Hello and welcome to this special meeting of the Ammeris Conservation Commission on July 30th, 2025. The time is 7:03. So this special meeting is being held to specifically address the uh topic of hunting on conservation
lands um specifically the document put forth by the um land use subcommittee. So it was determined previously by the commission that the topic warranted additional discussion. And so now we are we are convening to review and discuss the recommendations put forth by the
land use subcommittee um suggesting alternatives to the current policy. Um so purview here is town conservation lands excluding DPW lands and other town lands. So uh conservation lands only. So
before we go into that I'm going to first acknowledge some comments regarding the open meeting law. Um, I've had conversations with town staff and initiated some guidance and discussions about that. Um, and some further guidance will be sought from the AG. So,
this topic was not posted on our public agenda and we will not discuss it tonight. Um, we'll just also just need more information from the town and AG before we can have a productive conversation. So, no further comments about this tonight and we'll move it to
a future agenda where it can be posted. um with in a timely manner. Um so focusing tonight on the subcommittee's proposal on hunting and I'm going to our format's going to be um word from
Alex the land use subcommittee chair on the proposal. Andre has requested time in the agenda for the 20 to 30 minute presentation. We'll go to public comment, then commissioner discussion, and we will end no later than nine, taking stock at some point about what we'll need for any kind of
next steps towards moving towards vote. So, I will hand it over now to Alex, subcommittee chair. Thank you. I'm going to ask Erin if she would bring up a PowerPoint that I sent
to her and I have it here, but I am not keen on sharing. I It would be a lot easier if she did it. And this is um this is I'll just I don't think I can activate the slides, but if you want to
go into power um presentation mode, that would be great. So I think I have um I don't I didn't count the slides. I think there's 10 or 12. So, we produced a document and um I want
to just give a an overview of that document and it um um it'll take I don't know how long it'll take me. I've I've I've learned it as I made this PowerPoint, but I didn't time myself. So, I'll try to be brief.
Aaron, can you go to next slide, please? Yeah. Yeah. Erin, can you put it in presenter mode? You're in presentation mode. You're in presenter mode right now. You may have to if you go to
I think I think the command is I think the command is power is presentation or slideshow or something like that. Yeah. I mean that's usually the one I think it's the one to the right of where you are. Aaron, hold on Aaron. This is
Click on that one. Yeah, that's what I just did. Yep. Go up to the top where it says display settings. Do you have two monitors? I do swap presenter view and slide view. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Jason. I'm glad I'm not doing
this. I do a lot of PowerPoints. Okay. So, um I will give the slides and try to try to I'm I am assuming that commissioners have read the document we're talking
about. So I'm not going to try and uh review all of it. I will it's um so what I want to start by just with this graph of Ammeris population growth from 1940 to 1920.
So it was a little bit of a town back in 1940. The university grew a great deal and with that its population growth, it grew. its housing density grew and that's a whole wetlands issue I'm not going to go into but the important thing
here is that when we get to number of trails and acres and all that kind of stuff we have had increasing use of conservation land pretty steadily from the 1960s up to the now and it continues to
increase. So we don't have trail monitors on our trails to know how much use we have. And this slide is the best representation I can give you of um um
uh increasing use of of by its citizens and others who come to Amorest of our trails and our conservation land. We are well known for that land. Next please. So these as I said these numbers are
from memory and they may be not quite right but they give you an idea. So the conservation department maintains about 140 mi of trails. They provide parking and access to those trails. There's about 3,200 I think that number is low
uh acres of conservation land that the department has consciously put together over years. The Department of Public Works, which we're not going to talk about tonight, but they have also a lot of land. They have about 3,000 acres of water
supply land which is open to hunting and um it does not provide parking consciously and it does not as a mission maintain trails. So the DPW uh is is not as forward as the
conservation department in inviting use. Therefore, conservation land has a denser use than DPW land. Next, by the way, if uh if folks have questions or I'm not clear about
something, just raise your hand, please. So on December 3, 2024, the subcommittee presented uh all the rules and regulations that it has revised for use of conservation land to
the commission and the commission approved them all except for hunting. And those rules included agriculture, forestry, um um camping, bicycling, horses, you
name it. Every use on conservation land, we spent uh over a year going through it. And I think personally before that committee was set up, I spent two years. So, a lot of time was spent going through it. And we took care with every
single one. And as we were done with them, we brought them to the commission for approval. And we always gave about two weeks notice uh or we tried to give two weeks notice for the commission to read over every rule we were bringing to
them. So then it came for a vote. They had had opportunity to comment, raise questions and get them resolved. and that we were really dedicated to that from the September through the end of our commission through the end of our charter. Thank
you. Next. So, what's the current status of hunting? State law says that unless prohibited, hunting is allowed in Massachusetts according to seasons and regulations set
by Mass Wildlife. That means that hunting can occur on all public and private land during periods set by mass wildlife, a state agency with jurisdiction in compliance with its published regulations. And I what I
didn't add again is unless prohibited. Next. Yeah, this one's a little out of order, but um I'll talk about it anyway. So prohibition, we usually think that of of you know
posting, no trespassing or no hunting signs, but the state legislature decided to prohibit the discharge of firearms, the carrying of loaded weapons within 500 ft of any occupied structure.
And that was mass general law chapter 269 section 12E. They called it a public safety law. And the map right here is of um Si
Simmons farm. And you can see the buffer uh in orange where it's it sticks out 500 ft from from every occupied dwelling or structure. That means it can be a hay
barn. It doesn't mean somebody lives there. It can be a tractor shed. It could be a woodshed. It could be a a a horse barn. The boundary of these 100 foot buffers get convoluted as a 100 foot buffer
reaches out from every occupied structure. So there is there is a very difficult outline to follow. And if you're in the woods, unless you're really dedicated with a GPS on your phone and strictly
paying attention, you would have a very difficult time knowing if you're crossing over a boundary of this public safety buffer. And when the legislature adopted this buffer, I don't I I didn't
look at the legislative history, but I doubt that they went to the effort of finding out how many accidents there were within 500 ft of an occupied structure due to a discharge of a firearm or um an arrow.
They simply acted in the public interest to create what they called a public safety buffer. And they certainly didn't go into what's the effect of not allowing uh the discharge of a firearm and
therefore hunting in those buffers. They did not go into, I'm sure, what the effect is on forests, ticks, uh automobile accidents, and all that kind of stuff. So, we followed the state's lead and we
took this 500 foot buffer, and I don't have the graph of it because I just I do, but I didn't put it in the slideshow, but we took the 500t buffer just for kicks and laid it on top of every trail and to see, well, how much is left? And
frankly, there wasn't much left. So, then that was a quandry. And I'll just leave it there. But this this buffer is really important because from an administrative standpoint, if you if you have hunting going on in Simmons Farm,
you have a heck of a law enforcement problem trying to figure out if somebody's in the buffer and therefore shouldn't be hunting, shouldn't be carrying a loaded firearm, shouldn't be discharging. Yeah, go ahead, Andre.
Uh, could you explain what the difficulty is? Yeah, I just tried to do that. The buffers are convoluted. One, every single structure has a different 500t buffer. It's not a straight line and they're not marked in the woods.
That's my answer. Okay, let let Yeah, let's just um focus on the presentation and we'll get into questions and discussion later. Alex, how many how much more time do you how many more slides just so I have a sense of till I get
till you get Can you just give me an estimate? I don't know how many slides there are. I'm almost I'm I'm rolling along. All right, please continue. Yeah. Can you advance the slide, please, Erin? Okay. No. Did you go to two?
So the the effect the rule in effect now is that hunting and fishing is permitted where not posted. And that's what it says in the in the rules codified for
conservation land if not posted. Next, the Ammeris website at the bottom says all other town conservation land areas or conservation areas is closed to hunting. And at the top it says hunting is only
permitted in the following. And it names them and it actually the link to each map. This is on the town website. So this is the town's way of saying where hunting has been allowed and where it's not. And there was great discussion in the subcommittee about the
administrative burden of posting. So we have a little bit of a conflict or question when the about whether or not the town has to post or whether it can simply put something on its website. And that's a discussion for the commission. Next, please.
This is a map of the land. uh that DPW manages and I said we're not going to talk much but it's just a map to show how concentrated it is essentially where it is. There's also land in Amoris which is in Belchuretown which is not shown but there's a big
blocks of Koh's land DPW land which is all open to hunting. Next please. So the decision the decision choices for the commission are pretty simple and it says in the document that the the
subcommittee doesn't have a position pro or con hunting and I think these alternatives show that the first choice is that the commission could make is to continue hunting on of all 23 species
that the state allows plus migratory birds on designated conserv ervation land. That would be what I'd call status quo. The next is to continue to allow hunting of deer, turkey, feeasant, grouse, and
rabbit, but not the other 18 species or migratory birds, and they include English sparrows, starings, skunks, raccoons, etc. The third choice is to not continue hunting at all on designated lands. So
there's really only three choices, two of which allow hunting. Next other decision choices which I called secondary and that is to post trails informing public that hunting is or is not allowed.
That doesn't occur now. And post trails advising users that they and their pets should wear hunter orange during hunting season. The state recommends it. And I spent a lot of time looking at what Mass Wildlife has to offer on that. And the
third um it's not the sixth one, sorry for the numbering, is to update the town website accordingly. Next, please. So, this is what this is in the the report. This map shows you the the
months of the year across the top. The number the species that are allowed to be hunted down the left and the black are the months and periods of months when hunting is allowed on concom land. So there's another slide which is more
complex that shows what weapons can be used. But this map shows you that there is hardly a day in the year when somebody can't be walk can there is I the law allows for somebody to be walking around in the woods on our
conservation land any time of the year with a weapon and shooting at wildlife that the state says it has a season on it. And you can see we got chipmunks, porcupines, skunks, starings, so on, weasels, so on. There's 23 species plus
migratory birds. Next, so this is the other choice. This is the compromised choice that preserves hunting of deer and feeasants, grouse, turkey, and rabbit. And when I talked with mass wildlife, these are the key
species that they think are most important for their clientele and the state depends on license sales for its income. And in particular, they like uh feeasants and Turkey because younger people can start there and they're
interested in growing their constituency. So, this is to me um a great compromise because it's it it allows hunting to continue for the most popular species, but eliminates um the
possibility of people wandering around the woods with firearms and plinking at at various things for which the seasons are open uh about any time of the year. So, it makes hunting much more predictable for the public. Next, please.
