Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPB agenda 091802COUNTY OF ORANGE ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM To: Agricultural Preservation Board From: David Stancil, ERC Director Date: September 11, 2002 �0IE 0 V E l Re: September 18 Meeting Agenda -�-- Please find attached the agenda for our next meeting, scheduled for: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 7:30 p.m. Planning and Agricultural Center Conference Room 306 Revere Road Hillsborough, NC As per the August meeting, everyone should have received an email (or mail) reminder asking you to think about three items (September 2003 Farm Festival ideas, Agricultural Business options, and VFPP Ordinance revisions /County Attorney letter). These items, plus a review of the completed (rough draft) farmland mapping project, will highlight the agenda. Please contact Carol Melton (245 -2590) by the Tuesday before the meeting if you will be unable to attend. Copies: Dianne Reid, Economic Development Director Fletcher Barber, CES County Director Brent Bogue, District Conservationist Rich Shaw, Land Conservation Manager Mike Lanier, Ag Economic Development Specialist AGENDA COUNTY OF ORANGE AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION BOARD Time Page 7:30 7:30 7:31 02 7:33 PLANNING AND AGRICULTURAL CENTER Conference Room 306 Revere Road HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA Wednesday, September 18, 2002 7:30 p.m. AGENDA ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — August 21 4. WELCOME TO NEW MEMBERS 7:45 5. ITEMS FOR DECISION a. Agricultural Business Options (Attachment 1) 8:15 12 6. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION a. September 2003 Farm Festival Proposal (Attachment 2) b. Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance / Proposed Conservation Agreement (Attachment 3) c. Review — Farmland Mapping Project d. Update on Federal Farm Bill Grants (Attachment 4) e. Organizational Chart & Rules of APB (Attachment 5) f. Update Land Use Committee 8:55 7. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS a. Carolina Farm Stewardship Association 17th Annual Sustainable Agriculture Conference b. "Common Ground" 9:00 8. ADJOURNMENT 0 t, DRAFT MINUTES AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION BOARD August 21, 2002 PRESENT: Tony Kleese, Louise Tate, Bob Strayhorn, Rodney Recor, Noah Ranells, Marty Mandell, Gordon Warren, Environment & Resource Conservation Director David Stancil, Preservation Planner Tina Moon, and Carol Melton. ABSENT: Elizabeth Walters, Kimberly Roberts and Whit Morrow GUESTS: Carl Walters, Mike Lanier ITEM #1: CALL TO ORDER Kleese called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and thanked everyone for attending. ITEM #2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA Members requested binders and punched agendas. Warren requested that the group discuss how VAD's interact with the Extra Territorial Jurisdiction's (ETJ) of neighboring municipalities and suggested Gerry Cohn from AFT as a guest speaker. Staff to investigate and report back in September. Stancil asked to add an item 6a., and distributed a memo from the county attorney on the VAD form and conservation easement document. ITEM #3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 19, 2002 Kleese requested two grammatical corrections. MOTION: Warren made motion to approve the June 19th, 2002 minutes. Seconded by Recor. VOTE: Unanimous. ITEM #4: WELCOME TO NEW MEMBERS Kleese welcomed new member Warren. It was noted that Roberts had called and asked to be excused as she would be out of town for the August meeting. Stancil noted that with the two new VAD's of Lee Miller and the Bacon Family, the potential for two new members is on the horizon. ITEM #5: ITEMS FOR DECISION None DRAFT 03 ITEM #6: ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION a. Orange County 250 / September 2003 Ag Event It was previously reported that on September 9th, 1752 the county held it's first colonial court session at Grayfields along the Eno River. The committee working on this project seeks advisory board assistance in celebrating. Stancil reported on the activities surrounding the County's 250th celebration beginning with a hike from Moorefields to the old county courthouse on Sunday September 8, 2002. This event will be followed by a brief ceremony at the courthouse with a bell ringing ceremony at high noon on September 9th. Other activities are planned throughout the next year with a final, farm - oriented, event in September of 2003. Mike Lanier gave a presentation of ideas for a "Farm Festival" for the final 250th event. He asked the APB for their ideas and suggestions on ways to promote agricultural heritage and ways to educate residents on locally produced farm products. During the presentation members expressed the following concerns: ➢ Be aware of potentially sensitive areas such as the use of animals. ➢ Instead of a pony ride where animals are walking in a circle, consider engaging an equestrian club to provide adult assisted short trail rides for children. ➢ Get Orange County folks to do demonstrations of farming activities and talk about the way farming used to be done, and include current examples of beekeeping, sheep herding, and production methods. ➢ Show maps of Orange County in 50 year intervals to show farming trends. ➢ Get farmers involved in the oral history program. ➢ Include educational information on future farming in Orange County. ➢ Include the 4 -H, Future Farmers of America, Grange, Ruritan clubs and other farming organizations. ➢ Seek grants for funding. ➢ Festival