The URL can be used to link to this page

Mineral Hills Forest Stewardship Plandcr CH61 cert. recert. amend CH6IA cert. recert. amend Plan Change: to FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN Submitted to: Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation For enrollment in CH6I /61A /6IB and/or Forest Stewardship Program CHECK -OFFS CH61B cert. recert. amend 0 0 0 STWSHP new renew Green Cert C -S EEA Other Conservation Rest. CR Holder Kestrel Trust OWNER, PROPERTY, and PREPARER INFORMATION Property Owner(s) City of Northampton (c /o Conservation Commission)* Mailing Address 210 Main Street, Room 11, Northampton, MA 01060 Administrative Box Case No. Orig. Case No. Owner ID Add. Case No. Date Rec'd Ecoregion Plan Period Topo Name Ehamp Rare Spp. Hab. River Basin CT Phone (413) 296 -4324 Property Location: Town(s) Northampton Road(s) Montague Chesterfield Plan Preparer Michael Mauri, Forester Mass. Forester License 161 Mailing Address 20 West Street, South Deerfield, MA 01373 Phone (413) 665 -6829 RECORDS Assessor's Lot /Parcel Deed Deed Total Ch61 /61A Map No. No. Book Page Acres 61B Excluded Acres 20 003 10885 240 90 0 TOTALS 90 0 Excluded Area Description(s) (if additional space needed, continue on separate paper) HISTORY Year acquired 2012 Year management began 2012 Ch61 /61A 61B Certified Acres 90 90 Stewshp Stewshp Excluded Acres Acres Are boundaries blazed /painted? Yes No Partially What treatments have been prescribed, but not carried out (last 10 years if plan is a recert.)? stand no. treatment reason (if additional space needed, continue on separate page) Previous Management Practices (last 10 years) Stand Cutting Plan Treatment Yield Value Acres Date Remarks; (if additional space needed, continue on separate page) *Attention Wayne Feiden, Director of Planning and Development. Boundary is blazed and painted yellow, however, the northern half of the eastern bndry could not be located (pin Chesterfield Rd. could not be found). See "Logging prior to purchase by the City of Northampton" in Stand Descriptions section. (Form revised February 2008) Page of 90 90 Property Overview: Mineral Hills Conservation Area (former Sarafin Property) Land of City of Northampton Montague and Chesterfield Roads, Northampton, MA Landscape /Regional Context The local pattern of land use is mainly forested or agricultural, with nearby sand and gravel quarrying, and with residential development occurring over recent decades. Another major land use is the back up drinking water system of the City of Northampton (Roberts Meadow Reservoirs). Major rural land uses are forestry/logging, grassland farming, maple sugaring, hunting, snowmobiling, hiking and cross country skiing, as well as off -road vehicle use. Distinguishing or special features include: This large tract of land is located at the northern end of the Mineral Hills Conservation Area. Although it is not contiguous with the City's large ownership of Turkey Hill Road (described in a 2011 Forest Stewardship Plan), the City is in talks with the remaining ownership that separates these areas. This plan is intended to serve as an "addendum" to the 2011 plan, and would have been included as an amendment to the 2011 if DCR policy had allowed discontiguous land to be covered under a single plan There is a large area of hardwood forest with red, black and white oaks and hickories. The land rises up along the northwest shoulder of Bald Hill and rises up along the northern end of the grouping of hills known as the "Mineral Hills Property Overview Listed as 90 acres, in Northampton, MA. The entire acreage is to be enrolled in the Forest Stewardship Program. The parcel boundaries are shown in a survey (Plan Book 221, Page 85 (4 of 4)). With the exception of the Northampton Westhampton line, and the northern half of the long eastern boundary, all boundaries are painted yellow (painted in 2012/2013). Some boundaries of this property are "historical with barbed wire or stone walls serving as physical evidence on the ground. Other boundaries (including the eastern boundary) were created by recent surveying and do not have any historical land -use marking. The pin said to be at the northeast corner could not be located. Topography: most of the acreage is on flat or steadily but mildly sloping terrain. The only area that is somewhat steep is the southern -most section, which runs up toward the Mineral Hills. No ledge outcrops were observed. Some of the land is low and wet along Montague Road Dominant forest types are: tall and maturing hardwoods, with red, black and white oak, shagbark and pignut hickories, black and paper birch, and sometimes yellow birch, and red maple, with minor amounts of ash, sugar maple, and black cherry. Mature hemlock is found mainly in the swamp along Montague Road and otherwise occurs as a midstory. Tall white pine occurs in a few concentrated areas and otherwise as scattered, tall individuals. Also, in the old field area (along Montague and Chesterfield Roads), white pine also occurs as clumps of dense saplings 15' -20' tall and also as tall, stringy remnants of a recently logged -over area. Main tree ages: probably date back to 1900 -1950. Overall forest health is OK other than the dual infestation of hemlocks by hemlock woolly adelgid and elongate hemlock scale, both of which are introduce pests. Over time, these pests can be expected to further weaken, and eventually kill, most of the hemlocks. There is no effective control at this time for hemlocks on a forest -wide basis. More importantly, perhaps, the prevalence of non native invasive plant species in the recently abandoned farmland undermines the long -term prospects for growing any type of forest at all. The most abundant non native invasive plant here is Oriental bittersweet, followed by multiflora rose, with less Japanese barberry and bush honeysuckle. The infestation affects roughly 10% of the land at this time, and will be easier to control at this time than in the future. A limitation to control efforts is the abundance of bittersweet on the abutting property to the west (historically this was all part of the same property). Ideally, any effort to control invasives on the City parcel will be mirrored by a similar effort on this abutting private land. Otherwise, the effectiveness of any control will be compromised. Invasive species are present and threaten to pose a long -term problem. See above. Main habitat types are either maturing oak- hickory hardwood forest with vigorous understory growth (due to the increased light resulting from recent logging), or abandoned field growing back into white pine, or tall, dense hemlock and hardwoods on swampy ground. Unique cultural and physical features: (1) the acquisition of this conservation area reflects a sustained commitment by both the City and by a number of landowners; (2) the land includes valuable frontage that could have been developed for housing but now will be habitat and part of a trail system constitute an excellent hiking resource; (3) the oak hickory forest is a significant habitat resource. Water resources concerns are "elevated This parcel falls within a back -up surface -water drinking -water supply. The land drains into Roberts Meadow Brook and is therefore part of the drinking water supply of City of Northampton (Roberts Meadow Reservoirs). Currently, and foreseeably, however, the Roberts Meadow Reservoirs are part of the back -up system. Furthermore, the Upper Reservoir may actually be removed. However, it is still a water supply system, and therefore it is very important to avoid causing surface runoff into waterways. Run off is most likely to be cause by poorly draining of roads Roads were left in less- than -ideal condition after the recent logging (2011 -2012) Property wide stewardship concerns include: (1) controlling invasive plants to limit their potential harm to the forest (described above); (2) improving drainage in old logging roads /hiking trails so that sediment does not enter streams; (3) enhancing habitat and releasing young trees where appropriate by enlarging openings created in recent logging (the logging activity could be coupled with improvements to the roads mentioned above); (4) locating or re- establishing the NE corner pin and completing boundary marking; (5) determining whether to relocate sections of the main hiking trail that go on abutting land to the east; (6) determining whether to salvage hemlock in the low, wet area; (7) protecting the wood turtle in the area near Montague Road (state listed as a species of "Special Concern" under the MA Endangered Species Act) this can be accomplished by limiting logging activity and brush mowing in the period November 1 to March 31 (which protects turtles because they are said to be dormant in streams during this time rather than crawling across the land where they can be inadvertently crushed). Forest Cutting Permits issued by DCR are likely to include this restriction as a condition if the land near Montague Road is to be used. In the 2011 -2012 logging, the abutting land of Clapp was used so that the requirement of winter -only logging was not triggered; (8) if /once invasive plants are under control in the brushy area along Montagaye and Chesterfield Roads (shown as Stand 4 on the Forest stand and Boundary Map), manage this area to perpetuate brushy habitat over time. Role/Im. act wrt. nearb Protected Lands Water supply The main threat to water supply would be erosion in heavy rainfall events, exacerbated by unauthorized ATV use. Improvement work can be done to mitigate this possible occurrence. Wildlife habitat The anticipated activities are expected to sustain or improve the current habitats. Recreation The anticipated road improvement activities will improve the hiking trail. The persistence of unauthorized ATV use will be a problem (this is coupled to some extent with a beer -can shooting gallery in the abandoned -field area). Over time, with communication and education, and enforcement where necessary, the ATV use can probably be reduced The between property impact of any management is expected to be essentially non existent. Summary of Management Recommendations The landowner's main goals include (1) completing this plan as a way of taking stock of the property and identifying major concerns and opportunities; (2) address the property -wide concerns stated above. The property's potential to achieve the landowner's goals is outstanding, with notable challenges including (1) the presence of non native invasive plants and (2) the fact that much of the timber capital was depleted in a 2011 -2012 pre- acquisition harvest (this limits the City's ability to derive income from any logging /habitat activity and may result in a net cost to bringing out loggers to fix road drainage). Working towards these goals, the main recommendations include 1. Complete this plan 2. Finish marking all property boundaries (the Northampton- Westhampton line and, once the NE corner is located, the remaining eastem boundary). 3. Consider posting the land with NO -ATV signs. 4. Control non native invasive plant species in Stand 4 and in any spot- infestation in Stand 1 (one spot- infestation was noted, though there may be others). 5. Consider relocating parts of the trail that are off property so that the entire trail is on City property. 6. Improve drainage in old logging roads/hiking trails so that sediment does not enter streams. 