October 30, 2024 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

y to, you know --19 THE WITNESS: It will depend on the20 direction of the wind, the strength of the wind and21 where the animals choose to go.22 MR. CARDOZA: Okay.23 The proposed deer fencing, how far will it24 extend into the ground?25 71 THE WITNESS: The posts?1 MR. CARDOZA: Yeah.2 THE WITNESS: I would have to look at the3 spec sheet that is attached. I just don't have it in my4 head.5 MR. CARDOZA: And the fencing itself?6 THE WITNESS: The fencing itself doesn't go7 underground, it goes to the ground.8 MR. CARDOZA: All right. Perfect.9 So as mentioned it wouldn't interfere with10 animals that didn't burrow?11 THE WITNESS: No, burrowing animals, I mean,12 chipmunks are going to walk through it. Fox,13 woodchucks, they're going to burrow under it. It's not14 designed to stop them. Deer don't burrow that way.15 They will push but this fencing is stiff galvanized with16 cross members and they're not going to get under that.17 That's why it's used. Other animals they're not --18 small animals are going to have no problem transferring19 through this area.20 MR. CARDOZA: And then in reference to deer,21 or I should say in reference, I believe you mentioned22 one alternative to deer fencing, which would be deer23 hunts, which is obviously more invasive, any other24 alternative that the board or general public should be25 72 aware of and how did you come to the determination that1 this is the best option?2 THE WITNESS: It's not the best option. The3 best option to control deer purely on a control basis,4 not a recommendation for this application, the best5 option to control deer is a combination of hunting,6 which reduces population, deer fencing, if you want to7 regenerate the forest and potential deer relocation,8 which is extraordinarily expensive, very stressful on9 the animal and not all that successful in my experience10 of reading. However, this is the best option that I11 could come up with, professionally speaking, for this12 site with all the limitations that go with it. Housing13 density nearby, neighbors, trying to anticipate the,14 shall we say, disaffection with the deer hunts in South15 Mountain Reservation, I've never seen that be a very16 popular option. When it's on large private property,17 that's different. But this is the best option I could18 come up with in the time of negotiation.19 MR. CARDOZA: Thank you, Mr. DeFeo. I20 appreciate it.

option. When it's on large private property,17 that's different. But this is the best option I could18 come up with in the time of negotiation.19 MR. CARDOZA: Thank you, Mr. DeFeo. I20 appreciate it. That's all my questions.21 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Ms. Kapferer.22 MS. KAPFERER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.23 Mr. DeFeo, I have a couple questions about24 the beginning of your presentation, the study you have25

19 of 80 sheets Page 73 to 76 of 203 11/06/2024 03:21:43 PM 73 done. One, I think you show a couple of pictures on1 tree parking.2 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I will get there in a3 second. That?4 MS. KAPFERER: Yes.5 If I understand you correctly you said that6 these photos over time, because it shows that that's not7 a popular thing. So what would, if we were to look at a8 mature forest that it would be possible that --9 THE WITNESS: You would -- I'm sorry. What10 I said is this, over, and this, by the way, I didn't put11 every image that I looked at into this show. This slide12 show. I have looked back at images back to 1985, that's13 as far back as I can get a satellite image for this14 site. So to give you context, one change is this was15 wooded. Right. It's just woodland. What I would16 expect to see in here is, and this is a winter image17 admittedly, but what I would expect to see open areas, I18 would expect to see areas that are being cleared because19 of nature. Trees falling, dieing, etc., but with new20 growth coming in, which I won't see in the winter image21 of course, but as I start to look again at this other22 winter image, what I'm seeing is literally no change.23 This is not meant to be definitive, this is just24 illustrative of the forest being very consistent over25 74 time. Since 2002 to today these trees simply gotten1 bigger, which is a good thing, you know. I don't have a2 problem with that. I do have a problem with the fact3 that on the ground looking at this forest I don't see4 any change, even over five years with any understory5 growth. I see some growth, which I saw last time. Does6 that answer your question?7 MS. KAPFERER: Yeah. Then moving a bit8 further into your presentation I think you had a chart9 that was a histogram.10 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes. This one.11 MS. KAPFERER: So when someone went out to12 measure the trees, you know, were there measurements13 done on trees that are less than four inches?14 THE WITNESS: You don't do measurements in a15 tree survey on anything under four inches. You observe16 they're there, but you don't take physical measurements17 of them.18 MS. KAPFERER: Right. So how would that19 show up then? Like, how would that be characterized20 then on this chart.21 THE WITNESS: You would see it by22 observation. You would just count them. They just23 didn't appear in the -- let me go back and be clear on24 this.