location should be decided by October 2002. ➢ If using a resident's farm, they should be compensated for disruption of farming as the event would need to be assembled prior to the date of the activity. Members discussed the possible use of holding the festival at the Blackwood farm and asked if there is a coordinator for the event. Members also asked for a copy of the festival presentation so they could develop a memo of their suggestions. b. Local Harvest Guide Web Site (Previously members had received the Agricultural Resource Guide recently published by Economic Development Commission and Mike Lanier. Members asked if the Guides are free for citizens, and it was noted that the Guide would be on the county's web page.) Lanier reported that a new web site was being created and urged the APB members to investigate and asked for them to call or email suggestions to him. Recor asked about long -term maintenance of the site and volunteered to assist with updates to the web site. (web site address:) http: / /serverl.co. orange .nc.us /harvestnewsite /index.htm DRAFT 2 C. Agricultural Business Options Previously a new approach for establishing farm - related business operations was presented to the APB. The concept is to upgrade the permitting process to better address the needs of our rural community. It consists of these key elements: (1) streamlining the bonafide farm accessory use process, (2) reviewing the agricultural- related land uses in our existing ordinance, (3) considering new options for small and medium size operations, and /or operations that are agricultural in character but not directly linked to a specific farm, or are cooperatives, (4) combining similar uses into categories to allow for future uses, and (5) creating permitting procedures based on the intensity of the use, subject to performance standards. Moon reviewed a chart showing an overview of the proposal. Uses are categorized based on the strength of their link to agriculture and their land use intensity, and assigned permitting procedures accordingly. The Agricultural Business Options Matrix laid out the proposal within the framework of the existing regulations. Existing land uses and new uses are shown in different colors. The columns indicate the zoning districts where the land uses would be permitted, the permitting process and if the use is existing or proposed. Moon explained the approval process of the different special use permits and site plans. Moon asked the members for feedback on performance standards or other suggestions and noted that once the APB input is incorporated into the proposal staff will arrange a meeting with members of the community who have either established a successful farm - related business or are interested in pursuing one. After the community meeting, staff will incorporated comments and other new ideas into the proposal and begin to draft amendments to the ordinance. APB members noted that there needs to be clear definition of a bonafide farm. They also agreed that the determination of whether a farm is bonafide or not should be decided by farm service agencies prior to a permitting request being submitted to the Planning Department. Other ideas and comments: ➢ Government should defend farmers rights ➢ Don't add burden on farmers for unnecessary permits ➢ How can the current land use permitting fees be adjusted to promote this proposed process instead of becoming more of a burden to small farmers? ➢ Should site plan really be needed for a tomato stand on a farm? ➢ Establish a way for zoning complaints to be handled without requiring farmers to get a land use.permit to sell produce. ➢ Adjust the zoning ordinance so that farming operations would be allowed multipurpose uses without having to subdivide. ➢ A farmer should have the right to use his land to make a living in a traditional or non - traditional farming method. DRAFT 05 ➢ Make it clear that the intent of the new effort is to support ag enterprises- - reducing the burden of permitting hoops instead of increasing it. ➢ Farm Zoning is not feasible because it is a property rights issue. ➢ Coordinate zoning enforcement with agricultural agents. Kleese wrapped up the discussion with three summarizations: 1. the definition of bonafide farm needs to be settled 2. we need to figure out how can the county better deal with complaints about farming practices in the community 3. we need to avoid burdening the farmer with more permitting processes and rules. Members were asked to think about the table "New Ways to Support Our Rural Economy — Agri- business" and prepare a list of suggestions or concerns for the next meeting. Next potential check in point with BOCC is the public hearing in November. d. APB Mission and Charge /Organizational Chart This item was deferred until September meeting due to lack of time. e. Federal Farm Bill — Farmland Protection Program In May of this year, Congress adopted and the President signed the new Farm Bill. Part of the Farm Bill provided for appropriations to the Farmland Protection Program, which channels funds to the states for assistance in the acquisition of conservation easements. The County has been working with several farmers on potential easement acquisitions over the past several months, and may wish to apply for FPP funding to augment and leverage County funds for easement purchases. Announcements of designations are due out September 15t" f. VFPP Ordinance Revisions Stancil reported that a memo from the county attorney had been received and distributed at a previous meeting where there was not a quorum. The memo was redistributed, reviewed and