7. Enhance habitat and releasing young trees where appropriate by enlarging openings created in 20122 -2012 logging (the logging activity could be coupled with improvements to the roads mentioned above) 8. Determine whether to salvage hemlock in the low, wet area. 9. If Step 4 above is successful, initiate a brush mowing program to maintain Stand 4 in early successional habitat Name, 4 Ektisl&rtiktel/a- NtAltatt�fov l.pmc `l""` STEWARDSHIP PLANNING W RKSHEET These two sheets will help record your goals and visions for your property. Use the first page to start your thinking about issues to discuss or questions you may wish to ask your consulting forester prior to your plan's preparation. It is an optional worksheet for you to use as you wish, The second page will be included as part of the plan. Qwnership 1. How many years have you or your family owned this property? 2. How many more years do you expect to own it? 1 to 10 )4 11 or more 3. Have you done any estate planning? yes no it /r7 4, What do you think you will eventually do with this property? Will it as is to heirs Divide among heirs Sell for development Protect some or all land from development Don't know— Other 5. Are you interested in classifying the property under Chapter 61, 6IA or 61B for tax purposes? Yes No Already is Don't know 1. Are you aware of any important natural )0 Abandoned Fields Beaver Pond )Q Brooks or Streams Forested Wetlands VI Rock Outcrops or Ledges Very Large or Unique Trees Mowed Fields The Land or cultural features on your land? (Check all that apply) Apple Trees Springs or Seeps Waterfalls y Stone Walls Old Foundations Vernal Pools 4 2. Is, your property posted against: Trespassing Hunting p Fishing Motorized vehic. 'r 3. Are your property boundaries well marked? 4 Yes No Accomplishing Goals 1. How much of the management work do you plan on doing yourself? None Some of it Most of it 2. How many days of free labor per year do you have (self, family, friends)? None s7 1 to 5 10 to 20 more than 20 3. What percent of earnings from woodland are you are willing to reinvest in the land? _None 10% to 25% 33% to 50% 10 more than 50% don't know 4. How much out -of- pocket money are you willing to ingest to improve your property? e None $100 to $500 $1000 to $2000 more than $2000 5. Are you willing to work with your neighbors to accomplish mutual goals? ?0 Yes No Don't know er. Please check the column that best reflects the importance of the following goals: *This goal must be checked "HIGH" if you are interested in classifying your land under Chapter 61' 6 r In your words, describe your goals for the ropetty: CM.. ;r re ServrhliOn, Id &I a (9. n��n Vl,fdiufw4 C iiv 1 4 .41.' s i �r U i�ri a Stewardship Purpose By enrolling in the Forest Stewardship Program and following a Stewardship Plan, I understand that I will be joining with many other landowners across the state in a program that promotes ecologically responsible resource management through the following actions and values: 1. Managing sustainably for long -term forest health, productivity, diversity, and quality. 2. Conserving or enhancing water quality, wetlands, soil productivity, carbon sequestration, biodiversity, cultural, historical and aesthetic resources. 3. Following a strategy guided by well founded silvicultural principles to improve timber quality and quantity when wood products area goal. 4. Setting high standards for foresters, loggers and other operators as practices are implemented; and minimizing negative impacts. 5. Learning how woodlands benefit and affect surrounding communities, and cooperation with neighboring owners to accomplish mutual goals when practical. Signature(s): 4111,21 gate Date: P(9/15 Owner(s) (print) r) i J N4 'c1FFV &mptt 1 O»t&» VrAtioin v'I oS1 efrt■ �3 (This page will be included i h t compleledplanJ Page of Landowner Goals Revised May 2009 Importance to Me Goal High Medium Low Don't Know Enhance the Quality /Quantity of Timber Products* V Generate Immediate Income Generate Long Term Income J Produce Firewood V Defer or Defray Taxes Promote Biological Diversity Enhance Habitat for Birds Enhance Habitat for Small Animals V Enhance Habitat for Large Animals Access for Walking /Skiing/Recreation Improve Maintain or Enhance Privacy Improve Hunting or Fishing Preserve or Improve Scenic Beauty Protect Water Quality Protect Unique /Special/ Cultural Areas Attain Green Certification 7th er. Please check the column that best reflects the importance of the following goals: *This goal must be checked "HIGH" if you are interested in classifying your land under Chapter 61' 6 r In your words, describe your goals for the ropetty: CM.. ;r re ServrhliOn, Id &I a (9. n��n Vl,fdiufw4 C iiv 1 4 .41.' s i �r U i�ri a Stewardship Purpose By enrolling in the Forest Stewardship Program and following a Stewardship Plan, I understand that I will be joining with many other landowners across the state in a program that promotes ecologically responsible resource management through the following actions and values: 1. Managing sustainably for long -term forest health, productivity, diversity, and quality. 2. Conserving or enhancing water quality, wetlands, soil productivity, carbon sequestration, biodiversity, cultural, historical and aesthetic resources. 3. Following a strategy guided by well founded silvicultural principles to improve timber quality and quantity when wood products area goal. 4. Setting high standards for foresters, loggers and other operators as practices are implemented; and minimizing negative impacts. 5. Learning how woodlands benefit and affect surrounding communities, and cooperation with neighboring owners to accomplish mutual goals when practical. Signature(s): 4111,21 gate Date: P(9/15 Owner(s) (print) r) i J N4 'c1FFV &mptt 1 O»t&» VrAtioin v'I oS1 efrt■ �3 (This page will be included i h t compleledplanJ Page of Landowner Goals Revised May 2009 Stewardship Issues Massachusetts is a small state, but it contains a tremendous variety of ecosystems, plant and animal species, management challenges, and opportunities. This section of your plan will provide background information about the Massachusetts forest landscape as well as issues that might affect your land. The Stand Descriptions and Management Practices sections of your plan will give more detailed property specific information on these subjects tailored to your management goals. i Biodiversity: Biological diversity is, in part, a measure of the variety of plants and animals, the communities they form, and the ecological processes (such as water and nutrient cycling) that sustain them. With the recognition that each species has value, individually and as part of its natural community, maintaining biodiversity has become an important resource management goal. While the biggest threat to biodiversity in Massachusetts is the loss of habitat to development, another threat is the introduction and spread of invasive non native plants. Non native invasives like European Buckthorn, Asiatic Bittersweet, and Japanese Honeysuckle spread quickly, crowding out or smothering native species and upsetting and dramatically altering ecosystem structure and function. Once established, invasives are difficult to control and even harder to eradicate. Therefore, vigilance and early intervention are paramount. Another factor influencing biodiversity in Massachusetts concerns the amount and distribution of forest growth stages. Wildlife biologists have recommended that, for optimal wildlife habitat on a landscape scale, 5 -15% of the forest should be in the seedling stage (less than 1" in diameter). Yet we currently have no more than 2 -3% early successional stage seedling forest across the state. There is also a shortage of forest with large diameter trees (greater than 20 See more about how you can manage your land with biodiversity in mind in the "Wildlife" section below. (Also refer to Managing Forests to Enhance Wildlife Diversity in Massachusetts and A Guide to Invasive Plants in Massachusetts in the binder pockets.) Rare Species: Rare species include those that are threatened (abundant in parts of its range but declining in total numbers, those of special concern (any species that has suffered a decline that could threaten the species if left unchecked), and endangered (at immediate risk of extinction and probably cannot survive without direct human intervention). Some species are threatened or endangered globally, while others are common globally but rare in Massachusetts. Of the 2,040 plant and animal species (not including insects) in Massachusetts, 424 are considered rare. About 100 of these rare species are known to occur in woodlands. Most of these are found in wooded wetlands, especially vernal pools. These temporary shallow pools dry up by late summer, but provide crucial breeding habitat for rare salamanders and a host of other unusual forest dwelling invertebrates. Although many species in Massachusetts are adapted to and thrive in recently disturbed forests, rare species are often very sensitive to any changes in their habitat Indispensable to rare species protection is a set of maps maintained by the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife's Natural Heritage Endangered Species Program (NHESP) that show current and historic locations of rare species and their habitats. The maps of your property will be compared to these rare Page of species maps and the result indicated on the upper right corner of the front page of the plan. Prior to any regulated timber harvest, if an occurrence does show on the map, the NHESP will recommend protective measures. Possible measures include restricting logging operations to frozen periods of the year, or keeping logging equipment out of sensitive areas You might also use information from NHESP to consider implementing management activities to improve the habitat for these special species. Riparian and Wetlands Areas: Riparian and wetland areas are transition areas between open water features (lakes, ponds, streams, and rivers) and the drier terrestrial ecosystems. More specifically, a wetland is an area that has hydric (wet) soils and a unique community of plants that are adapted to live in these wet soils. Wetlands may be adjacent to streams or ponds, or a wetland may be found isolated in an otherwise drier landscape. A riparian area is the transition zone between an open water feature and the uplands (see Figure 1). A riparian zone may contain wetlands, but also includes areas with somewhat better drained soils. It is easiest to think of riparian areas as the places where land and water meet. Figure 1. Example of a riparian zone. The presence of water in riparian and wetland areas make these special places very important. Some of the functions and values that these areas provide are described below: Filtration: Riparian zones capture and filter out sediment, chemicals and debris before they reach streams, rivers, lakes and drinking water supplies. This helps to keeps our drinking water cleaner, and saves communities money by making the need for costly filtration much less likely. Flood control: By storing water after rainstorms, these areas reduce downstream flooding. Like a sponge, wetland and riparian areas absorb stonnwater, then release it slowly over time instead of in one flush. Critical wildlife habitat: Many birds and mammals need riparian