ould that be characterized20 then on this chart.21 THE WITNESS: You would see it by22 observation. You would just count them. They just23 didn't appear in the -- let me go back and be clear on24 this. These types of studies and histograms are not25 75 absolute. This is a statistical survey. I'm sure you1 understand. But this means in these circled areas we2 did not find any of those trees. On my second, when I3 did a walk-through in 2024, as noted earlier, we did see4 some saplings under four inches, but I would say to you,5 all-though we did not do a statistical measurement, they6 weren't statistically significant, and the basis of that7 is purely anecdotal and by response. Oh my goodness,8 there's sampling. And when you're that surprised at9 seeing one, that's not good.10 MS. KAPFERER: So what you're saying though11 is that on that chart there wouldn't -- that how, the12 number, how would you have a number there? I mean,13 right now it looks like zero.14 THE WITNESS: In those study plots they saw15 them, they would count them and put them there. Because16 they know they're under four inches. I mean, that's17 observationally we can tell you that. And when the18 arborist who is used to go out into that section, there19 were three of them actually. You know, easily through20 years of experience, okay, there's three inch saplings.21 We note down there were five of those. But that, again,22 on this 16 feet or ten feet outside these little plots,23 I'm not saying there can't be one, but that's not what24 you're studying because it messes up your statistics.25 76 MR. AFRAN: I'm sorry, could you repeat1 that, I couldn't hear you.2 THE WITNESS: What I'm saying is, when you're3 doing this kind of a study, understand it's a4 statistical survey, it's not an absolute. No one is5 going in there and counting every single tree in that6 area. That's just not feasible. But when I say there7 are no saplings in the study area, I'm sorry, I'm not8 hitting the circle very well, I was never very good at9 those games. I could be here, which is outside of the10 study area and I could see a sapling potentially, but I11 wouldn't count it in my statistical study because it's12 not in the study plots. In 2024 as noted we did see13 some saplings but weren't doing a repeat of the14 statistical survey of the forest. We weren't recreating15 that survey, it was unnecessary in our

not in the study plots. In 2024 as noted we did see13 some saplings but weren't doing a repeat of the14 statistical survey of the forest. We weren't recreating15 that survey, it was unnecessary in our opinion.16 MS. KAPFERER: Thank you.17 I think I was confused when I saw that sign18 and I was pretty sure that would have to be more than19 zero. I'm just confused as to where the number was and20 how someone divided that number.21 So is the deer fence, is it practiced by22 other experts? I know you mentioned that the Department23 of Agriculture sounds like they have design guides or24 something like that. So are there other entities that25