That's it, Michelle. And if there's any questions, I'm open for it. Thank you. Okay. Thanks, Alex. Thanks. I think we're gonna just move to the next presentation. And please hold comments or questions for the commissioner discussion. Andre,
you're muted. Andre, thank you. Um, so I understand you wanted 30 minutes. So if we can do quicker the more of a time we have for discussion. Um but I'll at 28 minutes I'll just give you a indication you have two left. Okay.
All right. Oh you you'll give me a two-minute warning. Yeah. All right. Um well I'm going to need to get uh figure out how to get uh my presentation on. So let's see. How do I uh how do I get to present
here? Do you see um a green share sort of at the bottom center of your Yeah. If you click on that um you should get to select what screen you're sharing. Okay.
Uh I think I did. Does it um Yep. You see it? You can see it. Yes. Okay. Let's let me pull up another item here real quick. There we go.
So, Andre, if you're sharing more than one document, you might need to unshare and then reshare and click on the new item just to give you a heads up. Sure. Uh, it's the PowerPoint that I'm looking to share. So, um, if everybody can see it, we'll we'll we'll continue. We'll we'll get started. Okay. I can see it.
You all can see it. Okay. Thank you. All right. Well, first uh I just wanted to make sure uh thank everybody for uh for coming to this uh meeting including the public. Um uh this is just uh in case folks are not
clear on it. Um the uh Ammeris Conservation Commission decided to uh form a subcommittee to go uh to revamp and review the regulations that have to do with uh conservation
land. uh they uh there was a three uh person subcommittee um put together and they worked uh tirelessly for a long time uh to try and revamp the uh uh the regulations. Um they did a wonderful
job. Um I just feel like the hunting um issue was not uh was not covered properly or fairly. And uh uh that's uh that's part of what I'm going to uh discuss uh for hunting. Um we're looking
for a healthy uh discussion here. And what I uh find to be important here is discussing facts. Um so let's see if I can move to my next There we go.
So um yeah, the reason why uh why we're uh here to uh to speak today is that the uh subcommittee um made proposals of different um uh different newly revamped
regulations. And one of the proposals that uh uh was set forth was uh to uh ban hunting on all conservation lands. In um December 4th of 2024, um the
subcommittee presented uh the full commission uh all of their reg their proposed regulations. One of the uh in where it came to uh hunting um the it essentially said uh hunting is
prohibited on all conservation lands. Um reversing uh uh decades of uh or beyond decades of uh tradition of people hunting on these lands and
reversing as well. um the uh stated um policies uh and philosophy uh of the town of Ammerst. Um we will be talking about all of those. Um
the uh again the uh after uh after the full commission um rejected the proposal to uh prohibit hunting, this subcommittee went back and eventually uh put together a uh uh
document called hunt uh called hunting on uh amorous conservation lands alternatives. um and uh it gave uh several alternatives. I think you've uh seen the uh condensed version of the alternatives
uh in the previous presentation. So I'm not going to bore you with with any more of that. Um a quick background uh for myself. Um you know we did talk about uh I think uh during the previous presentation you
heard uh some uh assumptions that uh law you know enforcement of wildlife laws in uh in certain areas would be a quandry and doesn't know and how how it's going to
it's going to be a heck of a time and so on. Well, I you know, with 30 years of experience in uh enforcing wildlife laws, I think that I could uh speak to that and I can say tell you that any game warden, anybody enforcing those
laws is going to know exactly what to do. Uh I'll say as well, um hunters, uh a good hunter is going to know where they are because they're going to know where uh where to find the game. They're going to be looking for the game. They're going to know where the homes are. They're going to be looking at
maps. and they will have GPS's. So, um just just FYI, um I uh was a special agent with the US Fish and Wildlife Service for 22 years. 20 uh 22 23 years. Um I was officer of the year
two times during that time. I've checked hundreds and hundreds of hunters. I've watched hundreds more that I never checked that never knew I ever uh watched them. I've conducted investigations into uh largecale
commercial uh operations uh poaching and so on. Uh so I do have some experience in uh in these matters. Not only that, I have a wildlife uh biology uh degree and I've worked in uh as a wildlife biologist.
Um and we're going to be talking uh uh here on a few different topics. Um, so we're going to be uh talking about the town's philosophy on hunting uh and Ammerst's rural character.
Uh, we're going to talk about how hunting was not prohibited in Ammerst conservation lands unlike what uh the website says. And we can I'm totally open to uh having that discussion at some point. Um
uh we're going to discuss the uh Amoris land use survey. Uh that uh was t that took place last year. It uh there was a discussion during that survey about um and there are some questions about
hunter uh about user satisfaction. Um and uh you're going to you might be shocked but uh safety was the least concern of uh anybody and dogs were the biggest. Um we're going to talk about uh the history of uh discussions uh within
the conservation commission and uh give a little background on where we started with all this. Uh I'm going to mention some state laws and safety measures that uh should uh give us a little bit of reassurance uh about uh what hunters have to go
through to uh in order to legally hunt. Uh they'll talk about a presentation by Dr. Martin Fen uh to the commission. Uh he is the state's um uh deer biologist
um deer and uh moose and um health biologist. Um he gave us a commission and I mean a uh presentation and um he made some very important points that were never included into into the uh
subcommittee's document that they uh shared with us. Um, I'll just speak a little bit about uh uh making of regulations. Um, and while I do this, I'll I'll let you all know that uh I have uh participated in uh putting
together federal regulations in commenting on federal regulations and I've put together uh um uh fine structures and so on with US attorney's offices and the judges in in uh Rhode Island and in uh Kansas. So um anyway
and then I'll uh conclude um when uh you know when you uh think about uh our town I mean just think about some of the things that uh that you like about the town. It's the the the wonderful uh
people here the the amount of uh uh brain power that's here. the uh uh the outdoors I mean the the the it's got a wonderful rural character. Now when you look at this um the conservation department website uh you can see uh
this slide that I uh that I'm presenting here um and it speaks about the uh uh about maintaining um uh and preserving Ammerst's uh rural character. Um,
the highlighted area, I'm just going to read it real quick. Protected land is essential in to Ammeris appearance, economy, and well-being. Conservation land helps maintain the town's rural character. Provides adequate land areas for traditional and modern forms of
outdoor recreation and protects important wildlife habitat for go both game and non-game species. Protected farmland provides a permanent base on which to present uh um traditional the last uh point here.
Traditional resource-based economic activities such as agriculture and forestry and traditional forms of recreation such as fishing and hunting continue to play major roles in Ammerst. The conservation commission and conservation department, that's us,
continue to help keep these traditions and their associated cultural practices viable by working closely with farmers and farmland, blah blah blah. I think it's pretty clear that the town espouses hunting and the
conservation commission uh is to do the same. the uh as uh as we were talking earlier uh in the previous presentation um the this is all from the uh uh town's website and uh the town website um also
included hunting regulations which was an informative uh which was very informative for everybody. Um, and it also uh kind of curiously uh mentions that interfering with legal hunting activity is against the law. I mean,
they go to the extent where um where the conservation department is making sure that people know that you can't uh uh you can't interfere with uh with hunting. I mean,
it's it should be clear that the uh that the town's position um is pro- hunting or at least it's not anti-hunting. It has the regulations that um
uh that we were talking about before, the 500 and 150 uh uh feet uh buffers from a uh uh residence or from a um uh elevated highway. Um
and a quick uh and then something about the Norweatic uh rail trail. it. There is nothing here and there's nothing in state law that ever uh that says anything or hints that uh there should be any buffers around a dirt trail.
Uh I'll argue that uh hunting has never been legally restricted in Ammerst. I mean although the town website does state that uh only uh eight or nine depending
on whether it's a current you know current or not uh version but certain it does say like uh we saw in the previous presentation that uh only certain amount of uh uh conservation areas are open and the rest are uh are all closed. Um there
is there has been no legal process uh at all to close these. Um as far as I can tell uh somebody decided to just post that on the uh on the town's website uh without uh being authorized to do so. Um
I I would like to see otherwise and and if that's if it has been done otherwise then then that's fine. But um uh I think this is an assumption. So, uh we're we're starting from uh from a a different kind of an we're not
starting from the an assumption of something that is actually true. Um there's no area that's uh where it's illegal other than these uh deeds. Um so during the uh subcommittee's meetings
they did find out that uh two of the places uh two of the conservation areas um that had been listed as uh being open uh have deed restrictions uh and uh Atkins Flats and Eastman Brook. Um half
of Atkins Flats or a portion of Atkins Flats is deeded to be closed and apparently Eastman Brook is as well. Um that's I have no no argument against that. Um so uh let me just I'm just going to
back up a little bit. Um the when we all received um or when the uh subcommittee issued their um uh alternatives document um there was uh there were statements made
in that document that said that we have no way to find out to figure out how people how uh to figure out user satisfaction uh for non-hunters. uh on conservation lands, but it's not true. I
mean, we have a a survey that the uh uh that the uh subcommittee had in their hands and used for uh some of their um some of their things to uh
such as uh dogs um dog regulations. And uh what we see here in this survey uh results that's in our uh that's right in front of us is that uh the main thing that uh folks are concerned about is
dogs and the least concern is safety. So if you take this survey and you this was a very extensive survey and uh following that there was some questions uh uh to explain uh what it is. I think the
question was um uh essentially comment on what uh what you think um uh problems are uh within uh or areas of concern. And there was one
comment about hunting and they were actually asking um whether hunting is allowed or not and uh stating that if it's not allowed uh in Brickyard uh that it needs to be properly posted so that hunters uh know that. Um there
Andrea Andre I have a point of clarification please. Uh yep in a minute. Um there was another comment um that uh where somebody stated that uh we need more land to hunt. Um this document wasn't available to the
subcommittee. Aaron was put it together and her deadline was end of December. She didn't make that and the subcommittee actually didn't have a copy to consider. Um
so that's an important distinction. Thank you. Fact is that the the subcommittee had that in their hands. Um uh this was uh this was uh published in May of the last year and um the publication of uh or the
creation of uh the alternatives document was finished April 1st of this year. So from May of last year to April 1st of this year, uh you had plenty of time to uh uh to incorporate uh comments and so
on into your discussion. Um I mean what we're doing here is we're supposed to be discussing uh all factors to bring in to to come up with an informed decision. We don't we're not here to cut out what we don't agree with. Um
so uh with that I'll move uh look uh and when you look at the satisfaction I just want you to see question one uh 93.6% of the uh uh folks were uh either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied.