discussed briefly. Members were asked to review the information and bring back ideas, suggestions or concerns at the September meeting. g. Update — Land Use Committee The first meetings for the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Committee (CPLUC) were held in June & July. Made up of representatives from the county's advisory boards and the county commissioners, the committee will serve as sounding board for the Planning Department to help evaluate different strategies for updating the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Mandell, the representative and Ranells, the alternate will be providing reports to the APB for feedback. Mandell reported that the first meetings were mostly about sprawl in the county and asked for APB members to voice issues they would like to be addressed by DRAFT 4 t the CPLUC committee. The idea of `farm zoning' was negatively discussed. One member gave an example of current permitting process being too stringent for a farmer that wants to give a son or daughter a lot to build a house on. Another example of extensive regulations was given. Currently there is a drought assistance program offered by the federal government where they will drill a well for a farmer (to water cattle /livestock) if he agrees to not use it for human consumption for a certain time and protect the watershed area around the well. However, when the farmer comes to environmental health for the permit to drill the well he is still required to pay an expensive fee. It seems that there should be an exception for this type of well drilling permit fee. A discussion of protecting the farmer's right to farm was highlighted with the notion of getting Gerry Cohn of AFT to be a speaker in the near future. Members were asked to e-mail ideas on the Agri business options to staff as well as other concerns. Mandell and Recor asked members to convey their comments for the Land Use Committee to them also. Items for next agenda Review comments from the APB on the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance (VFPPO) and the memo from the county attorney. Review APB's comments on the Farm Festival presentation. Review the APB's ideas on the Agricultural Business Options proposal. Revisit APB charge /mission. ITEM #5: Adjournment The APB adjourned at 9:45 p.m. DRAFT F f 1, ATTACHMENT # 1 ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE ".'CONSERVATION MEMORANDUM To: Agricultural Preservation Board From: Tina Moon, Land Use/ Preservation Planner Date: August 14, 2002 Subject: Agricultural Business Options Over the last several years, many local farmers have looked for options to supplement their income. Unfortunately the innovative nature of these options often make the permitting process more challenging. In an effort to remedy this situation, planning, economic development and farm agency staff have been working together to evaluate our current regulations, and to consider revisions that will better address the needs of our rural community. At your last meeting on June 19, 2002 Planning /ERCD staff outlined a proposal developed by this interdepartmental group for feedback. The proposal focuses on the following issues, which were identified by the group and local farmers: ✓ Streamlining the bonafide farm accessory use process ✓ Reviewing the agricultural - related land uses in our existing ordinance ✓ Considering new options for small and medium size operations, and /or operations that are agricultural in character but not directly linked to a specific farm, or are cooperatives ✓ Combining similar uses into categories to allow for future (unforeseen) uses ✓ Creating permitting procedures based on the intensity of the use, subject to performance standards The attached chart provides an overview of the proposal. Uses are categorized based on the strength of their link to agriculture and their land use intensity (hence the progression from green to brown), and assigned permitting procedures accordingly. Since a good part of the purpose behind this project is to make it easier to establish agricultural - related businesses, the approximate length of the permitting process is shown as well. The attached matrix lays -out the proposal within the framework of our existing regulations. Existing land uses are shown in black, new uses are shown in red. The columns indicate the zoning districts where the land uses would be permitted, the permitting process, and if the use is existing or proposed. A site plan is approved by planning staff, a Class B Special Use Permit is approved by the Board of Adjustment, and a Class A Special Use Permit is approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Please review the materials and come to the meeting with specific comments, language changes, etc. Once your input is incorporated into the proposal staff will arrange a meeting with members of the community who have either established a successful farm - related business or are interested in pursuing one. You are encouraged to participate in this meeting, and /or suggest other people to invite. After the community meeting, staff will incorporate your comments and other new ideas into the proposal and begin to draft amendments to the ordinance. NEW WAYS TO SUPPORT OUR RURAL ECONOMY - Agri- business Proposed New Use Categories and Permitting Requirements based on Intensity • Pick - your -own fruits & vegetables • Retail sales for site grown products • Processing for site grown products • Agri- tourism for site grown products: corn mazes, hay rides Exempt hhh- Sales: wayside stands cooperative stands & seasonal sales Agricultural