11/06/2024 03:21:43 PM Page 77 to 80 of 203 20 of 80 sheets 77 use the deer fence? I know you said Duke Farms and1 Essex County, are there others that promote, like does2 DEP have a stance on the deer fence?3 THE WITNESS: To my knowledge I don't, I4 haven't seen anything published by the DEP, but there5 have been and I have read over the years multiple6 studies, Cornell University, Penn State, University of7 Syracuse. Many have done studies. US -- sorry.8 Department of Agricultural -- US Department of9 Agriculture Forestry has done studies on deer fencing.10 What I have read, I would say to summarize it11 succinctly, is it works but they're expensive. Probably12 the single most expensive means of trying to preserve a13 forest and not feasible as most would say when you're14 trying to preserve a national forest or something to15 that size. It's just not feasible. Duke Farms happens,16 apparently, to have a significant resource base of money17 to be able to create that much fencing. Some of their18 fencing however was also paid for by settlements with19 polluters over the years. That's how they could afford20 it. In this case you have an ordinance based on the21 settlement, was I close, that does call for the22 applicant to pay for the deer fencing.23 MS. KAPFERER: Thank you.24 And then question about, I'm not sure if25 78 this questions for you or for us. Does somebody review1 the design for the fence? If it's something that, you2 know, maybe is unfamiliar, how do we determine --3 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I think he testified to4 the design of the fence.5 MS. KAPFERER: Okay.6 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did testify to the7 design of the fence, it was actually part of my report.8 The US Department of -- New Jersey Department of9 Agriculture design standard.10 MS. KAPFERER: Okay.11 And then one question, I believe you said12 something about that the deer are herded out when the13 fence is actually closed. How does that work? Maybe14 this is a silly question, but thinking it's, you know,15 so many, it's a very large area, how do you make sure16 all the deer are out and any other wildlife for that17 matter?18 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I'm not worried about any19 animal other than deer not getting out of there on their20 own. I'm not going to worry if they get out on the day21 that the fence is closed. They will get out.22 The deer, not much different than herding23 out any other

er not getting out of there on their20 own. I'm not going to worry if they get out on the day21 that the fence is closed. They will get out.22 The deer, not much different than herding23 out any other animal. You're going to have to, I don't24 have the exact methodology in front me what you would25 79 have to do, because it would be determined at that time,1 but essentially you do a sweep. You start at the2 farthest points from the gates and you make, it's going3 to sound rather archaic but similar to driving game when4 hunters do that. They drive game by having people move5 game in a specific direction. If we go to the, let me6 go back and show you probably the easiest. So I'm not7 going to even go to the next slide since I have such bad8 luck with it. Presuming that, let's presume for9 argument sake right now, because the final design isn't10 done, that the gate is here. Just for argument sake.11 So what you would start to do is create, whether it's12 with people or some other means, probably people because13 you can't get a machine in here. You create a line and14 you begin walking in this direction and you begin a15 sweep, so you create an arc and the deer are not going16 to come towards you, they're going to move away and you17 continue that until you arc, and they only have one18 point to go and that's out the gate. They can't get19 over it, so they're going to go through the gate. It's20 not a very sophisticated thing but it can be very21 effective.22 MS. KAPFERER: That's my questions. Thank23 you.24 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Guess who's up, the25 80 engineer. Do you have any questions about his1 testimony?2 MR. HESS: One quick question, if I may.3 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Sure.4 MR. HESS: The, you have indicated also5 invasive species within the understory area that's going6 to be fenced with the deer fencing?7 THE WITNESS: Correct.8 MR. HESS: Are there any plans, since that9 will be fenced in, are there any plans to do anything to10 remove the invasive species in that area?11 THE WITNESS: That's not something that we12 discussed to any great length. There are no plans that13 I know of to do that.14 MR. HESS: Okay.15 Just wait naturally then and hope that the16 new growth causes the invasive species to back off or17 succumb?18 THE WITNESS: Over time that's what we would19 anticipate. But I also don't know that, the applicant20 may not want to put a trail, a walking

wth causes the invasive species to back off or17 succumb?18 THE WITNESS: Over time that's what we would19 anticipate. But I also don't know that, the applicant20 may not want to put a trail, a walking trail and do21 something, it's up to the applicant. They may choose22 over time to say, let's do something. Create a garden23 club. I'm not saying they will, but perhaps the24 community in there wants one. Any number of things can25