Um and 79% of these people are daily uh daily or weekly users. So these are the folks who are out there most of the time. They're happy. they don't they don't they're not seeing hunting as an issue. Um so historically um
let me just come back to uh this here for a second. Um so uh the website uh that we have as we've discussed had uh allowed nine uh places
uh that could be hunted. Now back in 2022 uh the full commission got together to uh begin a process of uh uh reviewing the regulations. um we never finished and therefore uh that subcommittee was
uh formed. But the uh what's important to note is that uh the uh commission was looking to was looking to not change those uh those hunting regulations before. Once the subcommittee got
together, um they began to uh discuss hunting and came up with the uh the initial proposal uh December uh 4th of 2024 to prohibit hunting.
Um, and when uh that came up um I asked what the purpose is or what the justification for uh prohibiting it was and um I really wasn't getting much of an answer other than for safety. Uh so
that made it so that later um I had to go back and review all the subcommittee uh meetings where hunting was discussed. I spent loads and loads of time that you all had discussed it uh to try and
figure out what was dis what was the justification or the reasoning and how we've morphed from uh hunting will be uh permitted on all uh conservation lands to hunting will not will be prohibited on conservation
lands uh because I couldn't find uh I wasn't getting an explanation um and so on. So you'll see here uh that there were several um uh several different uh reasons uh
including our statement mission including uh safety uh or facts that it's uh anyway that it's prohibited. Um so um after uh the I'll state also that after
the um rejection of uh the prohibition um we did end up getting um uh the Massachusetts uh deer uh expert to come as I mentioned earlier and I'll be talking about that uh in one of the
future slides. Um I one of the things that I noticed during uh my review of uh of the subcommittee's meetings and uh during
and with some of the questions asked on in the full committee or full commission is that uh there's some need for uh for education. I think our uh most of us don't know um much about hunting. Um I
think we uh Alex has stated that he's a hunter as well. Um but I don't think we have a lot of uh folks who are experienced with it or know what folks what people do when
they're hunting. Uh but let me just start by giving a little bit of background on what uh what's necessary in order for somebody to hunt legally. First of all, um they have to go through background checks. They have to have a a
firearms identification uh card um document FID or they have to have a license to carry a firearm. Um don't need them for bows or muzzle loaders. Um, hunter education is a
course that uh all hunters need to uh complete. I had to complete it even back in um 1981 in New York because I was uh under 17. Um during these hunter education
courses, uh they learn uh to know their backgrounds. Uh they learn hunters learn uh about ballistics. They learn to um you know they learn uh a lot of different uh things that are important
that the state determines uh would make a more safe hunter out of these folks. Um bow uh bow hunters are also required to take a hunter education bow hunter education uh course as well. Um,
I'll just uh there's certain implements uh that are allowed. There are others that are not to uh to be used to hunt here uh in Massachusetts. Um the only uh uh rifle that's allowed in most uh during most of the time is a
22. Uh only during bear season um are they allowed to are folks uh bear hunters allowed to carry a more powerful rifle. So what that leaves is folks hunting with bows and shotguns. Um if you're not
familiar with what a shotgun does, it sends out a whole uh a bunch of uh pellets, tiny little round BB's that are smaller than the BB. The BB that we uh are all familiar with that goes into a BB gun is about a number four uh sized
um uh pellet if you go. But when you really consider it, we're talking about a uh most of what uh what bird hunters hunt with uh are going to be about a millimeter and a half. That would be about uh
maybe an eighth uh not even an about around an eighth of an inch or so. Um, deer hunters are going to shoot uh with typically um one slug, which is one uh one large projectile
uh that fits uh fits in the uh shotgun. Uh or they might be shooting if it's uh typically a lot closer up, uh they might shoot with uh um with several uh pellets
buckshot. Um, but uh I'll state that um uh the smaller uh BB's um they don't travel very far because they're um they're they don't have that much mass. Therefore, they don't have that much um
uh reach. Uh having been an agent and having been uh uh watched a lot of people hunting, I've been peppered by uh uh by shot many many many many times. Um, and it hasn't been uh it's hasn't
been an issue. I'm not asking folks to do that. They the hunters didn't know that I was there, but um what I can tell you is that the uh that they are not very dangerous at a distance. Alex, I would much rather you ask the
questions at the end. Uh but yeah, Alex, can you just hold off for the end and just they're not aware that I had my hand up. Oh, okay. Um, and just FYI, you're at uh six more minutes. I have uh I have a little more than that
to do, though. Um, so um so uh you have you have a set of implements. The state has determined that the way to keep people safe in uh in the state um is to uh not permit discharge of of firearms within 500 ft
of an occupied dwelling uh or a res or occupied building. Um and you can't discharge a firearm 150 ft from a roadway uh or over roadway. they have made, you know, this uh whole
idea of assigning uh these 500 foot buffers to trails um is it's frankly ridiculous. Um I'm sorry to put it that way, but it it's I don't see anywhere uh that that's that where that's drawn
from. you can walk anywhere in this state in any trail and there's no 500 foot buffer uh assigned to it. Um so just make that point. Um when it comes
to the proposal these alternatives uh proposal um I'm assuming that all of the subcommittee members are in agreement with everything that was written on that or am I incorrect about that? That's a question to the to to the three of you.
I mean, we can discuss that during the discussion, I think. Okay. Um All right. Well, uh so this is the um alternatives proposal. Uh there were no compelling arguments to prohibit hunting. I mean, when you when you make
a proposal like this uh that's so uh so far reaching and um a complete reversal of what the town's policies are, you need to really justify that you're uh uh justify the proposal to uh prohibit
hunting. And frankly, I haven't seen the justification. Um what I've seen is a whole lot of conjecture, a whole lot of assumptions. um assumptions such as such as what we
heard before, law enforcement is going to have a heck a heck of a time uh enforcing. How do you know? Um you you you know we need to be talking about that amongst each other so that we can uh each give what we know uh
or give you know provide our experience toward it. Um the tone and the arguments uh made are uh completely or they they just seem quite one-sided um to the extent to where um the author or
authors refer to hunters repeatedly as its instead of their and I mean I just I don't understand the uh the dehumanization of uh of your fellow
uh trail users. I mean, I'm out there on the trail uh on the trails probably five times a week. I use it all year round. I hunt on uh on conservation land uh
between and most pe almost nobody hunts on conservation land between um between the end of uh the season in uh December and um October. So that's somewhere that that's
a point we can uh we can begin to talk from. Um anyway uh you know the proposals uh the alternatives uh that we have seen have uh not really been uh they're just they
would all limit hunting. Um except uh if you're going to leave it as is. Um again there was no mention whatsoever of the uh the very good presentation that we all had from uh Dr. Martin uh uh Fen the deer
biologist. Um and really when you look at this um I think that uh what we really need is a little bit of education here not only for the commissioners but also for uh folks for anybody who's going to be uh offended or scared by seeing uh hunters
out on the trail. Now remember now during the hunting season um it's fall time. There are no leaves on the trees. You can see through the woods here. All right. I don't think I heard anybody mention that um before nor during the
subcommittee uh uh meetings. So uh and the now we go back to the population uh to the census uh where uh as you see here um
the uh the alternatives document uh talks uh uses language such as quote uh Ammerst having a exponential growth. Well, if you look at the the growth, uh you have about um 40 I think it's
somewhere around 40 4,000 people uh of growth between 1940 and 1980 or so. Look at what we But in in from the year 2000 uh or you can go all the way back to the
year 1990 uh to current date, we've only had a recruitment of 4,000 uh new people to this population. How can you make the argument that we're undergoing uh exponential growth when you have um you
when you yourself presented the data that uh that um contradicts this? I mean, anybody reading this can see that. Andre, we're at 30 minutes now. How much longer do you think you need?
Let me just uh take a look here. I have another 10 slides to go. I'll try to make it. Okay. I apologize for the uh for the time. Uh, I just find it important for um, you know, I think us, all of us as
commission members, we're all familiar with what we're talking about, but the public hasn't seen half of this stuff. So, I just want to make sure that everybody sees this. Um, now, uh, I'll
give a quick, uh, rundown on Dr. uh, Martin Fian's, um, uh, presentation. Um, essentially the higher the deer density, uh, the there's going to be a decrease in important native plants and insects
and there's going to be a degradation of the habitat. Um, and that negatively impacts, uh, birds and other animals. Uh, there you'll see increased invasives. Um, uh, the deer, uh, will browse, uh, they'll eat all they, you
know, whatever they can. Um uh now uh deer uh now as far as deer are concerned um we have some major issues with uh uh deer ticks here in this uh in this area.
Um right here in uh uh at UMass is a uh the New England Center of Excellence and Vectororn Diseases. uh I sent uh you can take ticks off of you and send them in and they'll tell you whether it has uh whether it's infected with Lyme disease
or not. What they have found in their um uh in their surveys around Amoris is that about 40 47% or so of the ticks are infected with uh uh with lime. Uh so the
large the uh more dense the population of deer in this area, the more uh ticks we're going to have, the more Lyme disease we'll have. I'll tell you that I've been treated uh 12 or more times for lime. Uh my daughter was just found
to have lime right now. We found out today. Um uh they uh Dr. Fen also mentioned um uh the current uh status of uh deer density in this
area. And uh what he he uh emphasized was a fact that um uh we're beyond um the 18 uh deer per square mile uh that is uh healthy for um
uh for this environment here. And um what happens in um in wildlife is that uh when populations begin to uh uh overpop populate that growth becomes
exponential if it's unchecked. Um and we do have uh at least one other wildlife biologist on our uh on our commission. Um uh this is a a list of the deer harvest in Ammerst. Um when you look at
uh these uh amounts um since um in the last several years, you could see that the uh uh deer harvest has uh increased quite a bit um in the Amorest area. Yet um the uh
recruitment of new hunters uh has decreased and in fact the amount of people engaging in hunting activities has decreased quite a bit. So what that tells you is uh one of the things it could tell you um I won't bet my life on it but uh one of the things that can uh
be an indicator of is this increasing population and more availability of uh uh of deer to the hunters. Um just another uh one of those warnings that Dr. Fen was uh was giving us.