education: rural heritage museums, petting zoos, agricultural learning centers Seasonal, or Special Events: corn maze, hay rides Site Plan Review 2 -4 Weeks • Veterinarian services • Farm machinery repair • Landscaping • Grading operations • Retail for farm, forest, horticulture, nursery, or equine related products Site Plan or Class B SUP 2 Weeks to 2 Months • Vineyard/ Winery • Dairy product processing • Special product production (sauces, etc.) • Small -scale meat processing • Small -to medium scale cold storage facilities • Farmers' Markets Class B Special Use Permit 1 -2 Months • Large -scale processing, distributing • Livestock yards/ meat processing • Grinding/ composting facilities • Cold storage facilities Rezoning/ Class A SUP Quarterly Public Hearing 6 -9 Months loop. CIO Agricultural Business Options Matrix (Uses are listed and shaded based on the intensity of the permitting requirements - -least difficult to most difficult) Land Use Residential Zonin Districts Nodes/ Existing Commercial - Industrial Permitting Process Existing/ Proposed Bonafide Farm Accessory Uses AR R1 RB Accessory-See brochure Existing Botanical Gardens & Arboretums AR Ri RB LC1 NC2 Site Plan Existing Greenhouses, no on- premise sales AR, R1, RB, existin AS NC2, EC5 Site Plan Existing Class I Kennel AR, R1, RB, existin AS Site Plan Existing Garden Center LC1 NC2 Site Plan Existing Farm Equipment Sales EC5 Site Plan Existing Animal Hospitals, Veterinarians EC5 Site Plan Existing Greenhouses, on- premise sales NC2, EC5 Site Plan Existing Stealth Communication Towers (75 or shorter) AR, R1, RB LC1, EC5 Site Plan Existing Rural Guest Establishments (3 rooms or less) AR, R1, RB Site Plan Existing Agricultural Tourism * Sales: • Wayside stands, and cooperative stands • Seasonal sales: Christmas Trees, pumpkins, orchard sales, specialty fruits & vegetables, flowers AR, R1, RB LC1, NC2 Site Plan Proposed Educational: Agricultural education: rural heritage museums, petting zoos, agricultural learning centers Seasonal, or Special Events: ■ Corn maze Small -Scale Equine - Related Programs AR, R1, RB Site Plan Proposed i i i I Zoning Ordinance amendments (forthcoming) for proposed new land uses will include performance standards such as: thresholds for the number of patrons /employees associated with the business or lot size, hours of operations, traffic generation, time of year, time of operation, intensity of use. ,_.. Land Use Residential Zoninq Districts Nodes/ Existing Commercial - Industrial Permitting Process Existing/ Proposed Special Events Under 150 le AR R1 RB SUP B Existing Cam /Retreat Center AR Rl RB SUP B Existing Class II Kennel/ Riding Stables AR, R1, RB, existin AS SUP B Existing Communication Towers 199 feet or shorter AR Ri RB LCl EC5 SUP B Existing Rural Guest Establishments 4 -8 rooms AR R1 SUP B Existing Agricultural Processing/ Retail ■ Vineyard/ winery ' ■ Dairy product processing ■ Special product production (sauces, etc.) ■ Small -Scale meat processing ■ Small -to- Medium Scale Cold Storage Facilities AR, R1, RB, (existing AS) LC1, NC2, EC5 SUP B Proposed Farmers' Markets AR R1 RB LC1 NC2 SUP B Proposed Historic Sites Non-Residential/Mixed Use ARf Ri RB SUP A Existing Communication Towers 200 feet or greater) AR Ri RB LCi EC5 SUP A Existing Rural Guest Establishments (9 or more rooms or 4 or more moms & Restaurant AR, Ri SUP A Existing Animal Hospitals, Veterinarians AR -AS " Rezoning & Site Plan Existing Feed, Seed, Storage & Processing Includin large-scale cold storage facilities AR -AS Rezoning & Site Plan Existing Greenhouses on-premise sales AR -AS Rezoning & Site Plan Existinq `, Commercial Feeder Operation AR -AS Rezoning & Site Plan Existing Sawmills - AR -AS Rezoning & Site Plan Existing Stockyards Includin large-scale meat processing-- facilities AR -AS Rezoning & Site Plan Existing Garden Center AR -AS Rezoning &Site Plan Existing Farm Equipment Sales AR -AS Rezoning &Site Plan Existing Grind in com posting facilities or yards AR -AS Rezoning & Site Plan Proposed. Bio -a ricultural industries AR -AS Rezoning & Site Plan Proposed Commercial stables AR -AS Rezoning & Site Plan Proposed Large-scale processing, distributing, storage facilities AR -AS Rezoning & SUP A:. Proposed AS Agricultural Service is a floating zoning district available for appropriate uses within the AR zoning district, subject to the rezoning process. �J Other Ideas: Consider changing existing " "agricultural service" to agricultural industrial and create new agricultural service to address services for farmers (i.e. veterinarians, farm machinery repair) New Ag Service Category — (Services for farmers or rural property owners) • Veterinarian — mobile unit or hospital ■ Farm machinery repair, small engine repair ■ Landscaping ■ Grading operations • Retail for farm, forest, horticulture, nursery, or equine related products Existing Zoning Districts: AR Agricultural Residential R1 Rural Residential RB Rural Buffer NCI Neighborhood Commercial LC1 Local Commercial EC5 Existing Commercial AS Agricultural Service (Rural Activity Nodes) (Rural Activity Nodes) (Commercial activity in existence prior to zoning & not in Node) (Floating zoning district available within AR, subject to the rezoning process) ()RANG_*; COUNTY X002 NORTH CAROLINA RIFLE BRATItG 254 YEARS Date: August 22, 2002 ATTACHMENT # 2 Fai/,vm Festival To: APB Members and ERDC Staff From: Mike Lanier Subject: Orange County Farm Festival Please find attached copies of the Farm Festival slide Show. Feel free to make comments, add events you would like to see, suggestions, etc. next to the slide you are commenting on. Contact me if you have any problems. 