21 of 80 sheets Page 81 to 84 of 203 11/06/2024 03:21:43 PM 81 be done in those areas. They're not wetlands so they1 can be disturbed. And let me be clear, when I say2 disturbed, I mean take out the invasives.3 MR. HESS: No, I understand.4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you, Mr. Hess.5 Mr. Haizel, you have a question for Mr.6 DeFeo on his testimony?7 MR. HAIZEL: Yeah, quick question.8 I thought it was actually very fascinating9 as well because I'm not familiar with any type of10 development done in this manner. So I did some11 research, but question. Looking at the slides that you12 have at the start of the session, the slide show showing13 no variation in the vegetation, is that normal for a14 terrain that is, you know, you have a wetland area, you15 have a fairly inclined area, is that normal that it16 would be that consistent across?17 THE WITNESS: You're talking about the line18 of sight being so clear?19 MR. HAIZEL: Not just the line of sight, but20 just looking at the canopy and things of that sort. I21 would suspect there's going to be, in the wetland area22 for instance, there may be greater density there, even23 by the standards of little density that it would be24 relatively greater density in the wetland area maybe25 82 more or less of a --1 THE WITNESS: It's a very good question. The2 answer is, no, I would have expected a higher density in3 the wetlands but unfortunately the higher density in the4 wetlands would be observed with barberry. It's an5 extraordinarily aggressive plant. Obviously very6 successful but not in the means that I would like to7 see. But we did see higher density but nothing of the8 native variety that we wanted.9 MR. HAIZEL: So I think one of the10 commissioners did ask before, is there anything else11 impacting the commission of the forest? Would it be12 then that the deer are a major contributor but that this13 invasive vegetation is also having a significant impact?14 THE WITNESS: Yes. The invasive plants15 normally have an impact. But number one, since there16 isn't a high density of native plants because the deer17 are eating those, the invasive plants are left, the deer18 don't go there. You won't find deer resting and19 sleeping in barberry, it's not very comfortable and so20 they leave it alone. The barberry simply reproduces.21 The birds will eat those seeds and spread them further22 and barberry will also spread itself by

in barberry, it's not very comfortable and so20 they leave it alone. The barberry simply reproduces.21 The birds will eat those seeds and spread them further22 and barberry will also spread itself by seed drop and it23 just, since nothing eats it, it continues on its24 spreading. The same is true of Japanese stiltgrass,25 83 where we saw open areas where trees have come down,1 going back to Ms. Kapferer's question, where I had open2 areas was mostly Japanese stiltgrass. Now, that will3 die, it's an annual, but it will come back by seed.4 But, again, deer don't eat it. I keep trying to train5 the ones in my yard to eat it, but they don't listen.6 MR. HAIZEL: And just out of curiosity, this7 may be beyond your scope, but this process by which this8 is done in terms of cording off an area and fencing it9 and as far as you know is this considered humane in10 terms of the --11 THE WITNESS: It's -- yes, in my opinion it12 is because we're not killing the deer. We're not13 harming the deer. We're simply driving them out of a14 given site. Now, I -- question of hunting and not15 hunting is a whole separate question. But as I've said16 in other areas, for example Duke Farms is the largest17 area deer control that I've seen lately, they hunt it.18 And I don't mean that they brought in sport hunters,19 these were, similar to what you have in South Mountain20 and other deer control areas, these are marksmen.21 They're not there hunting for sport, they're baiting and22 killing deer quickly. You can say that's inhumane, I'm23 not going to make that argument one way or the other.24 That's the single most effective way to reduce deer25 84 population. Again, basic math. Is the deer fencing1 humane, we're not hurting the deer. We're not doing2 anything. They're going to be scared that one day when3 they're driven out, but deer aren't really, I mean, I've4 walked through there a few times, the deer were looking5 at me, they weren't really afraid of me. They just kind6 of looked at me and I looked at them.7 MR. HAIZEL: Thank you.8 No more questions.9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Plocker.10 MR. PLOCKER: Very briefly.11 Thank you, Mr. DeFeo, I just wanted to12 confirm for the record that the IH-1 zoning ordinance13 which applies to this application, there is a section14 called, Tree Removal and Replacement. Are you familiar15 with that?16 THE WITNESS: I didn't read the