Um Dr. Fen um noted the uh environment, you know, the environmental impact uh as we were talking before of uh of high uh deer
density. What he also noticed uh and mentioned was that Ammerst has a fairly high uh when he was in Ammerst, he could see the deer browse line uh as he's driving around where essentially the vegetation between the ground and where
a deer can reach has been uh wiped out because the deer eat the uh leaves and mostly the buds and that uh wipes out generations of uh uh of new new trees and so on.
Um, I'm going to uh skip past most of this, but if you all are uh if any of you are familiar with the uh issues that they've had in the Quabin, um Quabin did not allow hunting
for uh decades. And um they uh they ended up having to open uh the areas to hunting and in fact now uh encourage it uh even on uh places where uh uh where
fu uh where the public is not allowed to go like the Prescott Peninsula. Um they're doing everything they can to try and convince uh people to hunt uh and to take uh more females, more doze because that's how you can control the
populations. Uh they uh Dr. Fian presented a case uh study on Middleboro that closed hunting um on the conservation commission uh closed hunting on their properties and
uh eventually uh tried to uh went uh back on on things realizing that uh uh their deer getting overpopulated and then they had a really hard time finding folks to uh to actually hunt deer there.
Um Dr. Fian also spoke of uh what an important resource game is. Um and in case y'all any of you forgot um 11.4% of uh hunters would classify as uh food
insecure. Tell them they can't hunt in conservation lands and and uh how how fair do you figure that is? Um folks give away a lot a lot of uh meat. there's a lot of um community uh around
um hunting and I feel like uh and I think it's important to to to note that to note that there's a large population outside of uh you and me so to speak uh who depends on that. Um here's part of the impact of that
program. If you're familiar with uh um you know familiar with uh places uh food banks such as um uh the Nipmuck Land Project, uh Peekquog
Farm, Northampton Survival Center, um uh Franklin Food Pantry. I mean, these are all places that receive um that receive meat from hunters. um and who uh who depend on that. This is, you know,
so hunting doesn't just isn't just a bunch of folks out there with gods. Um Dr. Fen also uh mentioned vehicle uh deer car collisions and um what you have
here is uh an indication of uh how many uh car collisions there were in 2024 and you've got uh 22 in Ammerst. Imagine that, right? Uh so every time
that uh so the I think it's the um insurance some uh some insurance information institute uh put out that every uh vehicle animal collision uh averages out to be about $10,000 of
damage. I can tell you a guy a kid who was about 22 years old got into uh he killed a deer right in front of my house. His truck was totaled. how you know uh a a professional woman who was driving
through uh hit a deer uh in front of the house also and we looked all over to try and find uh find uh the uh the deer after that. This is happening on a regular basis throughout Ammerst. It's also a safety concern. You know, people
can get hurt. Um these uh this information by the way uh was available to the uh uh subcommittee members um by going to DOT, the Department of Transportation
um and uh finding it there. Alex can probably find it on his phone right now as he's texting. So a quick a quick blurb on um on regulations. I mean uh what's the reasons for regulations? Uh I mean the
you you you come up with regulations uh to address problems and find solutions to them. Uh what I could say is that the uh alternatives document uh didn't expose problems. the the I mean the the
main actually it did expose a problem. The problem that I can see is that there's an education issue. Um there's a discussion issue. We need to be talking about these things. Um so uh I didn't you know I I didn't see reasons why it was necessary to make
these uh these rules. So uh as I was saying before the you know I couldn't find uh I couldn't get reasons from uh the subcommittee other than uh for proposing um curtailing hunting other
than safety. So when I went back through uh all of these meetings, what I found was uh four different things, four different topics. Safety, uh the statement that um
hunting doesn't uh is doesn't go along with or is in contravention to uh the uh mission statement of the conservation commission. uh that user sensitivity or satisfaction needs to be um uh taken
into account or that some folks would be um would have issues with uh hunting. I think the word used in the document was some people abhore hunting. Um when it came to safety um there's no
hunting no hunting related deaths. Uh it's highly regulated. The hunting is highly regulated by uh by the state. Um and uh we haven't had any issues. Um, as far as the mission, uh, statement, um,
we have a mission, let me see if I could, I don't think I need to find it, but the mission statement that was pointed to, um, pointed out, uh, essentially is that the commission is to uh, uh, protect the environment and the
wildlife on it. I don't think it specifies wildlife, but when that came up, uh two of the members of the uh sub commmittee um or one of the members of the subcommittee and another uh uh
person in the meeting uh mentioned to uh to the chairperson um well look uh uh when you know uh hunting is used to um what would you say to people who say
that hunting is used as a uh viable form of uh wildlife management and that it uh I think the words were uh that it helps uh uh helps uh forest uh
health. I think whatever it was the answer uh by the chair was I don't believe any of that. And this is after having said several times that uh um that that he's a trained wildlife biologist and one of the other people in the
meeting called him an expert. Go ahead, Bruce. I can't hear you. I just I I want to make sure there's time for questions and Michelle has asked that we wrap it up. So, please do.
Uh I'll wrap it up uh as soon as I can. Bruce, thank you. Okay, we are eating into discussion and public comment time, Andre. So, if you can wrap it up, that'd be great. Uh, I will. I'm going to wrap it up as soon as I can here. Um, so just to come back to that, um, as far
as user sensitivity and satisfaction, all we need to do is look at the use uh the land use survey. And when it comes to uh folks who have different philosophies, education discussion and maybe not everybody can be satisfied. I really
don't know. uh as far as uh the possible outcomes um from this discussion and this is my last slide by the way just so you all know um
is uh you know we've discussed uh we've seen uh issues of safety and so on um I think uh personal philosophy is real uh you know you can't tell people to think differently. I know there are a lot of
folks who are against hunting and uh we have to accept the fact that uh folks are for and against. I don't you know but maybe uh some education or some uh uh conversations uh that um promote
understanding, respect uh are important. Um, and I completely agree with the um the part in um the alternatives document where um
where it says uh suggests uh or in one of the other documents suggesting that uh uh as far as dogs are concerned, people need to be educated. I think it's on all of the items that we uh uh that we cover. Um, I appreciate your all uh
your patience. I apologize for taking um longer than I expected, but I hope that uh this uh filled you all in as much as possible. Um I'll stop sharing and we can come back to uh to
our regular meeting. Thanks again. Okay. Thanks, Andre. So, we're going to move now to public comment. So, if there is any comment, please raise your hand. And we're going to keep this to 2 minutes per person. Okay. Going once for public comment. All right. Um
I see somebody. Ellen, please go ahead. Hi, can you hear me? Yep. Great. Um, thank you all for the opportunity to provide a public comment. Um, my name is Ellen Jedriera. I'm a resident of South
Ammerst and I'm writing to well, I wrote this as a letter. I did not submit it before the period, but um, I want to urge the commission not to limit hunting on its conservation lands. And there are many sound scientifically based reasons not to limit hunting, especially in
Ammerst. And I'm speaking to you not as a hunter myself, but as a conservationist, as a wildlife biologist, and someone who cares deeply about our natural world and our impact upon it. Um, when you limit hunting or eliminate it, it really takes away our
only tool to effectively manage um, particularly our deer populations. That's the only one we have. Deer have no natural predators left here in Massachusetts. We eliminated wolves and mountain lions in uh the mid 1800s. And
aside from the occasional coyote, it's really humans or vehicles that are the only predator of whitetail deer. Um but while the numbers of hunters are declining in Massachusetts, deer density is rising. um especially out here in
western Mass without predators, it's pretty well documented that deer will overbrowse their habitat, reduce biodiversity, um reduce the number of native plants, insects and birds and invasives and exotics will increase. Um and while
growing to high densities, deer will spread ticks, especially the blacklegged tick, which carries lime and a number of other tickborn illnesses. And the rates of lime only continue to increase out here. And I've known countless friends and biologists who have been who have
tested positive for lime and other illnesses like anoplasmosis, besiosis, all of which can be life-threatening or lifealtering and even life-threatening. When deer density increases, Lyme disease increases. There's a direct
correlation. taking away hunting, there will be an increase in in tick density and and Lyme disease. Um, deer car collisions have also increased AC in Ammerst over the past 20
years on my own road, which is Bay Road. I've personally seen five deer hit um, in the past six years that we've lived here. And that's an underestimate because we know at least of at least two
that were hit and and got away. And the people in those accidents have been fortunate, but uh and they've been okay, but the possibility of a serious or fatal accident looms each fall in particular. When you take away hunting
as a management tool, the numbers of deer vehicle collisions are going to increase. Um and we have a high number each year. Um they have deer have an increased impact will have an increased impact on farms and crops. Um since
we've moved here, my partner has been asked to hunt at two different large farms that are important sources of food for people in and around our town because the deer are impacting local crops. So, I wonder if the commission has reached out to the farming community
to ask for their input around hunting restrictions in Ammerst. Um, I also think they're a really important food source for many families in Western Mass, um, including Ammerst and my own family. And for us, um, it
means reducing our need for buying beef from cattle each year, and that reduces our own family's climate impact. I'm really grateful to be able to obtain meat that was able to live in the wild, that grew here locally, that was harvested locally, processed locally.
Um, hunting is really a dying tradition, and it's a way of life that is going away. There's a lot of knowledge that's being lost with every hunter we lose. And I didn't grow up in the tradition of hunting and I really grew up in a world of processed food and grocery stores but
as an outdoor and animal lover. And for many years I was against hunting. And as I grew older and went through my education in wildlife biology and conservation, I began to understand a lot more about my own impacts on the
world I was living in and on the wildlife and wild areas that I loved so much. And by working with a number of hunters through various jobs and graduate work, I realized that hunting actually plays a critical role in our ability to maintain biodiversity here in
North America. The hunters I've worked with have been very well educated, conservation-minded, ethical people who really care about what they're doing. Every single one has been concerned with safety. And if they see you out in the woods, they're going to move away from you. They don't want
to be near members of the public, both for safety and because, you know, when I'm out there with my kids and we're making noise and we're in Blaze Orange, we're we're going to push the animals away. Um, Massachusetts has a really good safety record for hunters. Um, and
if you're worried about safety or worried that hunters aren't concerned for your welfare, I hope you can meet some hunters and learn from them as I have. I've there are a lot of really wonderful people. They're really the first
conservationists in this country and you may have more in common with them than you think. So, I appreciate you listening to my comments and uh have a good night. Thank you. Thanks, Ellen. Um is there any more public comment? I'm not seeing any other
hands. Okay, we'll move on to commissioner discussion. Um okay so just to put a frame around this we have um under discussion tonight the subcommittee's proposal which includes four
alternatives. We can of course consider alternatives to that. So the fourth and Alex please jump me in if I'm not characterizing these. Um oh I see another hand up.