and wetland areas for all or part of their life cycles. These areas provide food and water, cover, and travel corridors. They are often the most important habitat feature in Massachusetts' forests. Page of Recreational opportunities: Our lakes, rivers, streams, and ponds are often focal points for recreation. We enjoy them when we boat, fish, swim, or just sit and enjoy the view. In order to protect wetlands and riparian areas and to prevent soil erosion during timber harvesting activities, Massachusetts promotes the use of "Best Management Practices" or BMPs. Maintaining or reestablishing the protective vegetative layer and protecting critical areas are the two rules that underlie these common sense measures. DCR's Massachusetts Forestry Best Practices Manual (included with this plan) details both the legally required and voluntary specifications for log landings, skid trails, water bars, buffer strips, filter strips, harvest timing, and much more. The two Massachusetts laws that regulate timber harvesting in and around wetlands and riparian areas are the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (CH 131), and the Forest Cutting Practices Act (CH132). Among other things, CH 132 requires the filing of a cutting plan and on -site inspection of a harvest operation by a DCR Service Forester to ensure that required BMPs are being followed when a commercial harvest exceeds 25,000 board feet or 50 cords (or combination thereof). Soil and Water Quality: Forests provide a very effective natural buffer that holds soil in place and protects the purity of our water. The trees, understory vegetation, and the organic material on the forest floor reduce the impact of falling rain, and help to insure that soil will not be carried into our streams and waterways. To maintain a supply of clean water, forests must be kept as healthy as possible. Forests with a diverse mixture of vigorous trees of different ages and species can better cope with periodic and unpredictable stress such as insect attacks or windstorms. Timber harvesting must be conducted with the utmost care to ensure that erosion is minimized and that sediment does not enter streams or wetlands. Sediment causes turbidity which degrades water quality and can harm fish and other aquatic life. As long as Best Management Practices (BMPs) are implemented correctly, it is possible to undertake active forest management without harming water quality. Forest Health: Like individual organisms, forests vary in their overall health. The health of a forest is affected by many factors including weather, soil, insects, diseases, air quality, and human activity. Forest owners do not usually focus on the health of a single tree, but are concerned about catastrophic events such as insect or disease outbreaks that affect so many individual trees that the whole forest community is impacted. Like our own health, it is easier to prevent forest health problems then to cure them. This preventative approach usually involves two steps. First, it is desirable to maintain or encourage a wide diversity of tree species and age classes within the forest. This diversity makes a forest less susceptible to a single devastating health threat. Second, by thinning out weaker and less desirable trees, well- spaced healthy individual trees are assured enough water and light to thrive. These two steps will result in a forest of vigorously growing trees that is more resistant to environmental stress. Page of Fire: Most forests in Massachusetts are relatively resistant to catastrophic fire. Historically, Native Americans commonly burned certain forests to improve hunting grounds. In modern times, fires most often result from careless human actions. The risk of an unintentional and damaging fire in your woods could increase as a result of logging activity if the slash (tree tops, branches, and debris) is not treated correctly. Adherence to the Massachusetts slash law minimizes this risk. Under the law, slash is to be removed from buffer areas near roads, boundaries, and critical areas and lopped close to the ground to speed decay. Well- maintained woods roads are always desirable to provide access should a fire occur. Depending on the type of fire and the goals of the landowner, fire can also be considered as a management tool to favor certain species of plants and animals. Today the use of prescribed burning is largely restricted to the coast and islands, where it is used to maintain unique natural communities such as sandplain grasslands and pitch pine /scrub oak barrens. However, state land managers are also attempting to bring fire back to many of the fire adapted communities found elsewhere around the state. Wildlife Management: Enhancing the wildlife potential of a forested property is a ter' common and important goal for many woodland owners. Sometimes actions can be taken to benefit a particular species of interest (e.g., put up Wood Duck nest boxes). In most cases, recommended management practices can benefit many species, and fall into one of three broad strategies. These are managing for diversity, protecting existing habitat, and enhancing existing habitat. Managing for Diversity Many species of wildlife need a variety of plant communities to meet their lifecycle requirements. In general, a property that contains a diversity of habitats will support a more varied wildlife population. A thick area of brush and young trees might provide food and cover for grouse and cedar waxwing; a mature stand of oaks provides acorns for foraging deer and turkey; while an open field provides the right food and cover for cottontail rabbits and red fox. It is often possible to create these different habitats on your property through active management. The appropriate mix of habitat types will primarily depend on the composition of the surrounding landscape and your objectives. It may be a good idea to create a brushy area where early successional habitats are rare, but the same practice may be inappropriate in the area's last Nock of mature forest. Protecting Existing Habitat This strategy is commonly associated with managing for rare species or those species that require unique habitat features. These habitat features include vernal pools, springs and seeps, forested wetlands, rock outcrops, snags, den trees, and large blocks of unbroken forest. Some of these features are rare, and they provide the right mix of food, water, and shelter for a particular species or specialized community of wildlife. It is important to recognize their value and protect their function. This usually means not altering the feature and buffering the resource area from potential impacts. Enhancing Existing Habitat This strategy falls somewhere between the previous two. One way the wildlife value of a forest can be enhanced is by modifying its structure (number of canopy layers, average tree size, density). Thinning out undesirable trees from around large crowned mast (nut and fruit) trees will allow these trees to grow faster and produce more food. The faster growth will also accelerate the development of a more mature forest structure, which is important for some species. Creating small gaps or forest openings generates groups of seedlings and saplings that provide an additional layer of cover, food, and perch sites. Page of Each of these three strategies can be applied on a single property. For example, a landowner might want to increase the habitat diversity by reclaiming an old abandoned field. Elsewhere on the property, a stand of young hardwoods might be thinned to reduce competition, while a "no cut" buffer is set up around a vernal pool or other habitat feature. The overview, stand description and management practice sections of this plan will help you understand your woodland within the context of the surrounding landscape and the potential to diversify, protect or enhance wildlife habitat. Wood Products: If managed wisely, forests can produce a periodic flow of wood products on a sustained basis. Stewardship encompasses finding ways to meet your current needs while protecting the forest's ecological integrity. In this way, you can harvest timber and generate income without compromising the opportunities of future generations. Massachusetts forests grow many highly valued species (white pine, red oak, sugar maple, white ash, and black cherry) whose lumber is sold throughout the world. Other lower valued species (hemlock, birch, beech, red maple) are marketed locally or regionally, and become products like pallets, pulpwood, firewood, and lumber. These products and their associated value -added industries contribute between 200 and 300 million dollars annually to the Massachusetts economy. By growing and selling wood products in a responsible way you are helping to our society's demand for these goods. Harvesting from sustainably managed woodlands rather than from unmanaged or poorly managed forest benefits the public in a multitude of ways. The sale of timber, pulpwood, and firewood also provides periodic income that you can reinvest in the property, increasing its value and helping you meet your long -term goals. Producing wood products helps defray the costs of owning woodland, and helps private landowners keep their forestland undeveloped. Cultural Resources: Cultural resources are the places containing evidence of people who once lived in the area. Whether a Native American village from 1,700 years ago, or the remains of a farmstead from the 1800's, these features all tell important and interesting stories about the landscape, and should be protected from damage or loss. Massachusetts has a long and diverse history of human habitation and use. Native American tribes first took advantage of the natural bounty of this area over 10,000 years ago. Many of these villages were located along the coasts and rivers of the state. The interior woodlands were also used for hunting, traveling, and temporary camps. Signs of these activities are difficult to find in today's forests. They were obscured by the dramatic landscape impacts brought by European settlers as they swept over the area in the 17` and 18 centuries. By the middle 1800's, more than 70% of the forests of Massachusetts had been cleared for crops and pastureland. Houses, barns, wells, fences, mills, and roads were all constructed as woodlands were converted for agricultural production. But when the Erie Canal connected the Midwest with the eastern cities, New England farms were abandoned for the more productive land in the Ohio River valley, and the landscape began to revert to forest. Many of the abandoned buildings were disassembled and moved, but the supporting stonework and other changes to the landscape can be easily seen today. One particularly ubiquitous legacy of this period is stone walls. Most were constructed between 1810 and 1840 as stone fences (wooden fence rails had become scarce) to enclose sheep within pastures, or to Page exclude them from croplands and hayfields. Clues to their purpose are found in their construction. Walls that surrounded pasture areas were comprised mostly of large stones, while walls abutting former cropland accumulated many small stones as farmers cleared rocks turned up by their plows. Other cultural features to look for include cellar holes, wells, old roads and even old trash dumps. History of Natural Disturbance: As noted above, the mid 19th century was the