1 15 jr, .0 a 7 ^j Rr r i.. f: y T Y • r( ! .4 .4 C �'�}�' � s'ai it .yf r p r t P � : � R ><,r.., �. � • At� , 'b � .,k ;,4'7' q .< a.- �l +i. � ,wi 1 . . �" c, + 4 4- •.ra. E , u ' ;, , 04- 12 -'02 09:50 FROM- Coleman Gledhill.& H 9191234567 ,-AW OFFICES COLEMAN, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE A FROMENONAL CoRPOK TION 129 E. TRYON M7MT K U. L)KAWEX 029 F LU- 90ROUGW, D102-TK CA3JOL11�1A 17178 919.992.2196 April 12, 2002 rAx 919.73744 WEBSM WWW.CGANr)KCOM Mr. David Stancil Director Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department Post Office Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 RE: Farmland Preservation Program Dear Dave: T -944 P02/03 U -160 ATTACHMENT #3 PPLOM M Dul: of GEOFFREY E. GLH)HILY. &,Mail:. eeolfr+rrQ:edh4 *t"hoom Z have reviewed the documents that you provided to me with an eye toward simplifying the Voluntary Agricultural District application form and the Agricultural Conservation Agreement used by Orange County for its Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program. Enclosed aie documents which I think achieve that goal consistent with the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act, Article 61 of Chapter 106 of the North Carolina General Statutes. One of the things I looked at is the short -form combination application and conservation agreement. In my view it is not possible to.combine these two instruments..consistent with the Enabling Act. The Enabling Act requires a conservation agreement between the farmer and the county that conforms to C.S. § 121- 35. This is not achi©ved by the combined document that you sent to me for review. I also looked at the Durham County, Chatham County and Alarnance County program documents you provided me. I think the Durham County Code provisions best capture the sense of what is required of a farmland preservation program in. the same way that Orange County has implemented its farmland preservation program. However, all three ordinances (and Orange County's) make clear that one of the requirements for qualifying farmland and placing farmland in a voluntary agricultural district is that the land be subject to a conservation agreement as defined in G.S. § 121 -35. A G.S. § 121 -35 conservation 04- 12 -'02 09 :50 FROM- Coleman Gledhill & H 9191234567 T -944 P03/08 U -150 Mr. David Stancil Page 2 April 12, 2002 easement cannot be reduced to a line or two. The sense of this is captured in the Durham County Code provisions that relate to Durham's County's conservation easement requirements. wn my view a conservation agreement between a landowner and the County required in a Farmland Preservation Program is comparable to what is required in a conservation easement. The difference is that a farmland preservation agreement is revocable on short notice; a conservation easement is typically perpetual. Furthermore, a farmland preservation agreement must be designed to create a legal interest in the farmland in order for it to be mapped and identified as part of a voluntary agricultural district in the County land records. Of the documents I reviewed, only the Alamance County documents create, in the ordinance, a requirement for a conservation agreement as defined in G.S. S 121 -35 and in the applicaition apparently ignore that requirement. I cannot toll you whether Alamance County or other counties are operating their voluntary farmland preservation programs without requiring substantive conservation agreements. I can say that in my opinion a voluntary agricultural preservation program that operates without substantive agricultural conservation agreements meets neither the language nor the spirit of the Enabling Act. In the hope that the conservation agreement will not unnecessarily worry farmers, I have reduced it to what is, in my view, bare bones. The length of the document has been reduced by one half. I hope what's enclosed will help with keeping the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program vital,. If I can provide anything else to help in that regard, please advise. GEG11sg Enclosures 13g:1attera \ztancl1farm1and.1tr Very truly yours, CQLEMM , GLEDH I LIL & HARGRAVE , P.C. Gledhill 19, 04- 12 -'02 09 :51 FROM- Coleman Gledhill & H 9191234567 T -944 PO4/03 U -160 SAMPLE AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AGREEMENT THIS AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") is made this day of t , by _(NAME) ( "Grantor ") and between Orange County, a North Carolina unit of local government ("Grantee "), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Grantor is the sole owner in fee simple of certain real property in Orange County, North Carolina, more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference (the "Property' �; and WHEREAS, Grantee is a Nort}r Carolina unit of local government seeking to preserve and protect land in its agricultural condition pursuant to the laws of the State of forth Carolina, and, in partieular, by the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act (Chapter 106, Article 61) and by the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act (Chapter 121, Article 4) of the North Carolina General Statutes, and pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland preservation Program Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Agricultural Districts Advisory Board ( "Board ") certified the Property as qualifying farmland pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance on and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners designated the Property as a. Voluntary