Okay, I'll come back to this. Um, okay, last public comment and I'm going to keep you to two minutes. Go ahead, Jason. Jason, you're muted. Can uh can somebody tell him how to uh unmute him?
Can somebody please tell him how to unmute? I sent him a request to unmute which he just has to click. Hello. Yeah, we can hear you. Sorry about that. Um, but I'm just
wondering like so on the conservation trail, so I probably have roughly a mile of conservation trail that runs through my land. Would that be closing my land down to public hunting? Because if that's the case, I would I would like to
actually not have dogs on the trail cuz nobody follows the leash law. Um I guess it's we have four alternatives which would affect that in different ways. So um I guess stay tuned to the conversation. And do you know
which um property you about that you're talking about? Um pretty much the whole Brookfield Trails on my property. Brookfield. Okay. So you're saying you're in favor of hunting to control?
Abs. Absolutely. I mean just the the deer, they're always, you know, eating vegetation and doing stuff, you know. Okay. and something about having people keep their dogs on leash. Oh, it's a it's a big problem. I mean,
dogs are running in in hay fields and other stuff and you try to talk to people and like they don't they don't listen. Okay, I see. I've had dogs on my own property actually chase chase us on horses and
people are thinking that it's my fault. Okay. Thank you, Jason. We got you. All right. Okay. Um, back to commissioner discussion now. So, let's see. Um the alternatives presented
in the document from the subcommittee including um the status quo which is hunting of all species in accordance with citizens and regulations for the state on the current conservation areas where they are po posted on the website
as being allowed. So that would then also exclude those that were found to have a deed restriction for hunting. Um, okay. The second one is the same locations as previously stated,
but hunting restricted to deer, turkey, pheasant, and rabbit excluding other species. So, allowable for deer, turkey, feeasant, rabbit excluding other species, same um locations as currently allowed. three alternative one which is
hunting of all species um with the public safety buffers presented by Alex um and this yeah same locations as stated previously. Alternative two um
I guess I'm having trouble Alex distinguishing between two and one. Oh, two would be just hunting for deer, turkey, feeasant, and rabbit with the safety buffers. Five is hunting is not allowed on conservation land. So, those are options
before us. Um, I'd like commissioners to think about what information, additional information, if any, they need to make a decision or continue a productive conversation on this. Um, and obviously ask questions of those who have produced
information for tonight. So, hands up from commissioners, please. Michelle, can you restate what it is that you're asking us to raise our hands for? Well, we're continuing our discussion, so we need to know, are you ready to vote on this now? Do you need more
information to consider those five alternative scenarios proposed by the subcommittee which eventually is what we're going to vote on? So what is our stance on hunting? So basically that one through five that I just wrote but also
questions open discussion. So any of the above Bruce I'm curious for anyone who knows the answer. Um well looking just at the the land that the town owns in Ammerst
and private land where hunting is allowed. Not let the stuff we own in Belure Town and and other towns go to the side for now. But of all that land that is open for hunting now, what percentage of it approximately is on
conservation land? because as was stated there's a lot of open hunting land on DVW land and private land and so just curious what we're talking Dave did you have a number on that
could you repeat the qu oops I froze could you repeat the question Bruce all of the the land that it is currently open to hunting in Ammerst what percentage of it is on conservation land roughly I don't even think I can take a stab at
that Bruce because you know when we say what land is open to hunting you know there are thousands of acres a few thousand acres of farmland for instance each farmer decides whether that land is open to hunting or not and to what kind
of hunting. So I I think it's I wish I wish I had the answer but I just don't think I I can. Um, I will say that, you know, we have about 23 2400 acres of conservation land. Then we have about 2,000 acres of preserved APR farmland
that that's all private. Each one of those farmers can decide whether they want to open their land, and many do to hunting. What's the DPW number? That might have been on a previous slide. Yeah, I think it was around 3,000.
Somewhat comparable. And that's all open to hunting. Yeah. And you need to distinguish between what's in Ammeris, like you had uh to to your question, Bruce, what's how much of that is in Ammerst and how much is outside. U most of those numbers were in Ammerst,
but yeah. Yeah, they're typically watershed. Um Jason, I'm curious to hear from Dave as far as um one of the things that Andre brought up is that there seems to have been no formal
process to actually close conservation land to hunting other than those that are deed restricted when they were sold to the town. So can you give us Dave some background on how how it came that from what I see
like roughly onethird of conservation land is open for hunting now in those eight or nine situation uh eight or nine locations. How did that come to be? And then is that actually something that is true or is that just something that was
posted on the website? Yes. So, is that okay, Michelle? Yeah, please go ahead. So, great question. Um, first of all, this is, you know, this is very helpful, very informative. Um, um, you know, I'm just appreciating the
conversations we're having. Um uh I I I in I I initiated this process a few years ago uh through you planted a seed with you that we needed to take a look at all of our regulations top to
bottom um um rules and regulations. So here we are. The commission has essentially put forth a number of them that have been at least voted on. There still needs to be a public hearing on anything you do. There would need to be a public
hearing on everything you've already put forth separate from hunting. So, I just want to put that out to the public listening. Um, so here we are. I put forth this idea and what we we kind of said when when the subcommittee started was let's take a look at where we are
today. we'll take a look back and then but but we're not going to we're going to take a look back but we're going to focus on where we are today and looking forward. So what I can say about what is on the website and it's interesting um I
get almost no push back from hunters. I've been working in the town as the conservation director and and then other titles for 20 years. I get almost no push back from hunters about the current
areas that are huntable or not huntable uh for conservation land. So I just want to put that out there. We have not changed those in roughly 20 years that I've been with the town. They were carried over from previous commission
conversations and votes. I will say this is not a new topic for the Amoris Conservation Commission. Um, it has been talked about off and on through the 20 years I've been here. And before that there were extensive conversations and some very heated conversations about
what were areas that were accept acceptable to be hunted in Ammerst and those that weren't. So, and just to put it out there again for the public, we have conservation areas that are half an acre to 60 or 80 acres. And I think we
carried forward um um myself and staff, Aaron has been here for five or so years, but previous wetlands folks and other conservation staff, land managers simply carried forward um what was discussed and voted
on by previous commissions. We haven't changed that. I don't think we've changed it at all in the years I've been here because the commission really had no appetite for changing it. So, we didn't. It wasn't until I initiated this process and planted that seed with you
all and we formed the subcommittee a couple of years ago that we began to look at everything from community gardens as as Alex stated earlier, community gardens and and uh trails and horses and dogs and and motorized vehicles, etc. And the list goes on. So
that's kind of the short answer. Uh Jason is um not much has changed and there really hasn't been much push back from hunters and the public. You know uh as Andre stated there has hasn't been an overwhelming number of complaints. They
do come in to me every once in a while and the commission actually received I think there was one in 2024 but there haven't been an overwhelming number of complaints or concerns raised about hunting through the years but they do come in from time to time.
Jason I was just going to maybe also explain that the subcommittee did explore that if you're asking how are those sites determined. Um, we don't know for sure, but in looking at each of those sites, it seems to be that they're the bigger
sites that have kind of more core area and are not directly near housing area. So, it's that that seemed to be the line of reasoning, but there isn't any kind of document that we could refer to where they where they explain the determination.
So, are we um on the right side of the wall then by not allowing hunting on those? Oh, the ones that I listed are available for hunting. So, you mean not allowing the other I know. I understand the ones that are
available. That's not My question is not about the ones that are available. It's the ones that are not available to hunters and to hunting. Are we on the right side of the law by not allowing them? I mean, if we can't point to a document or some process that we went
through that changed our regulations and this is again just what from what Andre presented and what was in one of the other presentations stating the Massachusetts law says that
these lands should be open to hunting or must be open to hunting. I don't know what the exact wording was, but that's my concern. Is that it's unless posted, right? So, the challenge is posting. Dave, were you going to chime in on
that? Um, the authority of the town to set its rules for town owned lands. I mean, we're going to come back to this, but uh lands are open to hunting in Massachusetts unwise posted. So, there's a challenge there. um the miles and
miles of perimeter. I see has his hand up, but I would argue that the information on the website has been carried through for years and years um with with almost no change. Um particularly in this section and I I I
was looking at the section while while others were making presentations. We haven't adjusted that significantly in the years I've been here. So I would argue that yes, it is the commission is well within their jurisdiction, their legal uh rights to carry forth earlier
decisions of former conservation commissions. You are also within your rights to reconsider those today in 2025. So um that's I think where we are. I mean that applies to all the things that the subcommittee looked at, right?
dogs, dog regulations, um, motorized vehicles, etc., etc. So, that's the purpose, that was one of the purposes of the subcommittee. Andre, I don't think that uh and with all due respect uh Dave Dave uh I don't think
that Dave has answered uh the question posed uh which is um was there a legal process that we can point to where uh hunting was prohibited on all but those nine
those initial nine uh properties. And I can tell you that I've uh done uh as much of an exhaustive search as I could and I've found nothing nothing indicating that anybody uh in the past has prohibited hunting when you look at
all the documents. So well let let's just uh put a real quick rapid reverse. Um if somebody were to be caught hunting uh on one of the properties that's closed, how would you charge them?