height of forestland clearing for agriculture and pasturing. The availability of richer, more productive farmland in the Midwest resulted in farm abandonment and subsequent regrowth of white pine, chestnut, and mixed hardwoods including red oak. In the early 20th century these stands, particularly white pine, were cut to supply the wood container industry. Farm activity on the newly cleared land was truncated by World Wars I and II and brought about another wave of farm abandonment and regrowth. Natural disturbances since 1900 include the Chestnut blight of 1900 -1908, the hurricane of 1938, the Gypsy Moth outbreak of 1980 -1982, wind events, and ice damage, most notably in December 2008. Recreation and Aesthetic Considerations: Recreational opportunities and aesthetic quality are the most important values for many forest landowners, and represent valid goals in and of themselves. Removing interfering vegetation can open a vista or highlight a beautiful tree, for example. When a landowner's goals include timber, thoughtful forest management can be used to accomplish silvicultural objectives while also reaching recreational and /or aesthetic objectives. For example, logging trails might be designed to provide a network of cross country ski trails that lead through a variety of habitats and reveal points of interest. If aesthetics is a concern and you are planning a timber harvest, obtain a copy of this excellent booklet: A Guide to Logging Aesthetics: Practical Tips for Loggers, Foresters Landowners, by Geoffrey T. Jones, 1993. (Available from the Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service, (607) 255 -7654, for $7). Work closely with your consultant to make sure the aesthetic standards you want are included in the contract and that the logger selected to do the job executes it properly. The time you take to plan ahead of the job will reward you and your family many times over with a fuller enjoyment of your forest, now and well into the future. Invasive Species Management: Invasive species pose immediate and long -term threats to the woodlands of MA. Defined as a non native species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human, animal, or plant health, invasives are well adapted to a variety of environmental conditions, out compete more desirable native species, and often create monocultures devoid of biological diversity. The websites of the Invasive Plant Atlas of New England, www. nbii- nin.ciesin.columbia.edutipane, and the New England Wildflower Society, Page of www.newfs.org are excellent sources of information regarding the identification and management of invasive plants. Some of the common invasive plants found in MA are listed below. Oriental Bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculata) Glossy Buckthorn (Frangula alnus) Multiflora Rose (Rosa multiflora) Japanese Barberry (Berbis thunbergii) Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia japonica) Autumn Olive (Eleaeagnus umbellata) Early detection and the initiation of control methods soon after detection are critical to suppressing the spread of invasive species. Selective application of the proper herbicide is often the most effective control method. See the next section for information on the use of chemicals in forest management activities. Asian Longhomed Beetle Pesticide Use Pesticides such as herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, and rodenticides are used to control "pests A pest is any mammal, bird, invertebrate, plant, fungi, bacteria or virus deemed injurious to humans and/or other mammals, birds, plants, etc. The most common forest management use of a pesticide by woodland owners is the application of herbicide to combat invasive species. MA DCR suggests using a management system(s) that promotes the development and adoption of environmentally friendly no- chemical methods of pest management that strives to avoid the use of chemical pesticides. If chemicals are used, proper equipment and training should be utilized to minimize health and environmental risks. In Massachusetts, the application of pesticides is regulated by the MA Pesticide Control Board. For more information, contact MA Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR), Pesticide Bureau at (617) 626 -1776 Please refer to FSC Pesticides Policy: Guidance on Implementation (FSC -GUI30 -001 Version 2 -0 EN, May 5, 2007) for information on chemicals banned from use on MA Private Lands Group Certification member properties. Page of This is your Stewardship Plan. It is based on the goals that you have identified. The final success of your Stewardship Plan will be determined first, by how well you are able to identify and define your goals, and second, by the support you find and the resources you commit to implement each step. It can be helpful and enjoyable to visit other properties to sample the range of management activities and see the accomplishments of others. This may help you visualize the outcome of alternative management decisions and can either stimulate new ideas or confirm your own personal philosophies. Don't hesitate to express your thoughts, concerns, and ideas. Keep asking questions! Please be involved and enjoy the fact that you are the steward of a very special place. Page of 6 11 V r Vl OBJ V 1V 1♦ Va Stand v..+��nv Type Acres MSD BA Mbf per acre Cords per acre Site Index Stew 1 OH 69.7 11.5 99 2.4 11.3 65 OR Stew 2 WH 3.0 8.6 63 2.4 6.5 67 WP Stew 3 HH 5.5 10.3 163 7.1 17.9 69 WP Stew 4 AF 11.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A 65 WP Total STAND DESCRIPTIONS 90.0 Logging prior to purchase by the City of Northampton Over the 6 years immediately prior to the 2012 purchase of this land by the City of Northampton, a local logging company carried out sporadic but extensive logging in Stands 1, 2 and parts of 4. Some parts of Stand 4 did not have any harvestable timber and were not logged. Stand 3 was not logged. At the time of the logging, the property included land in Westhampton (which has since become property of the Kestrel Trust). Altogether, about 101 acres were logged. During the period June, 2011 to December, 2012, an estimated 276,000 board feet (276 Mbf) of pine and oak timber was cut. The break down was 190 Mbf of pine, and 86 Mbf of oak. No estimate exists for timber cut in the time from 2006 and June, 2011. Information about the harvesting in 2011 and 2012 was compiled and provided to the City in a report titled "Stump Cruise Purpose, Methods and Results for Logging Activity on Sarafin Property, June, 2011 to December 31, 2011" (Report date: March 27, 2012). *inter ref the site index and the site's suitability for growing timber) OBJECTIVE CODE: CH6I stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; 13A basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton_ Page of STAND DESCRIPTIONS Comment Prior to harvesting that ended in 2012 (see above), this stand had a high volume of mature and maturing timber, primarily white pine and red oak, but also hemlock, and various hardwoods, especially black birch, black cherry, red maple and white ash. Poplar and hickory were also cut. During the time in question, some areas were cut more than once. Enough time has lapsed throughout the cut so that blackberries have had a chance to grow waist high, and cherry and oak seedlings are chest- to head high, sometimes surrounded by fresh slash from the more recent cutting. The management opportunities lie in protecting and promoting the remaining oaks, pines and hickories, and releasing and further establishing the early- successional seedling and blackberry mix. Type and Overstory (species and condition): Tall canopy of irregular density, ranging from crowded to sparse (as a result of logging described above) with red oak and less black oak, scattered white oak, and a small amount of chestnut oak (near the southernmost boundary), with scattered white pine. All of these trees occur in sizes of 12 -25 Mixed in with these are hickories (primarily bitternut, but also shagbark), birches (primarily black birch north of the brook, and paper and black birch south of the brook, with scattered yellow birch in wetter areas), and red maple, with a limited amount of beech, sugar maple and white ash These trees tend to fall in the 7 -12" diameter range, with larger individuals being the exception. Hemlock in the overstory occurs mainly in the southernmost boundary area and near the top of the brook, along the boundary there, but otherwise is abundant in many areas as a midstory tree. Only a few trees had grape vines. This was quite a dense stand prior to the recent logging, well stocked with large, tall trees. Though the logging removed many of the large trees, it did not remove all. These remaining trees form the basis for this forest going forward. The volume of all remaining oaks combined was about 0.9 Mbf per acre; the volume of the remaining white pine was about 0.5 Mbf per acre The northwestern part of this stand contains a much higher proportion of small and medium -sized trees and remains more dense (because there were fewer large trees to cut in the recent logging), occurring in a mix with scattered, large relic hardwoods. Earlier logging, over the past several decades, presumably created this patchy variability. The overall basal area of 99 was due in part to a high volume of the small and medium -sized trees in this area. Overall, small and medium -sized trees with no current commercial value had a basal area of 25 (out of 99 overall). The southwestern area (within and around the stone walls) seems to have been cut more heavily than other areas and has a more open canopy with well established seedlings of white pine, oaks, and black cherry, as well as birches and red maple. *(interpret the site index and the site's suitability for vrowing timber) OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 stands classified under Cli 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton_ Page of Cl) OBJ Stand Type Acres MSD BA Mbf per acre Cords per acre Site Index Stew 1 OH 69.7 11.5 99 2.4 11.3 65 OR STAND DESCRIPTIONS Comment Prior to harvesting that ended in 2012 (see above), this stand had a high volume of mature and maturing timber, primarily white pine and red oak, but also hemlock, and various hardwoods, especially black birch, black cherry, red maple and white ash. Poplar and hickory were also cut. During the time in question, some areas were cut more than once. Enough time has lapsed throughout the cut so that blackberries have had a chance to grow waist high, and cherry and oak seedlings are chest- to head high, sometimes surrounded by fresh slash from the more recent cutting. The management opportunities lie in protecting and promoting the remaining oaks, pines and hickories, and releasing and further establishing the early- successional seedling and blackberry mix. Type and Overstory (species and condition): Tall canopy of irregular density, ranging from crowded to sparse (as a result of logging described above) with red oak and less black oak, scattered white oak, and a small amount of chestnut oak (near the southernmost boundary), with scattered white pine. All of these trees occur in sizes of 12 -25 Mixed in with these are hickories (primarily bitternut, but also shagbark), birches (primarily black birch north of the brook, and paper and black birch south of the brook, with scattered yellow birch