October 30, 2024 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

11/06/2024 03:21:43 PM Page 157 to 160 of 203 40 of 80 sheets 157 THE WITNESS: Yes. From the study, yes.1 THE PUBLIC: Okay.2 You mentioned, and this is as you were3 talking, the study plots were very random in the entire4 forest, but they look pretty condensed to each other.5 If they were random they would be kind of all over. If6 I put a blindfold on and shot darts at the screen, sorry7 it's late, they wouldn't be condensed. So how is this8 not bias? It's on the footprint of the construction9 property --10 THE WITNESS: Correct.11 THE PUBLIC: -- it's entirety.12 THE WITNESS: It's randomized within the area13 of disturbance was my testimony.14 THE PUBLIC: The area of disturbance?15 THE WITNESS: We focused on the area of16 disturbance. But the plots within the area of17 disturbance are randomized.18 THE PUBLIC: Right. Well, why wouldn't you19 focus on the plots that are most vulnerable, like the20 areas we were discussing to understand the density? I'm21 just not understanding.22 THE WITNESS: Well, because there is no area23 of disturbance here. There is no disturbance here.24 We're focused on what is the worst case scenario that25 158 can occur. This is obviously, if you look at it1 carefully, not exact at the time, this is the best rough2 outline that we had so we focused on that area to3 determine the worst case scenario.4 THE PUBLIC: Okay. Of tree removal?5 THE WITNESS: There you go.6 THE PUBLIC: Okay. Fine. I'm sorry.7 THE WITNESS: No, no. That's okay.8 THE PUBLIC: Okay. I thought the study9 plots were used to determine the health and the10 statisticals of the trees and stuff?11 THE WITNESS: It was the tree density we12 were looking for. The health came -- the health you13 have to do observationally.14 THE PUBLIC: Right. But the study plot and15 the tree density came from a formula?16 THE WITNESS: Correct.17 THE PUBLIC: Okay.18 So this formula was created specifically for19 the agreement and then hence the ordinance?20 THE WITNESS: I'm not certain what formula21 you mean now.22 THE PUBLIC: The formula of the replacement23 that was created by, there's no standard formula that24 was used by an association, another government agency25 159 that says, hey, this is the formula you should use to1 determine tree replacement with deer fencing, etc.?2 THE WITNESS: The formula, the replacement3 and the credits were all a consequence of findings of4 the study, which

s the formula you should use to1 determine tree replacement with deer fencing, etc.?2 THE WITNESS: The formula, the replacement3 and the credits were all a consequence of findings of4 the study, which are the basis for the negotiation which5 ultimately led to a settlement, that's correct. There6 is not a third-party that said --7 THE PUBLIC: So you created it?8 Was it created by your suggestion?9 THE WITNESS: Well, yeah. Yes, I take10 responsibility.11 THE PUBLIC: Okay. I just wanted to know,12 there was no industry standard out there?13 THE WITNESS: No.14 THE PUBLIC: So I want to make sure I'm15 understanding. Can you explain that in five years you16 said there was no growth, correct?17 THE WITNESS: In the five years I've seen18 virtually no change in the forest, correct.19 THE PUBLIC: Okay.20 So -- so we talked about the, you said the21 undergrowth, right?22 THE WITNESS: The understory, the23 undergrowth, whatever you want to call it.24 THE PUBLIC: What about the, when you did25 160 this study, what about the overall health of the trees1 themselves?2 THE WITNESS: The mature trees, as we stated3 earlier, as I stated earlier, the mature trees appear4 healthy with certain exceptions. We did not do an5 analysis of every tree in the forest. But the mature6 trees with the exception such as American beech, which7 we did note are now, of course in December I wouldn't8 have noted that in 2019, but since we were there in the9 summer we noted that beech trees are infected with beech10 leaf disease, which we know, based on studies and11 reports done throughout the northeast, is fatal to beech12 trees. So those trees are not healthy, they're sic. We13 know that ash are unhealthy generally in most forests14 and sadly we think moving towards extinction due to15 Emerald Ash Bore and ash disease. Those trees would not16 be deemed healthy overall. Did I look at every ash17 tree, I did not. Did I look for evidence of Emerald Ash18 Bore, I did not. I don't need to, it's here. We see it19 everywhere. I don't need to look at the trees to know20 that in all likelihood many are infected.21 Overall the oak trees, if I looked at them,22 they looked healthy overall. We didn't analyze the23 trees per se, but based on growth and canopy and24 everything else observationally I would say that from25