What law would you refer to to charge them? I mean, you need to talk to your town. What did your town attorney tell you, Dave? What did I I haven't asked. So, I think you if you haven't talked to the town
attorney about this, what uh or if you have, tell us what the town attorney has mentioned about this subject? Because I I I'm curious, too. How do you charge somebody who who's violated a law that's never
been written? There is no law. It's not It's not illegal. Show Well, maybe we can think about this going forward and not what is in the past. So, what the subcommittee's charge was is to consider all of these and make a rule. So,
yeah. Yeah. I guess the interruption but but what I uh what where the subcommittee has started is by saying that only nine places are open to hunting
when in fact there's nothing saying that all those other places are closed. So why do we start on a false assumption? That's that's kind of where I'm going and I think that's aation we can talk about at some it's an interesting line of of
argument. I guess what I would suggest is that that same argument could be used for everything that we currently post on the website. So maybe every area is open to mountain bikes right now. Maybe, you know, community gardens can be placed
anywhere. So what what in I'm trying to get to in this age of technology many votes of committees, boards, etc. uh carry forth onto websites. So the way we communicate to the public tr
typically in in conservation and even recreation is what is on the website and what is on a sign or a kiosk or a way we reach people out in the field is a reflection of the rules and regulations.
For instance, dawn to dusk. We have carried forth that conservation areas are open in Ammeris dawn to dusk. And that's pretty typical in, you know, other towns and and municipalities. But how, you know, can I point to a vote
where a conservation commission said dawn to dusk? I can't. One of the reasons, you know, we maybe we can go back before the internet and before the web and look through hard copy files. Maybe we need to. I'm not interested,
nor do I have the time to do that. I would like to look forward and if we're going to look at all the conservation lands again, and maybe this is a good recommendation to make is we look at all the conservation areas again and say what is the rationale for any of them
whether they're 1 acre, 5 acres, or 80 acres to be open or closed. And that might be a a recommendation coming out of this discussion. Thanks, Dave. Um, I'm gonna go to Rachel because she hasn't spoken yet. Go ahead, Rachel.
Yeah. Um, I did have a question. Um, it seems like we're conflating hunting with carrying a firearm. And from the information that was presented, it sound like there are other activities that that do not in do not
use firearms. So, I feel like I'd like to understand if if this is something that we were going to prohibit or limit or restrict beyond what there is now. I would want to know more about what activities fall in the category of hunting that doesn't involve a loaded
far firearm because there may be activities that count as hunting that could happen within 500 ft of a house or 150 ft of a roadway and I would want to know more about that. um rather than
saying no hunting anywhere. Thanks, Rachel. Okay. Um yeah. Is is there an answer to that to address Rachel's? If I'm collecting uh if I'm out there with my kids and I want to collect some uh uh
some frogs or whatever, um you need a license for that. A fishing license for that. Uh still hunting. You're still hunting. Um, if uh you're uh hunting with a bow, uh it's not a 5 yard uh thing. It's a 300
uh foot. I mean, not 500 feet. It's 300 feet. Um although I think they just changed that uh to five. But there uh there are um you know there are ways to to hunt. you can hunt with a uh
uh with a um pellet gun and uh that's not considered a firearm. Um so there are uh there are activities um that uh don't fall within those um buffers to
homes and uh roads um that can be conducted um without violating those safety uh regulations. Okay. I think Andre or Jason, go ahead or Yep.
Yeah. No, I just I was going to kind of comment on our the previous question and the previous comment that I think that we ought to find out about the hunting and when when it was listed as not being permitted just
because I think it is a potential gray area uh if somebody were to be caught hunting on some land where it's supposedly not allowed. Um, but piggybacking off of what Rachel said,
are you allowed to trap? Can you trap for like fur on conservation land? Is I mean that's considered hunting, but you're not using a firearm, but also traps are pretty can be pretty nasty if a dog or a person were to step in them. So, is that
something that's allowed? I didn't see anything about Yeah, we we talked about trapping, but I can't remember what what the consensus was. Alex, are you is sorry, what? I don't remember either.
I can't Somebody said something. I can't hear it. I said I don't remember either. Oh, okay. Sorry. Um your audio is a little weird. Okay. Uh, so I guess we don't I thought Alex knew the answer to that, but maybe Andre does. So is tra is does trapping
fall under the hunting regulations or is it separately regulated? Uh, trapping have their has their own um set of regulations. Uh, so if uh they were to be dealt with, they'd be dealt with separately as well. But just so you
know, um, legold traps are banned in Massachusetts. So, you're not going to find uh legal leg hold traps. I mean, I've found a lot of uh you know, you can find people use them to uh to to kill um aven predators at times. They'll put a
trap on top of a a bird house or whatever that and uh certain beauty will uh uh certain generate of um birds will use those to hunt off of and they'll get caught in those traps. Anyway, no leg traps are not uh are not
permitted in the uh in the state. I think we should probably uh address uh trapping on conservation land uh as an issue at some point. It's already been addressed.
Yeah. Alex, could you just comment on that? How it's been addressed or how it was considered? Yeah, it's been already been adopted by the commission. trapping um is prohibited on on um conservation
land except during um except during I think it's beaver season you can trap beavers uh using cage traps but to use a lethal trap you need a special permit
and um um and also the pilt department can authorize um uh lethal traps uh in order to solve beaver problems
that that requires them to authorize that. But trapping is not hunting. It has its own set of rules. Okay, thank you. That seems like we have consensus on that. Um, okay. I think Bruce.
So, one thing we Sorry, Andre, I can't really tell. There's no rhyme reason to board. Yeah, go ahead. Andre, go ahead and then I'll follow. All right. Thanks, Bruce. Um so when it when it
comes to the uh these closed areas um that are that have not been um that nothing's been codified. Um you know we can make the argument that as a commission or as some commission 20
years ago might have decided something um that it's it's in some minutes somewhere or whatever. But when it uh but what we what law enforcement enforces is laws. And if there is no
law, there is no prohibition. It's as simple as that. Why did we put together uh bylaws? Well, because they're laws because we want to enforce them. So laws need to, you know, one of the issue, one of the things I didn't say during the presentation, laws need need to be
addressing a problem. They need to be understood and they need to be enforcable. So this law is not understood because nobody can look at the uh at the wording of the law. Remember that the wording of laws is the most important part of it.
Nobody can look at that. We can't enforce it. It doesn't exist. You can say on the website something, but you're never going to but it's not true. It's not It is not a law. And I would welcome uh finding it if it's there and and I
would certain and I think it's something we should all um uh we should all honor if it exists. But we haven't seen anything. So we can't start with the assumption that uh everything's
closed except for nine places. So and again this is I'm I'm saying this uh because our alternative options that we were given all start from that premise and my point that I that I'm trying to
bring up is that we can't start there. Thank you. Okay. I mean this is also a policy document and a regulation document. So not everything almost nothing really goes to the level of law. they are policies. Um, just to put some context
there. Okay, Bruce, very quickly to follow Rachel, um, one thing to remember which we did discuss is the complexity of some of the places where there are these buffers.
But in order to get to a place where hunting can uh uh be undertaken, a hunter has to walk through the no hunting areas. And so yes, there is a distinction between carrying the firearm and using it. And that was a
complication that was difficult to tease apart in our discussions. Thank you. Can I clarify one point on that? Okay. That uh the actual carrying of that firearm through that uh that property is
is is legal according to state laws. Yeah. I think if it's unloaded predict you. I'm just uh for those who don't know provided that it's unloaded. Yes, exactly. Dave,
yeah, a couple of quick followups. Um, one is normally when a member of the public is um done making their public comment, we move them back out to the audience. Is that possible, Aaron? Um, it's just pretty standard. Um yeah
um I think we we have multiple options here. Um we you know I'm interested in moving forward. You know we can do some research and and um look as far back as we can go. What we're talking about is
hard copy records. There may be a vote which would codify those areas. We can we can look. It's not as easy as some people might think because if it's not digitized
um going back into the 1980s or 1990s is real challenging from a hard copy standpoint. We could we could give it a look and I I I may do that um based on some some history I know. So I'm happy to do that. I'm more interested in
looking forward. Um, and maybe what we need is more of an analysis or a a look at, you know, at the parcels we currently own. And as Andre suggested, maybe starting from
scratch, if you will, starting from scratch and just saying what areas of the We have over 70 parcels of land in Ammerst. Oh, I think there more than that. or I said there's more than 70. Thank you um
for the clarification. Um but um what of of those should all of them be open to hunting? Should that half an acre on Middle Street or that or Puffer Pond or wherever? Um or do we need to
regulate those more than state law already does? I think that's a fair question. So maybe that's a way to go is to look forward and say, "Let's look at all these areas with trails and adjacent to schools and recreation areas and
houses and rail trails and all the rest of it and take a look. Um, and maybe we maybe the commission lands on state law is fine, but maybe the commission and it's well within your right to say no, we'd like to regulate it more than state
law and that's your prerogative. So, I think that's an option to move forward, too. I don't think I don't think we're going to conclude any I I suggest we we're likely not to conclude something tonight. And it doesn't appear that the commission is to vote on
something, but I don't you know, obviously I'm not a member of the commission. So, thank Yeah. And for everybody who's commenting, if there's something specific that is would be helpful for you to
come to um an opinion, then please express that. Um Andre, thanks again. Oh, Andre, I'm sorry. One other thing before it goes out of my head. I I forgot one thing. I will say that almost
all of our discussion tonight has been exclusively about deer hunting. So that is intriguing to me. I just think it's important for members of the public and for members of the commission to think beyond deer because what we really we've really been talking about deer hunting.
So there's lots of other kinds of hunting. Andre, you mentioned a couple or implements for hunting, but we haven't really focused much on other species. So most of the emphasis has been on deer hunting. Just an observation, Alex.
Yeah. Oh, sorry. Sorry, Andre. Thank you. Um, I couldn't agree more, uh, Dave. uh with the uh need to go through the different properties
again. If we don't find something that uh that if we don't find some uh proof that uh it that that the statement on the um website is correct, then yeah,
let's uh let's get to it and tackle uh tackle the issue with facts and um and with uh with an open mind. I mean, I think uh I think that's a a great point and I would do that any day. I'm I'm
willing to uh engage in those conversations. Thank you, Alex. Yeah, a couple of things. Um first of all, I did generate a slide and then Erin has it. Maybe she could
bring it up, but it has a simplified version of what our decision choices are. and they were 1, two, three, four. Two, two of them would leave deer alone and a bunch of other species. One is maintain status quo.