in wetter areas), and red maple, with a limited amount of beech, sugar maple and white ash These trees tend to fall in the 7 -12" diameter range, with larger individuals being the exception. Hemlock in the overstory occurs mainly in the southernmost boundary area and near the top of the brook, along the boundary there, but otherwise is abundant in many areas as a midstory tree. Only a few trees had grape vines. This was quite a dense stand prior to the recent logging, well stocked with large, tall trees. Though the logging removed many of the large trees, it did not remove all. These remaining trees form the basis for this forest going forward. The volume of all remaining oaks combined was about 0.9 Mbf per acre; the volume of the remaining white pine was about 0.5 Mbf per acre The northwestern part of this stand contains a much higher proportion of small and medium -sized trees and remains more dense (because there were fewer large trees to cut in the recent logging), occurring in a mix with scattered, large relic hardwoods. Earlier logging, over the past several decades, presumably created this patchy variability. The overall basal area of 99 was due in part to a high volume of the small and medium -sized trees in this area. Overall, small and medium -sized trees with no current commercial value had a basal area of 25 (out of 99 overall). The southwestern area (within and around the stone walls) seems to have been cut more heavily than other areas and has a more open canopy with well established seedlings of white pine, oaks, and black cherry, as well as birches and red maple. *(interpret the site index and the site's suitability for vrowing timber) OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 stands classified under Cli 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton_ Page of Cl) STAND DESCRIPTIONS Regeneration (species and distribution): very irregular distribution of white pine, oaks, and black cherry, as well as birches and red maple, sometimes 5' -8' tall. In places, these appear viable and could be released from remaining overstory competition. In other places (esp. south of the brook and along the eastern boundary), regeneration is largely lacking. Understory: Mountain laurel and witch hazel are prevalent south of the brook, and scattered north of the brook. Spice bush is found in wetter areas. Rubus species (blackberries, etc.) are prevalent in areas that were heavily cut. Hay- scented fern is abundant in the southern western area (within and around the stone walls); striped maple and highbush blueberry occur on a scattered basis. Non native invasive plants (species, distribution, potential threat): Essentially absent, but with one key exception noted: there is a small infestation "spot infestation of bittersweet (see map) consisting of mats of young vines climbing on low vegetation within an area with good moisture that was logged. No other infestation was noted, but there may be others, especially where moisture is good. Soils (type, moisture, drainage and productivity Mostly Paxton very stony fine sandy loam and, in wetter areas, with Ridgebury very stony fine sandy loam. The Paxton series consists of well drained loamy soils formed in acid subglacial till derived mostly from schist, gneiss, and granite. The soils are very deep to bedrock and moderately deep to a densic contact. Paxton soils occur on gently sloping to steep convex slopes. Paxton is well- drained, with a depth to bedrock of up to 60 Paxton is well suited for woodland production. Trees commonly growing on Paxton soils include red, white, and black oak, hickory, sugar maple, red maple, gray and black birch, white pine, and hemlock. Paxton soils have slowly permeable dense till layers that perch seasonal water tables. The Ridgebury seems to be the Paxton soil in lower landscape positions where the water table is close to the surface, rather than in any flat swamp (cf. Ridgebury in Sand 3) This is a fertile soil for tree growth (site index of 65 for red oak). From a moisture /drainage perspective, most areas would be suitable for logging (i.e. not too wet), but from a practical perspective, the access route along the eastern boundary is wet and, therefore, logging would need to occur in good winter conditions or dry summer conditions or, otherwise, lay brush mats in skid trails as needed. Main (and Special) Habitat: scattered "relic" trees (oaks and pine) generally 25 -30" in diameter (including white oak up to 45 an abundance of oak and hickory hard mast, areas of blackberries and thick seedlings Management history: harvested 2006 -2012 see description of logging above. *(interpret the site index and the site's suitabilitfbbr tinvber OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61 /6IA; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of STAND DESCRIPTIONS Desired future condition: multi -aged forest with mature oaks, including red oak, black oak, white oak and chestnut oak, hickories (shagbark and bitternut), other hardwoods, and pine forming a tall but irregular overstory, with groups and patches of much younger trees, including the same species as in the overstory but also black cherry. The transition to this from the present state would be group and patch selection system logging that would enlarge and/or complete existing openings and create new openings. Management options: selection system logging to achieve desired future condition described above combined with spot control (and further search and monitoring) of oriental bittersweet and repair and stabilization of skid road and trail network. Unique features: several large, living or dead chestnut oaks along southern -most boundary. Cultural features: stone walls and remnants of barbed wire fence indicating past grazing activity. "(interpret the site index and the site's suitability for growing timber) OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of (ICU OBJ Stand Type Acres MSD BA Mbf per acre Cords per acre Site Index Stew 2 WH 3.0 8.6 63 2.4 6.5 67 WP STAND DESCRIPTIONS Comment: Prior to harvesting that ended in 2012 (see above), this stand had a high volume of mature and maturing white pine timber (see discussion above), but lacked the oak component found in Stand 1. Type and Overstory (species and condition): Formerly a tall, dense canopy of white pine with red maple and scattered other hardwoods or, in places, a dense canopy of red maple, this stand was heavily logged in late 2012. Now it is a thin stand of maturing red maples with tall white pines that have short, thin crowns: overall, these pines are stringy in appearance, and would probably have been the pines to remove (as pulp) ina thinning of the previous pine stand, had it been handled that way. A few of the pines and red maples could grow into impressive trees some day if they survive winds and ice long enough to become stable trees with tall crowns. Regeneration (species and distribution): scattered white oak seedlings. White pine seedlings occur in scattered groupings, and hemlock is thinly distributed. Black birch seedlings, and saplings occur in scattered groupings. Understory: Scattered mountain laurel, witch hazel, highbush blueberry, with scattered blackberries and abundant prickly dewberry. Non native invasive plants (species, distribution, potential threat): None noted. However, this determination is somewhat arbitrary because the adjacent stand is infested with bittersweet. Part of the rational for delineating this stand as it is was to exclude the heavily infested areas from this stand and lump them in with Stand 4. Soils (type, moisture, drainage and productivity Woodbridge stony fine sandy loam. Woodbridge is deep, moderately well drained soil on glaciated uplands with a site index for white pine of 67. This well- drained soil formed in glacial deposits derived principally from dark gray schistose material and impure limestone. With moderate to rapid permeability and fairly high moisture holding capacity, this soil can produce good yields of timber. Due to their moisture holding capacity, and the slow drainage through a hard substratum, Woodbridge soils cannot be operated during wet times of the year; this becomes more critical in swales and along the bottom of slopes. Conditions must be dry or frozen to avoid excessive rutting, compaction, and root damage, or tops and poles must be laid down to form a mat. *(interpret the site index and the site's suitabili e limber) OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of STAND DESCRIPTIONS Main (and Special) Habitat: scattered overstory or red maple and white pine with significant coarse woody debris from recent logging. Chipmunks make heavy use of stone walls. Management history: harvested 2006 -2012 see description of logging above. Desired future condition: hard to say (see discussion below) due to the possible instability of this stand, and the risk of the spread of non native invasive plants from the adjacent stand. Ideally, the current overstory will survive and thrive. Contingencies are discussed below. Management options: allow this stand to grow and become stable and allowing seedlings a chance to become established, while monitoring the understory to make sure that non native invasive plants do not become established. If the stand does begin to blow over or otherwise does not appear to be thriving, consider cutting off the remaining overstory (if this occurs before enough seedlings are established, this cut would be a combination clearcut and coppice (red maple) cut; if adequate seedlings are established, however, this cut would be a combination shelterwood removal and coppice (red maple) cut. In either option, there is a possibility that some of the white oak seedlings would survive, perhaps from resprouting. There is a risk that any further logging disturbance could cause non native invasive plants to become established, so any activity should include monitoring for this. An alternative to active logging would be to let any significant blowdown to remain as is —this would provide significant habitat (e.g. for wood turtles). But again, even in this scenario, there should be monitoring for non- native invasive plants. Unique features: None noted. Cultural features: part of a stone walls along the eastern and southern boundary. he site index and the site's sultabili or •rowing t mbe OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of c2 OBJ Stand Type Acres MSD BA Mbf per acre Cords per acre Site Index Stew 3 HH 5.5 10.3 163 7.1 17.9 69 WP STAND DESCRIPTIONS Comment: This stand has not been cut in recent times. The last cutting (apparently in small patches) occurred about 40 years ago. The ground is wet and hummocky. Type and Overstory (species and condition): Tall, dense overstory of timber and pulpwood quality hemlock, with tall, large white pine (mainly in the eastern half of the stand) and hardwoods primarily red maple and black birch in sizes commonly ranging from 8 -14 but with scattered relic hardwoods as large as 32 Hemlocks as large as 29" were noted; pines as large as 27" were noted. Other hardwoods included paper birch, yellow birch, red oak, white ash and poplar. Some trees have grape vines in them. Roughly two- thirds of the timber volume is hemlock; the remaining 1/3 is mostly white pine, with a small component of hardwood. This stand derives some of its density from small trees (4 -7 (basal area 32 out of 163). The