Agricultural District ( "District") pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance on ; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and the mutual covenants, t�rrns, conditions, and restrictions contained herein, Grantor hereby voluntarily agrees to preserve and protect the conservation values of the Property for a period not to exceed ten (10) years from the date of this agreement. I , Pulpose. It is the purpose of this Agreement to assure that the Property will be retained in agricultural use. For the purposes of this Agreement, "agricultural use" is defined as cultivation of soil for production of crops, including but not limited to fruits, vegetables, flowers, and omamental plants, the planting and production of trees and timber, and the raising of livestock, for individual and public use, consumption, and marketing, ?. Rights of_ tce. To accomplish the purpose of this Agreement, the following rights are conveyed to Crrantee by this Agreement: (a) As provided in and subject to the limitations contained in this Agreement; Grantor shall limit the use of the Property to agricultural use as defined in this Agreement; and (b) To enter upon the Property at reasonable times in order to monitor Grantor's compliance with the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, that such entry shall be upon prior reasonable notice to Grantor, and Grantee shall not unreasonably interfere with Grantor's use and quite enjoyment of the Property. 04- 12 -'02 09:51 FROM- Coleman Gledhill & H 9191234567 T -944 P05/08 U -160 SAMPLE 21 Rights of Grantor. Grantor reserves all rights accruing from Grantor's ownership of the Property, including the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in all uses of the Property that are not inconsistent with the purposes of this Agreement. Grantor further reserves the right to create no more than three (3) residential lots from the Property that meet applicable zoning and subdivision regulation requirements. No right of access by the general public to any portion of the Property is conveyed by this Agreement. 4. Grantee's Remedies. 11 Grantee determines that Grantor no longer meets the criteria necessary for certification as qualifying farmland and designation as a District, Grantee shall give notice to Grantor of iiau- compliance. Grantor may tako oocmootivo notion ouffoient to bring the Property into compliance or may seek to revoke this Agreement. 5, Revocation. This Agreement may be revoked by Grantor by written notice to Grantee or Grantee may revoke this Agreement based on non - compliance by Grantor. In the event revocation occurs, the Property will no longer be a farmland preservation farm, will no longer be located in a District, and will no longer be entitled to the benefits prescribed in the Orange County Voluntary Fannland Preservation Program ordinance for a farmland preservation farm located in a District. A record of the revocation shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds. 6. Notices. Any notice, request or communication that eithcr party desires or is required to give to the other shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by fm-t class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: To Grantor: (NAME) (ADDRESS) To Grantee: Orange County c/o 13cvcrly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 or to such other address as either party from time to time sUl designate by written notice to the other. 7. Controlling Law. The interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laves of the State of North Carolina and, in particular, by the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act (Chapter 106, Article 61) and by the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act (Chapter 121, Article 4) of the North Carolina general Statutes, and by the Orange County Voluntary- Farmland Preservation program Ordinance, $. Agreement Runs With Land. This Agricultural Conservation Agreement n= with the Property and shrill be enforceable against Grantor and all future parties who have an interest in the Property for the term of the Agreement. TO HAVE TO HOLD unto Grantee, its successors, and assigns, this Agricultural Conservation Agreement together with the appurtenances and privileges belonging or in any way pertaining thmreto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF Grantor has set his/her /their hand and Grantee has caused this instrument to be executed in its corporate name by its duly authorized officers by authority of its Board of Commissioners, all on the day and year first above written. 04- 12 -'02 09:52 FROM- Coleman Gledhill & H 9191234567 T -944 P06/03 U -160 SAMPLE GILANrOR: GRANTEE: , Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners Attest: Clerk to the Orange County Board of Connn ssioners State of North Carolina ORANGE COUNTY i, the undersigned, a Notary public in and for the said State and County, do hereby certify that (NAME) personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the day of , Notary Public My Commission Expires: State of North Carolina OPLA4NGE COUNTY 1, the undersigned, a Notary public in and for the said State and. County, do hereby certify that personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged that is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, and that by authority duly given and as the act of Orange County, the foregoing instrument sighed in its name by , Chair, Orange County Board of Commissioners and attested by as its Clerk WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the day of , Notary Public My Commission Expires: 1xG ;orarr,=untylvad tint - 2002 24 L 04- 12 -f02 09:53 FROM- Coleman Gledhill & H 9191234567 T -944 P07/08 U -160 Draft Adopted by Agricultural Preservation Board 5/16/01 Application Voluntary Agricultural District County of Orange, NC A. APPLICANT INFORMATION Names Address: Town State Z(P Code Phone: (day) (eveninq) E -mail: B. PROPERTY INFORMATION Address of Property: Township: Property PIN # Tax Map/Parcel # Number of Acres: _ _ Deed Book/Page: Does this property have a conservation plan on file with the Natural Resource Conservation Service (Soil and Water District) or the N.C. Forest Service? Yes No (If no, please complete section C) Is this land listed for Present Use -Value taxation with the County of Orange Tax Assessor's Office? Yes No _ __(If no, please complete section Q 04-12-'02 09: 53 FROM- Culeuiati Glddhill & H 919123458 7 T -944 P08 /08' U -180 Draft Adopted by Agricultural Preservation Board 5116/01 2 C, FARMS WITHOUT CONSERVATION PLANS OR USE MUE TAXATION To become enrolled as a Voluntary Agricultural District, a farm must have a conservation plan on file with the Natural Resource Conservation Service (located in the Orange Soil and Water District offices), and must be enrolled in the Present Use Value taxation program with the County Tax Assessor, If your farm is not listed in either or both of these programs, would you like someone to contact you about how to enroll? Once you have listed a conservation plan with NRCS and enrolled in Present Use Value taxation, the property may be recontid ®red for Voluntary Agricultural District membership. Once a farm property has been certified as qualifying farmland and meets the provisions listed above, the County and the farm owner enter into a voluntary conservation agreement, as set out In the N.C. General Statues (106- 737,1). The agreement may be revoked at any time by written notice to the County of Orange Agricultural Preservation Board, This, the ,,,_„,day of , 20 Signed: date Landowner of property listed above ' , USDA RELEASES $323 MILLION FOR CONSERVATION PROGRAMS ATTACHMENT #4 usDA NEWS RELEASE -' United States Department of Agriculture • Office of Communications • 1400 Independence Avenue. SW Washington, DC 20250.1300 - Voice: (202) 720.4623 • Email: oc, news 0usda.gov - Web: http: //%Y% w.usda,gov Release No. 0371.02 Alisa Harrison (202) 720 -4623 USDA RELEASES $323 MILLION FOR CONSERVATION PROGRAMS WASHINGTON, Sept. 6, 2002 — Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman today announced the availability of $323 million for the Fannland Protection Program (FPP) and the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. These funds will allow NRCS to fully implement these programs in fiscal year 2002 as authorized by the 2002 Farm Bill. "These funds will help keep agricultural lands in production and they will help protect our country's valuable wetland ecosystems," Veneman said. Through FPP, $48 million will allow USDA to enter into agreements with states, tribes, local governments and nonprofit organizations —such as land trusts and land resource conservation councils —to protect productive farmland through the purchase of conservation easements. USDA provides up to 50 percent of the appraised fair market value of the conservation easement. Through WRP, approximately $275 million will enable NRCS to enroll up to 250,000 acres into the program. Landowners who have already submitted WRP applications to the local NRCS office will be notified when funds are available for their projects. The goal of the program is to achieve the greatest wetland functions and values, along with optimum wildlife habitat, on every acre enrolled in the program. The Bush administration remains committed to providing the tools and resources for environmental stewardship to ensure that the land remains both healthy and productive. The 2002 Farm Bill represents an unprecedented investment in conservation on America's private lands, nearly $13 billion over the next six years. Detailed information on these and other conservation programs authorized in the 2002 Farm Bill is available on the Web at http: / /www.nres.usda. ov /programs /fanubill /2002 /products.html. Farmland Protection Program state -by -state funding list: State Funding State Funding State Funding Arizona 1,681,200 Kentucky 2,052,700 Ohio 1,442,800 California 2,350,500 Maine 850,000 Pennsylvania 2,748,400 Colorado 1,959,700 Maryland 2,545,400 Rhode Island 1,328,600 Connecticut 1,967,600 Massachusetts 2,244,200 South Carolina 500,000 Delaware 1,836,500 Michigan 2,131,600 Utah 50,000 Florida 1,000,000 Missouri 411,100 Vermont 1,733,600 Georgia 1,380,300 Montana 1,229,200 Virginia 1,530,500 Idaho 450,000 New Hampshire 1,831,100 Washington 1,936,500 http: / /www.usda.gov /news /releases /2002/09/0371.htm 09/09/2002 USDA RELEASES $323 MILLION FOR CONSERVATION PROGRAMS Page 2 of 2 b Illinois 1,300,000 New Jersey 2,213,600 West Virginia 250,000 Indiana 938,400 New York 1,541,800 Wisconsin 1,635,200 Iowa 705,000 North Carolina 2,224,500 Wetlands Reserve Program state -by -state funding list: State Funding State Funding State Funding Alabama 250,000 Louisiana 18,000,000 Ohio 4,000,000 Alaska 0 Maine 210,000 Oklahoma 5,000,000 Arizona 100,000 Maryland 450,000 Oregon 6,830,000 Arkansas 21,000,000 Massachusetts 0 Pennsylvania 200,000 California 24,600,000 Michigan 10,000,000 Rhode Island 200,000 Colorado 1,350,000 Minnesota 17,000,000 South Carolina 8,000,000 Connecticut 0 Mississippi 18,000,000 South Dakota 2,500,000 Delaware 0 Missouri 17,000,000 Tennessee 350,000 Florida 27,000,000 Montana 700,000 Texas 8,150,000 Georgia 6,335,000 