans. Ms. Anne Ducey-Ortiz suggested the formation of sub-groups to address specific issues and that these sub-groups could identify early action plans to be pursued while the hierarchical approach operates simultaneously.

Adjourn

David Fuss agreed to consider all of the ideas and form an Advisory Group and sub-groups. He indicated that he would contact interested parties to inform them of future meetings. The meeting was adjourned.