cord volume per acre broke down to 7.9 cords of wood, 4.3 cords of hemlock pulp, 4.4 cords of small trees, and 1.3 cords of "growing stock" (well formed small trees with significant potential to grow nice timber). The total basal area of all cord products was 107 out of 163. A small number of large hemlocks and red maples have died or snapped off, creating excellent snags for wildlife habitat. Unfortunately, but by no means surprisingly, the hemlock is infested with elongate hemlock scale, an introduced pest, as well as hemlock wooly adelgid, also an introduced pest. It is to be expected that the hemlocks will experience progressively thinning crowns, weakening over time, until dying outright or persisting in a near -death condition for some time (until snapping off or being infested with beetles and/ or fungi). This will presumably match the trend inn hemlock for the wider area. If the hemlock does die or nearly die, there will still be a significant component of hardwood as well as some white pine. The response to this anticipated condition will vary from landowner to landowner and from site to site. Some owners are concerned about losing the value or utility of the hemlock timber and for that reason want to "pre salvage" in an anticipatory harvest. Other landowners may wish to avoid the unsightliness or "mess" of a large accumulation of dead trees (though some owners may be intrigued by the habitat value of this possibility). Other owners may wish to avoid the safety hazard of having a large number of tall dead trees. Other landowners may not be concerned about the hemlock's monetary value or utility as a building material, and may not view the "mess" as a problem. *Inter ret the site index and the site's suitabilit for erowln t rn ber OBJECTIVE CODE: CI-161 stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CB 61/61A; STD stand; AC= acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of STAND DESCRIPTIONS In this particular case, the site is very wet and therefore is difficult to log without making a mess of the ground surface. Furthermore, the disturbance of harvesting could cause the nearby bittersweet infestation to spread to this currently bittersweet -free stand. Finally, this area is listed as habitat of the wood turtle, a state- listed species of special concern. Though logging in this area (if following restrictions imposed by DCR and NHESP) might not have a negative affect on the turtles or their habitat, it is probably prudent to refrain from any logging here in the near future given that the adjacent areas (Stands 2 and 4) recently underwent heavy logging. Wood turtles will be drawn into the logged upland areas and will benefit from food resources there, but they will also benefit from having riparian area continue to be a limited disturbance area. Therefore, the ideal "treatment" of this area from the perspective of the wood turtle, at this time, would be no harvesting. The "slow release" of coarse woody debris of the declining hemlock could be beneficial to the wood turtles. All in all, it makes sense for the City, at this time, to allow the hemlock decline to run its course. The main recommended (see below) would be to cut grape vines to help maintain the current overstory. Regeneration (species and distribution): scattered hemlock seedlings. Understory: Scattered mountain laurel and, in wetter places, winterberry; cinnamon fern in wetter areas. Non native invasive plants (species, distribution, potential threat): None noted. However, Stand 4, which is nearby, is infested with bittersweet and other invasives. Soils (type, moisture, drainage and productivity Ridgebury. Ridgebury is a poorly drained soil formed in compact glacial deposits of granite, gneiss and quartzite; formed in depressions, this soil has a high water table and takes on water from the surrounding landscape and is typically wet 7 -9 months out of the year. The site index of 60 -69 for white pine. For reasons of flooding and high water tables and difficult access for equipment, this area is not well- suited for harvesting timber. Main (and Special) Habitat: intact, tall hardwood- coniferous forest with scattered relic trees, snags, and a high water table. A culvert drains this stand under Montague Road. Management history: no recent harvesting. Desired future condition: hard to say (see discussion below) due to the possible instability of this stand, and the risk of the spread of non native invasive plants from the adjacent stand. Ideally, the current overstory will survive and thrive. Contingencies are discussed below. Management options: allow this stand to grow and become stable and allowing seedlings a chance to become established, while monitoring the understory to make sure that non native invasive plants do not become established. If the stand does begin to blow over or otherwise does not appear to be thriving, consider cutting off the remaining overstory (if this occurs before enough seedlings are established, this cut would be a *(interpret the site index and the site's suitability for growing timber) OBJECTIVE CODE: CH6I stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC= acre; Mbf thousand board feet; RA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of STAND DESCRIPTIONS combination clearcut and coppice (red maple) cut; if adequate seedlings are established, however, this cut would be a combination shelterwood removal and coppice (red maple) cut. In either option, there is a possibility that some of the white oak seedlings would survive, perhaps from resprouting. There is a risk that any further logging disturbance could cause non native invasive plants to become established, so any activity should include monitoring for this An alternative to active logging would be to let any significant blowdown to remain as is this would provide significant habitat (e.g. for wood turtles). But again, even in this scenario, there should be monitoring for non- native invasive plants. Unique features: A 32" black birch in the southern boundary line. This stand includes a small amount of land in Westhampton (the northwest corner pin is set 50.6 feet off the town line). Cultural features: a barbed -wire fence runs through the middle of the stand. *�(1(ii pret the site index and the site's suitability for growing timber) OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of OBI Stand Type Acres MSD BA Mbf per acre Cords per acre Site Index Stew 4 AF 11.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A 65 WP STAND DESCRIPTIONS Comment This stand is best described as a chaotic mess formed by the overlapping of factors of recent agricultural abandonment, recent logging to remove the best trees, an infestation bittersweet and other invasives, and an unauthorized beer -can shooting gallery used by unauthorized ATV riders. At the same time, this stand is the main entrance into the property, the parking area, and the most public "face" of this parcel. Type and Overstory (species and condition): This is an abandoned agricultural grassland (pasture) in various stages of abandonment, ranging from small areas that have yet to grow back into trees (these are still occupied by grasses and forbs), dense concentrations of white pine seedlings 15' -20' tall, a recently logged stand of white pine, red maple and other hardwoods that had already grown back into timber -sized trees, many of which were and are very rough (twisted and branchy), and "forest edge" along Chesterfield and Montague Roads with large pines and hardwoods that were partially logged in the recent cutting. Some areas adjacent to the "forest edge" are thick with large, woodt debris from the large, rough trees that were cut. This stand also include a long, 60' -wise strip of land that connects to Stand 1 and which, historically, was part of a larger, abandoned farmland area (present -day land of Clapp et. al.). In some cases, the areas with grasses and forbs are also heavily infested with bittersweet and multiflora rose, along with less bush honeysuckle and barberry. These presumably got their "start" in the forest -edge area and have been seedling into adjacent areas ever since. The recently logged area is beginning to be infested. Grape vines are established in some of the taller trees. Regeneration (species and distribution): includes young white pine described above as well as, in the recently logged area, abundant black cherry seedlings. Normally, deer browse would be the biggest threat to cherry seedlings, but in this case, tiny bittersweet vines are already climbing the small seedlings in some cases. The same holds true for birch seedlings in the recently logged area. Understory: Grasses and forbs, including goldenrod, as well as sweet fern, poison ivy, rubus species and even spice bush. Non native invasive plants (species, distribution, potential threat): Serious infestation of invasive plants (see above). Ideally, no logging would have taken place until the invasives had been controlled. The reason is that the shade of the overstory had been providing a passive partial control of these plants, whereas the disturbance of the logging has served to release invasive plants. *(interpret the site index and the site's suitability for erowing timber) OBJECTIVE CODE: CH6I stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CH 61/61A; STD stand; AC= acre; Mbf thousand board feet; I3A basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of STAND DESCRIPTIONS Soils (type, moisture, drainage and productivity The soils are mainly Charlton fine sandy loams, with Woodbridge stony fine sandy loam (see above) and Pootatuck fine sandy loam. Charlton is a deep, well drained glacial till that is not shallow to bedrock and does not have a shallow restrictive layer. Moisture holding capacity is moderate. The Charlton site index for both red oak and white pine is 65. Although the Charlton needs to be dry or frozen like most other soils, it is not a problematic soil for logging, lacking minor streams and seeps. Pootatuck is deep and moderately well drained. Though the Pootatuck only occupies the fringe if this stand (near Montague and Chesterfield Roads), it is worth mentioning because it was formed in alluvial deposits (i,e, floodplain deposits presumably the flooding was from nearby Roberts Meadow Brook). Main (and Special) Habitat: semi -open area with grasses and forbs. May almost be good bluebird habitat Management history: recent harvesting (see above discussion of harvesting 2006 2012). Desired future condition: ideally, this would be an area of early successional habitat that could be maintained by periodic brush mowing and would be free of non- native invasive plants (however, the long neck of land would be tall forest that is free of non- native invasive plants). Management options: (1) implement an aggressive control of non native invasive plants, ideally coordinating with abutters to do the same (this may take successive treatments over three years); (2) monitor for a period of time (with spot treatments as needed) to allow native vegetation to take control of the site; (3) if, ever, a point is reached at which the threat of invasives is non existent or minimal, use tree cutting and brush mowing to bring this back to early- successional habitat (but continue to monitor for invasives). Unique features: (1) prominent location with good access and parking; could serve as an excellent trail head