Um, so nothing all the comments about deer and what they cause. The first choice of status quo would mean deer hunting would stay the same. The second one uh would maintain hunting
of I think four or five species. So deer again would be hunted. Uh the third one would is the prohibition and then the fourth and fifth had to do with sort of secondary things about hunter orange and posting
signs. But so that slide is there if you want to bring it up in summary at the end. I I also wanted to point out that in the document itself there is a table and it is uh it lists all the implements that
are allowed per species and they run the gamut from handguns to rifles to shotguns etc. So, I went through all of Division of Wildlife's regulations and
painstakingly listed that in table I think it's two. So, um, and they do they do name air guns, for example, as being a legal implement for some critters. And there was another Oh, when we when
the subcommittee was working and we started looking at the effect of the 500 ft safety buffer that the legislature passed, Aaron generated some maps and um and I
think the Kestrel Trust already had some maps with that buffer on it. Simmons Farm, for example, was the first one I found. And the request was made to to Dave to
um look at all the conservation areas and whether or not they were affected by the conser by the 500t buffer. That never got done. That was a that was a just a staff staffing issue.
However, when I was talking with the manager of uh division of of fish and wildlife in Belchuretown, he told me that he has a statewide map of that buffer, that 500t buffer,
because people contact him and say, "What's going on here? Can I hunt there?" And he looks it up. He told me when I was talking with him that he would share that So there's a person who is willing to
look work with us on this buffer thing. So using w the division of wildlife's statewide buffer, we could look at every single parcel of conservation land and somehow like 150 parcels comes to mind.
I'm not sure about that. But there's some of them are so small that some of most of them or many of them would be in a 500 foot buffer and it wouldn't take much cooperating with uh Belchuretown to
use his his statewide buffer map to figure that out. That's not a big job and it would save Aaron or somebody else from having to do it for individual uh sites. And so that's all I wanted to say. Thanks, Alex. Jason.
Um, I'm ready to I'm ready to vote on something. I think that uh personally there was a lack of any real facts in the subcommittee's findings. It was mostly um beewings and
um the fact that we've had hunting on conservation land for as long as we have and there have been no incidences and there's you know Dave said one safety concern maybe maybe multiple but
very few. Um, certainly the time that I've been on the commission, I don't recall ever seeing a public comment or anything come in about safety and hunting. Um, again, we've seen way more about dogs. Um,
so I'm I'm I'm ready to make a vote on this. Now, I think that um a lot of the stuff that was presented is anecdotal that was presented by the subcommittee is anecdotal rather than factual.
Um so, I don't know. I I I don't know where everybody else stands, but as far as I'm concerned, I'm ready to vote. Thanks, Jason. I I want to mention something though which hasn't come up is
is what I don't think was well captured by the open space survey or has been discussed is the displacement of people from the trails during hunting or when they perceive to be uh not safe from hunting and it is anecdotal because
there hasn't been a focus survey for it and I know of a lot of people who have anecdotally told me that they don't go on the trails or they get off the trails when they hear or see hunters and and they're not the same people that have responded to the open space survey. So, one of our missions is to make the
trails available for public use, the enjoyment of all, which means balancing different uses. So, if there is a real ongoing displacement of people from the trails because they are afraid, that's something that we should know and consider. Um, there is a lot of public
use. There's more there's more houses along trails. There's more dogs on the trails. There's just more of a lot of things. And the point of the subcommittee was to reassess based on current conditions rather than the conditions of 20 years ago. And maybe the assessment is no change is needed,
but I still think that um making sure some of those voices are heard, which I don't think they have adequately been is important. And you know, to your point, we have had people call in and discuss safety concerns about people hunting on
conservation lands near their house. So, there has been um conversations about that. I think Bruce is next. I'm disincclined to vote on anything tonight. I would like to keep the status
quo until we do the several concrete research analysis things that were discussed near the end of the conversation. Thanks, Bruce, Dave. Yeah, I just wanted to say we we'd be happy to do some of that research and um
you know for a future meeting if that's the the direction the commission wants to go. I would be remiss and I think I have mentioned this and I think I mentioned it to the subcommittee and I don't have a date. To my knowledge there's only been one serious hunting related incident on conservation land
and that was actually at Amethyst Brook. I can get a date. I don't have it off the top of my head. Again, it predates me. It had to be in the 80s sometime, but that's the only one I know of. Um, so, um, I I was remiss in not mentioning that earlier, but that's the only one I
know of, but I believe it was the 80s. And I'll I'll try to get get the date on that if if, uh, folks want me to. So, thanks. Thanks, Dave. Um, can I just see a show of hands from commissioners who's ready to vote now? Okay, that's not enough. So, we'll
continue the conversation. Um, I think we queued up some additional lines of investigations regarding looking across all of conservation lands, right? Am I characterizing that? Um, and not basing
the proposals on the status quo necessarily. And I would love to see some kind of more focused survey or outreach to get a better understanding of public sentiment um and experiences.
Uh Rachel, yeah, I think if we're collecting more information, some other questions I have are um what what does it look like on our lands if the 150 foot buffer is applied? because as the state has laid laid it out for the roads that that's a
linear feature. Um, and that makes more sense to me than the 500 foot that was applied in in the original document. Um, I'd also like to see a chart of hump hunt hunting implements and their effective range. I don't I don't know when I look at a list. I'm I'm an
uneducated commissioner. I don't know how far um you know different different tools and implements might have and how they fit within that. And so I'm seeing for example deer can be uh hunted with three different types of implements and
how effective are those ranges are any of those something that could be safely used to manage deer populations on conservation land without that conflict. Uh the other question I have is um you know the perception perception of safety
and hunting um if there's a way to reach out to people who that we that you know or hear is it just what what is the triggering moment for them? Is it the scene of the of the weapon then or is it something
else? So, is it something where if the weapon was um in a bag or you know hidden from view on the trail, people would feel safer that it was stowed away. Um if there's anything like that that could be done or if it's if the
safety is more of an educational thing. I will say when I first moved here, there was a hunter on the trail that I was on with my dog and I was scared and I reached out to the town because I was not around hunters and the town was
really good and um telling me about the buffers and things like that. Um and once I understood those rules, I felt safer on the trail. So, I'm curious too about how much education and and um the visual nature of that encounter could be managed.
I think that's it. Thanks, Rachel. Andre, thanks, Michelle. Uh, my uh my comment was uh going back to Jason's proposal to uh or Jason saying that he's ready to
vote. I I think by not vote just by not voting, um what we're doing is we're maintaining the status quo until we find out some more information. Um, and at some point uh we'll get a
chance uh to vote, but I I think um but getting more information and having a uh a full discussion is a good idea. I'll leave it at that. Um Dave, um yeah, the only thing I wanted to add
is is just um I made note of some of the additional information. And I think what I heard from Michelle, one of your last comments was at least consideration of some sort of survey work. And so I I noted that in in my my notes here, and I want to talk to Aaron and some other
folks in in the planning department. So, let us think about that. But if that's something that the commission would like to see done to um because keep in mind the open space and recreation plan had some other focus points, but if that's
something that you'd like us to consider, we will. Um the other thing is I just want to be realistic about time uh uh both tonight but also in the future that you know it's Aaron and myself for the most part. So, um, we
will do the very best we can, but I think we need to pace ourselves in terms of when do we have another special meeting like this in September or October or when. So, doesn't have to be decided tonight, but we need to be a little realistic about staff time. I can
tell you right now from my meetings with Aaron in the last week, uh, the commission has a very full plate coming up for the next 45 to 60 days. We have a lot of applications and some pretty complex ones. So, I'm just putting that out there. We have an obligation to
applicants and and the public to move those those u those NOIs and and RDAs forward. So, this is in addition to all that work. So, we just need to be realistic. Thanks,
Alex. Yeah, one of my opening slides which was uh slide six gave the current status and um the concom hunting and fishing rule that's now in effect reads hunting
and fishing is permitted. We're not posted. Hunters and people fishing must be licensed and abide by all Massachusetts and federal fishing and hunting regulations. So for anybody who's wondering what the
current status is, that's it. Hunting and fishing rule is now in effect. Hunting and fishing is permitted. We're not posted and we don't have any posted land. So that would raise the question about the
eight that are on the or whatever the number is that are on the website where the town says that's where hunting is allowed and all others are prohibited. The current code is declares where posted.
So that's that's something for people to chew on. Bruce, I'd like to know whether it would be possible to keep this topic separate from everything else the subcommittee did
so that the things that have already been voted on can go to the hearing and get used. I absolutely agree. So, let's let's do that and everything else that's been voted on can move into a public meeting
hopefully in the fall depending on time constraints and we'll keep this as a ongoing discussion until it's resolved. Okay, Andre, thank you again. Um,
I I would be happy to meet with uh anyone who would like to um, for example, have a uh, demonstration of how far a bow goes um, or how they
operate, etc. I think that kind of thing would be educational and helpful. Um, Alex is a shooter. Uh he is a member of uh a local gun club as I am and he goes
he said he goes regularly. Um he and I could both go over there and meet with you uh uh folks if we want to talk firearms. Um but uh I in my backyard I have a uh I have a um some
a little mini range where I shoot my bow. Um, I own 8 and 1/2 acres. Um, and uh, I'd be I'd love to answer questions from anyone uh, about hunting. For example, I could tell you I could answer your questions, Rachel, offline if you'd
like on um on the distances, effective distances. So, anyway, thanks folks. Yeah, we did look at effective distances at the subcommittee. Jason, uh, I want to make sure. So, Alex, back
to what you said is that hunting is is permitted except where posted. I think we need to make sure that that def the definition of posted is that publicly viewable and does publicly
viewable now include the internet or is that literally at the land? It needs to be posted like on a tree on a kiosk in the front that says no hunting allowed, you know, that's we don't have to answer
it tonight and we don't but I would like to I'd like to comment if I could just jump in. I think it would be a good thing for Dave to get with his attorney and have a discussion about what it says on the website. All other areas are prohibited.
What it says in our regulations all all except we're posted what posted means and so I come back with some clarity. I I raised I specifically put it in the
present my presentation and brought it up again because of what it says and because it's in conflict or could be in conflict with what's on the website. And so there's needs to be some clarity there. I'm I'm I agree with you. And
that that that needs legal review. And what does that mean? And what does the town set itself up for? Um as Andre said, well, how do you how did you was it where's the law enforcement?