for a through trail to Turkey Hill Road; (2) somewhat alarmingly, there is an unauthorized beer can (and coffee can, camp stove propane canister, McDonalds coffee cup, etc.) shooting gallery and unauthorized ATV use. The shooting targets are set 5' -10' off the ground on tree branches, setting up the possibility of stray bullets (presumably 0.22 caliber) traveling into the distance. The abutter, John Clapp, has been authorized to blockade ATV trails with logging debris, and has spent some time doing so. However, some of the blockades have been removed or sawn through. This situation can probably be best addressed by trying to find out who is doing this, and asking them to stop. Otherwise, involving the Envirommental Police may be required. However, involving the Environmental Police does not guarantee that anything will change. Cultural features: a barbed -wire fence and stone walls. *(interpret the site index and the site's suitabili Qrowiin timber OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 stands classified under CH 61/61A; STEW stands not classified under CI 61 /61A; STD stand; AC acre; Mbf thousand board feet; BA basal area; VOL volume; cds cords Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Explanation of Silvicultural Methods These are referred to in Stand -level management practices on subsequent pages and are drawn from the following list, which is based on (proposed) Chapter 132 (Forest Cutting Practices Act) regulations. Silvicultural methods are broadly divided into two groups, intermediate cuts and regeneration cuts. Intermediate cuts focus on improving growth in an existing overstory. Regeneration cuts focus on establishing and promoting new stands of trees. Intermediate Cuts Thinnings Improvement Cuts: reduce the density of trees to enhance the vigor of residual trees. An improvement cut is usually an initial treatment that removes trees of low quality or undesirable species. Thinnings are subsequent adjustments to continue focusing growth on selected trees. Intermediate cuts that are overly "heavy" are classified as regeneration cuts: basal area thresholds are as follows: BA 100 for conifer stands, BA 60 for hardwood stands, BA 80 for conifer hardwood stands. Regeneration Cuts Regeneration cuts use existing stands of trees to create future stands of trees. The future stands of trees can be of one age (even aged), two ages (two -aged) or of three or more ages (uneven -aged, i.e. selection). In regeneration cuts, particular attention is paid to seed and seedling sources for the future stand, light conditions in the understory, and interfering factors (e.g. competitor plants in the understory). A regeneration cut can be sudden and decisive (clearcutting, single -cut shelterwood), staggered (most methods), or ongoing (uneven -aged, i.e. selection). Even -aged Methods Clearcut: All established trees are removed to allow new trees to grow from seed in full sun. Clearcutting is especially appropriate for early successional species (e.g. paper birch, poplar and black cherry plus gray birch and pin cherry) and may grow with mixes of hemlock, red maple and other birches. Seeding is assumed to occur from edge trees or from seed stored in the soil (cherry). Clearcuts may be up to 5 acres, or, if artificial seeding or planting is used, up to 10 acres. Larger clearcuts require special permission. Clearcuts separated by more than 100 feet are considered separate. Seed -tree: Similar to a clearcut except that seed trees are retained to provide seed (and cut later) and except that any species may be grown. No size limitation. At least 4 seed trees (20 -inch diameter or greater) or 12 seed trees (14 -20 inches diameter) must be retained per acre. OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 Forest Products (for CH 61/61A); STEW Non harvest Stewardship Practices; STD stand; Type Forest Type; Mbf= 1000 board feet; cds cords; BA basal area; VOL volume Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Shelterwood: usually a multi -step approach to establish desirable trees in the understory in medium -light conditions before the overstory is eventually removed to release the seedlings. Used especially for oak, sugar maple (giving these species years to establish well developed root systems) white pine and hemlock (giving these species years to establish competitive height). Black birch typically becomes abundant as well. Regeneration that is adequate for release must typically be 2 feet tall, well- distributed and abundant. Interfering vegetation must be identified and (ideally) controlled. Coppice: a complete "cutting off' of small or medium -sized hardwoods to cause these to resprout and form a new stand from the same root systems. Two -aged Methods Clearcut, Seed -tree, Shelterwood with "reserves Same as methods described above but with retention of trees (12 inches diameter or larger) (possibly for timber, habitat or aesthetic reasons). Uneven -aged Methods (Selection) In an uneven -aged stand there will always be trees in a range of size and age classes that are free to grow. Often current conditions will be an approximation of this but over time a true 3+ -aged stand can be created and maintained. A selection cut is a mix of thinning and creating/enlarging openings. Openings are defined as groups or patches; new openings generally do not cover more than 50% of the stand area. Group Selection: openings may range from single -tree up to 1/4 acre (e.g. equivalent to a circle about 120 feet in diameter) in size, which is about 1.5 times the mature height of many trees (80'- 100'). No special provisions are needed in the understory for this" conservative" opening size. Patch Selection: openings may range up to 2 acres (e.g. equivalent to a circle about 333 feet in diameter). Interfering vegetation (if present) should be identified and ideally controlled so that seedlings can be established/released. OBJECTIVE CODE: CI-161 Forest Products (for CH 61/61A); STEW Non harvest Stewardship Practices; STD stand; Type Forest Type; Mbf= 1000 board feet; cds= cords; BA basal area; VOL volume Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Required Management 2013 -2023: None. Suggested Management 2013 -2023: Suggested management falls into the categories indicated below. T rails/Roads /Drainage An overarching goal of the Mineral Hills Conservation Area is to have a safe, enjoyable, sustainable hiking trail system. There are good pieces of a trail system in place, including a through -trail from the southern boundary all the way to Montague Road There are three issues with this trail: (1) part of the trail is off the property (see Forest Stand and Boundary Map). It would not be a big deal to lay out, mark and install a re- routing of this trail so that it is entirely on the property. Like other trail work the Mineral Hills Conservation Area, this work could be largely done in conjunction with the Friends of Mineral Hills. (2) a more serious issue is the poor condition of the trail in its middle section, including a number of spots in the 60- foot -wide neck of land (Stand 4) and in Stand 1 in various places north of Clapp Brook, especially where streams cross the trail. Work to improve and stabilize this section of the trail would involve shaping the road with excavating equipment (to direct drainage) and possibly the addition of stone or logs (laid in the road) to hold the road in place. The 2011 -2012 logging also did road damage to the abutting property to the east: perhaps this could be fixed at the same time. The implementation of this work could be done in either of two ways, either as a stand -alone project or in conjunction with a properly- designed logging operation. (3) currently, it is not abundantly clear that ATVs are not permitted. Signs stating the City's policy could be posted at key locations. Additionally, the Environmental Police could be brought in and shown the shooting gallery area. This could be logged into their records, and the Environmental Police could be asked to check in on this area from time to time. Boundaries Finish marking all property boundaries (i.e. the Northampton Westhampton line and, once the NE corner is located, the remaining eastern boundary). If needed, have a surveyor locate and /or re -set the NE corner pin. OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 Forest Products (for CH 61/61A); STEW Non harvest Stewardship Practices; STD stand; Type Forest Type; Mbf 1000 board feet; cds cords; BA basal area; VOL volume Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Spot control of non native invasive plant species "early detection and rapid response Stand 1 (monitoring and spot- treatment) Control non native invasive plant- species: use herbicide to control one (or more, if found) very localized infestation(s) of bittersweet before this spreads throughout an otherwise uninfested stand. This may take up to three successive treatments (over three years). This is an efficient way to prevent a larger infestation from occurring. Control of grape vines: Stand 3 (mechanical treatment) Control of grapes: This is a one -time treatment involving cutting grapes (grape vines) close to the ground and, typically, also at chest or shoulder height. There will be some re- sprouting, but deer browse will probably be sufficient to prevent the sprouts from reaching back up to the severed vine and re- climbing the tree. The higher second cut helps give the deer a chance to keep the sprouts browsed back. The work will probably be done by chainsaw, but because this is a wetland area, it would be good to use canola oil in place of traditional mineral -based bar oil. Canola oil works fine, and using it avoids the problem of spraying mineral -based bar oil all over the wetland (even though the amount of oil would be small, why not avoid it Control of non native invasive plant species subsequent brushy habitat maintenance: Stand 4 (ca. 12 acres) Control non native invasive plant- species: use herbicide to control the bittersweet, multiflora rose, barberry, honeysuckle and any other non native invasives so that native plants can thrive. This may take up to three successive treatments (over three years). Consider coordinating with the eastern abutters to implement this same practice throughout the entire infested area. Maintain /restore brushy habitat: following completion of non native invasive treatments, assuming the level of control is sufficient, consider using a combination of logging and brush mowing to reclaim/re- establish the former agricultural area to mowable, brushy habitat with the intention of maintaining these over time (making sure that mowing is done in the winter to avoid harm to wood turtles). Do not bother re- converting the long neck of land to early- successional habitat— this would not be beneficial to wildlife and would probably be counter productive. OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 Forest Products (for CH 61/61 A); STEW Non harvest Stewardship Practices; STD stand; Type Forest Type; Mbf 1000 board feet; cds cords; BA basal area; VOL volume Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of C3o OBJ Stand Type Silviculture (harvesting) Acres to Cut BA to Cut Mbf to Cut Cords to Cut Timing Stew 1 OH selection 25.0 33 10 60 2013 -14 Stew 2 WH NONE 0 0 0 0 N/A Stew 3 HH NONE 0 0 0 0 N/A Stew 4 AF NONE* 0 0 0 0 N/A OBJ Stand Type Silviculture (harvesting) Acres to Cut BA to Cut Mbf to Cut Cords to Cut Timing Stew 1 OH selection 25.0 33 10 60 2013 -14 MANA GEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Logging for forest habitat, timber, trails management The overall purpose of logging described below is to build on recent logging in Stand 1 to capture as much benefit as possible by enhancing habitat conditions (forest structure and age -class distribution). Potential salvage logging of hemlock in Stand 3 was considered, but was rejected in favor of leaving this stand undisturbed (and therefore less vulnerable to infestation by bittersweet), even though the City may someday be looking at a large amount of dead hemlock in this stand. Though unsightly, it will provide good habitat. And, by that point, dead and dying hemlock will not be unusual across the wider multi town area. The idea of cutting off the remainder of Stand 2 to get an early- successional stand of sprout hardwoods (mostly red maple) and birches was considered but was rejected in favor of avoiding further disturbance to this area that directly abuts a significant bittersweet infestation. However, the management decisions described above can be reconsidered over time if and as circumstances evolve. Totals 25.0 *Note: there may be some cutting of trees in Stand 4 as part of brushy habitat improvement described above. The cutting will occur on roughly 25 acres out of 69.7, but will be distributed throughout the entire area. h some areas, mid -story trees with little or no commercial use will be cut (in order to accomplish the overall goals) these may need to be left on the ground. Practice purpose (how it helps create desired future condition) This three fold work would capitalize on the effects of recent logging by (1) enlarging (or completing) openings in order to release vigorous seedlings (of oaks or pine) that became established in recent cutting; (2) thinning around well- formed, well established trees and around important habitat trees (large, old trees) to improve their future vigor, growth, seed production, and health; and (3) creating new openings in places where desirable overstory trees are lacking. This work falls under the headings of "group selection" or "patch selection" (see explanations above). This harvest should have the effect of giving the forest a more diverse and well- thought -out appearance. OBJECTIVE CODE: CI Forest Products (for CH 61/61A); STEW Non harvest Stewardship Practices; STD stand; "type Forest Type; Mbf 1000 board feet; cds cords; BA basal area; VOL volume Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of 0 7) MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years A fourth benefit of this work would be to accomplish road improvements discussed above. Trees to be removed retained (types, conditions, sizes): Highly variable. Remove: in areas to be addressed, removal will range from poorly formed individual hardwood trees to most trees in openings (any size, quality or species including, where necessary, oaks). Retain most white pine, overstory hemlock, most oaks or hickory as well as pockets of well- established seedlings. Special considerations (erosion, habitat, access, timing, cultural, etc.): Logging system and capabilities will have to be able to, and agree to, avoid damage to well- formed trees. Control spot infestation(s) of non native plants and do not disturb these in logging operations. Possibly coordinate with eastern abutters to re -use 2011- 2012 logging access if logging cannot be accomplished in winter. OBJECTIVE CODE: CH61 Forest Products (for CH 61/61A); STEW Non harvest Stewardship Practices; STD stand; Type Forest Type; Mbf= 1000 board feet; cds cords; BA basal area; VOL volume Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Page of rr r h ;trat«� I LOCUS MAP LAND OF: City of Northampton Former Sarafin Parcel ACRES: 90 TOWN; Northampton TOPO SHEET: Eastham ;.1-7'30 48 84 l lir J1LL.J LOCUS MAP LAND OF: City of Northampton Mineral Hills Conservation Area ACRES: 294 TOWN: Northampton TOPO SHEET: Eastham.ton E%civele ?cLrce 4 O 24-17 z z 00 27 PLAN OF LAND IN NORTHAMPTON, MA SURVEYOR: DOS ENGINEER: HAMPSHIRE REGISTRY DRAFTING: BCF DESIGN: PREPAREDFOR FIELD WORK: HOR2. SCALE: THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, PROJECT NUMBER: 12 -045 VERT. SCALE:. OFFICE OF PLANNING DEVELOPMENT no maw, nu r. —.0 other City land not under Forest stewardship Plan LOCUS MAP LAND OF: City of Northampton Former Sarafin Parcel ACRES: 90 TOWN: Northampton TOPO SHEET: Easthampton 400 00.108.5 THE IS TO ACT .AR m WS1 AN iNOE.a NNMOUE FEE Ac1WS LOCUS MAP LAND OF: City of Northampton Mineral Hills Conservation Area ACRES: 294 TOWN: Northampton TOPO SHEET: Easthampton 400' 07 -06 -2012 COMPILED PLAN OVERVIE ono Cann Nn NOW EORLIETLy 30-001 MAP-PARCEL ASSEZSN'S m00 LINE LOCUS ADJOINERS PROPERTY LINE TOW SOUNOARTLY10 004550010000 0E511011100 AREA I 11210130 CERTIFY TO ME BEST OE x 0020 0 MY PROFESSIONAL 0408.002E i NORTHEAST �7 SURVEY it „I CONSULTANTS 'Ai FA01110.17TORMA 0 1" =500' North 1 Forest Stand and Boundary Map Land of City of Northampton Northampton, MA 90 acres Key Stream; seasonal stream culvert- Wetland; stone wall; coo barbed wire skid trail landing 0 stand boundary number iron pin TP" Map by Michael Mauri; LF 11161 20 West Street South Deerfield, MA 01373 (413) 665-6829 based on survey (PB 183, PG 16), topo map, 2012 stump cruise map and recent fieldwork by M.M., 2/2013 x�a Montague Road 3 HH ,w. I.P. is set off 50.6' on W -hamp side 1 a 1 43..5 w. N 93 14 sr t' 9' o OT 5$ 15o�k•S 3 8q' N %3w o- 0 w r Chesterfield Road „a 00 1 P 54i P +0 R, „e_ro k;11.5 area of trail needing drainage improvements fro 2011 skid trail onto land of Clapp spot infestation of bittersweet "Clapp Brook” trail meanders on off property Signature Page Please check each box that applies. n CH. 61/61A Management Plan I attest that I am familiar with and will be bound by all applicable Federal, State, and Local environmental laws and /or rules and regulations of the Department of Conservation and Recreation. I further understand that in the event that I convey all or any portion of this land during the period of classification, I am under obligation to notify the grantee(s) of all obligations of this plan which become his /hers to perform and will notify the Department of Conservation and Recreation of said change of ownership. Forest Stewardship Plan. When undertaking management activities, I pledge to abide by the management provisions of this Stewardship Management Plan during the ten year period following approval. I understand that in the event that I convey all or a portion of the land described in this plan during the period of the plan, I will notify the Department of Conservation and Recreation of this change in ownership. Green Certification. I pledge to abide by the FSC Northeast Regional Standards and MA private lands group certification for a period of five years. To be eligible for Green Certification you must also check the box below. Tax considerations. I attest that I am the registered owner of this property and have paid any and all applicable taxes, including outstanding balances, on this property. Signed under the pains of perjury: Owner(s) Owner(s) Plan Prepar I attest that the plan satisfactorily meets the requirements of CH61/61A and /or the Forest Stewardship Program. Approved, Service Forester v/ ,i e -1a Date Date I attest that I have prepared this plan in good faith to reflect the landowner's interest. Date 3 I 2.t7 13 Date Approved, Regional Supervisor Date In the event of a change of ownership of all or part of the property, the new owner must file an amended Ch. 61/61A plan within 90 days from the transfer of title to insure continuation of Ch. 61/61A classification. Owner(s) City of Northampton Town(s) Northampton Page of Revised May 2009 Outreach Plan: Mineral Hills Conservation Area (former Sarafin Property) Land of City of Northampton Montague and Chesterfield Roads, Northampton, MA Goals (Clearly state the outreach goals in one or two sentences): Build community involvement with passive recreation use and the management of the Mineral Hills Conservation Area, including the Sarafin purchase. Build a community that views this not as a single 90 acre parcel but as part of the 700 acre Mineral Hills Conservation Area. Target Audience (List individuals or groups that will most likely be the focus of the outreach effort): The "Friends of Mineral Hills" (a volunteer group that has been working to help protect the Mineral Hills area) Residents within walking or bicycling distance of' any portion of the Mineral Hills Conservation Citywide residents interested in conservation areas. Message (Keep message focused, concise and consistent): Mineral Hills Conservation Area is one of the crown jewels of Northampton's open space. The City's role is preserving the land, but day -to -day management is the role of the community. Activities (List the activities you plan to conduct to help achieve the state goals): Annual meetings of the Friends of Mineral Hills. Friends of Mineral Hills email list for community members to stay involved and informed about the Mineral Hills. Periodic walks lead by Friends of Mineral Hills, Kestrel Land Trust, and others. Community fundraising campaigns to expand the Mineral Hills Conservation Area. Revise the Northampton Open Space and Recreation Plan to reflect the ecological and passive recreation values of the parcel. Update "Rediscovering Northampton" (a monogram on the natural and human history of Northampton conservation areas). Advertising (List parties responsible for delivering the message and the tools* that will be used to advertise activities): Northampton Planning and Sustainability, on behalf of the Northampton Conservation Commission, using email list serves, City open space publications and web site, and media. Friends of Northampton, using email list serves, annual meeting, and walks. Kestrel Land Trust, using email list serves and walks. Implementation (Identify who will be responsible for itnplementing the activities and advertising, Include a detailed schedule (with deadlines) for completing each activity): Northampton Planning and Sustainability o Email, mail, web, and media outreach for campaigns to expand the conservation area whenever new parcels of proposed for acquisition. o Email, web, media outreach, and community meetings on the resources in the conservation area, as part of updates to the Open Space and Recreation Plan. o Email, web, media outreach, and readings or walk, as part of the update of Rediscovering Northampton Friends of Mineral Hills Conservation Area and Kestrel Land Trust o Email outreach and annual meeting o Email and media outreach for organized walks Evaluation (Identify how who will evaluate the outcome of the outreach activity and how): Northampton Planning and Sustainability, Conservation Commission, Planning Board, and community partners will evaluate outreach activity as part of the next Open Space and Recreation Plan update. Outreach activities will be evaluated and revised, with the final revised plan incorporated into the next version of the plan. z 1- 7 0 0 Dia o o p a0 3z\ tOloWilna.zum 1 4 z S4 W rn E rn N N 0 N 1+ 019 0 4-a i w 0 O F 9■L) w C F zoZ a]]' O F oa Eb 0a wt zku LL.Z 06 �4 a� n PO Be gw a uw La V 3 n. F 6 �D 3a z1 e z ai NZ 41 CI¢ 1+11 SYLVESTE R R 0- a 2 0 m L tb FQ U O a CC De U.