How do you what what's being enforced? So maybe Dave could come back with some clarity on that because none of us can do that. Yep. My uh my other comment is that can we can we get a list from everybody
of like the specific information you would like to enable you to make a decision on this so that we're not kicking this down the road even further each time. I think that needs to be talked about right now right here and not lists like
distributed to Aaron or each other. That's a complicated open meeting law constraint. So, I've asked several times and people have given feedback. Is there any other thing that people need to know? I mean, I have stated um I think
some more public interest. Um, I was a big fan of the 150 buffer. Like Rachel mentioned, that wasn't supported in the subcommittee, but I wouldn't mind revisiting that so that we can at least show that we've addressed a public
safety issue here and thought about it and deliberated on it and come to something where we've said we've we've assessed the public use. We've assessed how hunting has changed, how the use of the trails have changed, the population and the juxtaposition of people to the
trails have changed and we are confidently making this decision balancing all the recreational uses and public safety in mind. Okay, I'd love to wrap this up soon. Andre, uh I was going to comment on uh uh for
Jason. Um so Jason the like like um Alex was saying the state law says that hunting is open you know areas that are not posted are are uh open to hunting that comes from
uh the philosophy um from a certain philosophy of people coming from England where essentially all of New England um if you don't want your uh land po uh to be hunted, you have to post it. Everything
else is open. Now, it doesn't mean that you don't have to uh uh recognize and um adhere by the 500 ft uh buffer on homes and 150 on uh uh on roads and the 150 on
the rail trail. But um it it it does mean that if one wants to uh keep hunting out, they need to either post it or intervene the the people and tell them. I mean, the posting is what tells people
that you can't hunt there. So that's something the town can do uh as uh as we go along after uh I think after we resolve this issue. As for um what questions we have, um I
you know I understand uh the sensitivity to uh to sending emails and so on. Um but uh I don't think that sending an email with uh with a few things that we're going to discuss um in a meeting uh in a public
meeting is any kind of a violation. Um, we wouldn't I don't think that would complicate anything. We've been doing this by submitting comments to everything ever since I've been uh uh a commissioner. So, I don't think this is
that uh that much different if Okay. Well, I'll just mention that after my conversations with the town today, I think that's You just interrupted me. I'm sorry. If yeah, we'll take a if um if folks want
to talk about give ideas now, I'm I'm great, but I don't think that way. I can't just give you all my ideas uh right right here. I've got to think about them and put them in writing. So, just I'd appreciate some Okay, that's fair enough. Um but they
should be directed to Aaron. And what I was going to say is that after conversations with the town, it would be inappropriate for everybody to passing along a list of questions um to the commissioners per open meeting law, which is a discussion to be had at a different uh commissioner meeting.
Okay. I don't know who is next. Um Jason. Yeah. I just um I I really want to make it known like I object to the term like oh we've considered public safety issues
because right now there does not appear to be any public safety issue. You're you're you have perceived issues. You have people that have anecdotally said things, but as a commission, we have not
seen anything submitted to the town, any reports, any police reports, any reports to Dave or to the town that states that there was an issue. So, I do object to some of the language that's been used
talking about this as a public safety issue. This is a perceived public safety issue, not a public safety issue. And there is just a lot of anecdotal language in here. And if we're going to
do factf finding and collecting of facts, they need to actually be facts and not anecdotal. Um, so I just want to state that and let that be known. Okay. So let's call it perceived public safety. And I'm fine with that because the point is that people are feeling
displaced from the trails and that is feedback that I've gotten that others have gotten and we have gotten official complaints to the town. So we I agree terminology is important. Um but part of this is again balancing the
availability of the conservation lands for the public and that is what we're trying to do here. Rachel. Um, two two additional thoughts. One, back to the posting. Um, just want to say I had a client who had 20 acres of
land and was surprised by the state law. Um, because there were there were people that had hunted historically on the property and when they when the transfer of ownership happened, um, it's on the on the hunters. Hunters had the rights and so the owners, it was an educational
process for them to know that they had to post. And posting involves quite a bit of process. Every season you need to hang signs. They you need to be able to see the next sign so that it's clear where the where the boundary is that you're demarcating as posting. Um for
large areas of land that is that can be a very labor intensive effort. Um that involves hanging signs about eye height on on vertical structures. Um, so that can be a that can be another burden to the town uh to manage that posting for
signs that um that need to be posted on the land to comply with state law. Um, and other question I had um is more of like a format procedural question as we go forward collecting more information. Um
is this is it going to be more informal in discussion or are there more documents that are going to be written by the um by the subcommittee? You know, how how how is this going to be compiled um and and who is doing that compilation
is the question. That's a good question. The subcommittee is no longer um a thing. So it would be towards the town and whoever wants to volunteer to compile information. Alex,
yeah, I am um I just want to reflect on um I didn't go through my resume, but I just want to say that I have taught hunter education for about 15 years. I have graduate degrees in wildlife
science. I worked for the US Fish and Wildlife Service in the regulatory field for 38 years. Um, I am a wildlife biologist. Then just for the record, I put that out there. I also want to say that I
participate, and this is tangent a bit, but it is still germanine. I participate in Revolutionary War reenacting that involves carrying musketss, black powder in a public park, in a national
park. I experience the rigor of safety that the park requires when black powder is being used in and around the public. We have to line up and have our musketss
inspected. Um, it's a it's a whole process and I I every year and every time I'm in the park with a musket, I experience the requirements that the National Park
Service implements. They've never had an accident and they've never had an accident because they're careful. So that is that a perception of safety? No, it's a precaution of safety
and I experience that a lot. And so when I come to this issue, uh it's not perception and I kind of take offense to that. Um because my experience is in teaching 100 ed that's all about safety. It's
also about attitude and a bunch of other things. But um um safety is a is good government. Thank you, Dave. Oh, excuse me. Excuse me. I'd like to
set Sorry, Dave. I'd like to set a date for our next meeting very soon and adjourn. Sorry, Dave. No problem, Alex. Um, Michelle, I just want to mention I would prefer that if commission members had questions or
followup that they email me and not Aaron. Aaron's plate is very full with all the, you know, important things she does for applicants and and with upcoming applications and and process. So, on the hunting issue, if you have
follow-ups to this, give me a call or shoot me an email. Thanks, Dave. Andre, I just uh I I think it's really important for all of us uh while we're talking about uh
um folks who are uh afraid or who have uh been uh displaced uh by hunters. um is the proposal to displace all the hunters.
You're looking to displace a whole lot of people as well by saying they can't hunt. So let's have a little bit of equity here between them. Okay. But there's five different alternatives and only one of them is saying you can't hunt. So, but when you look at the document that
uh has produ been produced and the fact that the subcommittee started uh to with the proposal to uh shut down hunting um and the wording of the document uh that uh the subcommittee produced, it's all
coming from the point of view of uh the non-hunting users. I mean it's I don't I that's that's all that you can see in that document. So I'm asking you and I'm
asking all of us to consider everybody that when you're talking about some folks possibly being displaced or anecdotally uh being displaced or who have told you about that. Um, then you also need to think that you're turning your back or we are turning our backs a
town on a whole bunch of other people who uh who hunt here uh and use the trails year round. And they, you know, frankly, hunting only takes place for them in general between October and December.
And deer hunting with shotgun is two weeks a year. Two weeks. I'm done. Yes. Alex's Gant chart. um was useful in understanding the full range of different hunting for species across the
year, which you know when we narrow it down to deer, it's shorter, but otherwise there could be hunting all year round, right? Yeah. But as a followup, uh the uh almost nobody hunts and hunt goes out and hunts for uh chipmunks and uh other
stuff like that. the real uh hunting season when people actually go out there uh to uh get game that they're going to put in their fridge and all that stuff or freezer. That's October. Uh midocctober. Yeah.
Bruce, I move we adjourn. Rachel, did you want to chime in first? Yeah, I'm sorry to continue the conversation. I I just want to the reason why I asked about the documentation and how we're going to manage that going forward. Um
we have a responsibility as a commission to really try to represent the facts um in a scientific manner. Um, I know we've collected a lot of really good information and it sounds like we're going to get some really good information going forward, but I am
concerned about any document going forward that uses inflammatory adjectives or adverbs that might um that someone from one side or the other might perceive as disenfranchisement. And so
I just would like to advocate for um the next version of anything that is on this topic sticks to the facts um and uses really clear language and it's okay to have differing viewpoints. It's okay
to have, you know, different documentation, but um as simple as the language can be without without the without jumping to a conclusion or or or saying something's not worth pursuing or
you know that kind of that kind of language I think distracts from the content of looking clearly at the argument. And so that was that's something that I'm looking for as a commissioner is to see pro hunting um or or you know the different sides of the
argument so clearly and and I get um it's hard it's harder to see that um with with with sort of that personal um language that's been applied. Thank you Rachel.
I'll second motion on the motion. Bruce on the motion. Jason on the second for adjournment. Rachel I Bruce I Jason I Andre hi Alex. I'm disappointed that we're voting
before we have a date for our next meeting. Yeah, I realize that I did that. Um well, we can let's address this some other time. Yeah, I think we need to take maybe we could add this to an agenda because
I I don't know what the outlook is for the next 60 days as Dave said. So unless Dave or Aaron can offer a date and I think we might have to do another round of when are you available for a special meeting. Um so I don't think we can
handle that right now. So, well, I can I can tell you right now that I'm not available from October. I mean, excuse me, most of August. I think I'm free after the 25th. I'm gone most
of October. And then there's an election. And if this is going to take a year, if we're going to do surveys to find out about displaced people and how they feel, uh we'll have new commissioners and we'll leave commissioners.
Um so um there's it appears that there's going to be no quick end to this and um so we need to be mindful of people's time. Today I have seven and a
half hours on this topic and that's a big chunk of time. Yeah, I'm not I'm not sure really how to nail down a date right now, but I guess would Erin, Dave, would you mind maybe
tomorrow or this week um circulating some potential polls or something? Keeping in mind that we want to um handle this sooner rather than later. Okay, thank you. All right, Alex. So, I think you haven't
voted on I'm an I. All right. All right. Thank you everyone. Have a good night. Thank you. Thanks, Aaron.