Nebraska 7,000,000 Utah 0 Hawaii 1,200,000 Nevada 0 Vermont 300,000 Idaho 2,000,000 New Hampshire 500,000 Virginia 300,000 Illinois 10,000,000 New Jersey 175,000 Washington 7,000,000 Indiana 10,500,000 New Mexico 0 West Virginia 0 Iowa 18,200,000 New York 2,000,000 Wisconsin 10,000,000 Kansas 1,000,000 North Carolina 5,000,000 Wyoming 500,000 Kentucky 0 North Dakota 2,000,000 http: / /www.usda.gov /news /releases /2002/09/0371.htm 09/09/2002 l ATTACHMENT# 5 Tlzis caption is from BOCC Clerk's Advisory Board information on the intranet site. Agricultural Preservation Board - Members are appointed by the Board of Commissioners. The purpose of this board is to encourage the voluntary preservation and protection of farmland from non -farm development, recognizing the importance of agriculture to the economic and cultural life of the County. From APB Rules of Procedure: Purpose To establish procedures for organizing the business of the Orange County Agricultural Preservation Board, hereafter referred to as the Board, in executing its duties and responsibilities. From APB VFPPO: Section II - PURPOSE The purpose of this ordinance is to encourage the voluntary preservation and protection of farmland from non -farm development, recognizing the importance of agriculture to the economic and cultural life of the county. D. DUTIES The Board shall have the authority to: 1. Review and approve the form of the agreement to sustain agriculture required in Section V of this ordinance; 2. Review and approve applications for qualifying farmland certification and make recommendations concerning the establishment and modification of agricultural districts; 3. Review and make recommendations concerning proposed amendments to this ordinance; 4. Hold public hearings pursuant to Section VII of this ordinance; 5. Hold joint public hearings with the Orange County Board of Commissioners on public projects likely to have an impact on agricultural operations within Orange County; 6. Advise the Board of County Commissioners on projects, programs or issues affecting the agricultural economy or activities within the county and that will affect agricultural districts; 7. Study additional methods of farmland preservation and make recommendations to the Orange County Board of Commissioners; and 8. Perform other related tasks or duties assigned by the Orange County Board of County Commissioners. Excerpt from the VAD brochure: What is the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board? The Agricultural Preservation Board is composed of a number of County residents, which includes farmers representing newly - formed Agricultural Districts. APB members are appointed by the Board of County Commissioners. The APB reviews and approves applications to the Agricultural Districts program. They also make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners on other issues related to the preservation of farmland in Orange County. About the Agricultural Preservation Board..... The Agricultural Preservation Board supports voluntary measures and incentives that will lead to the continued and future viability of farming in Orange County, and to the preservation of farmland as a factor in Orange County's quality of life. APB contends that farmland as a resource is best preserved by protecting the property rights and property values of the farmland owner. The goals of rural preservation, which encompass the conservation of prime farmland, the scenic vistas of the agricultural landscape, the family farm tradition, and the economic viability of agriculture in Orange County, are best served by keeping farming a profitable enterprise. Orange County Government- - BOCC Assistant Aging Advisory on Aging Board Adult Care Home Advisory HS Transportation Board Nursing Core Home Advisor Cable TV Citizen Board Child Support Cooperative Extension Health Board of Health Healthy Carolinians 2000 Housing 6 Community Development Human Rights and Relations Human Relation Commission Commission For Women Human Services Advisory Commission Human Servies Coordination Council Library Hyconneechee Regional Library Board Recreation 6 Parks Recreation and Parks Advisory Board County -wide Recreation and Parks Social Services I Social Services Board Work Place Development Board Youth Services Advisory Commission The People of Orange County Board of County Commissioners Clerk to the Board County Attorney County Economic Development Ecomonic Development Commission Skills Development Board Visitor's Bureau Industrial Development Review Board Arts Commission Engineer Environmental h Conservation Resource Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force AG District Advisory Board Historic Preservation Commission Water Resources Study Committee Commission on the Environment Jury Commission Justice Facility Study Group Orange /Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Program Advisory Board Personnel Personnel Advisory Board Planning j Planning Board j Board of Adjustment Water and Sewer Boundary Task Force Purchasing 6 Central Services Register of Deeds" Sheriff Soil and Water y Soil & Water Conservation Board Non - Departmental Outside Agencies (including OPC Mental Health) Orange County Schools Chapel Hill /Carrboro Schools Assistant County Manager Budget Elections Board of Elections Emergency Management Services Emergency Response Planning Committee EMS Advisory Council Triangle J EMS Committee Finance Information Systems jInformation Technology Advisory Land Records Orange County Fire Commission Public Works Revenue ABC Board Solid Waste Tax Assessor E A R Board Solid Waste /Landfill Solid Waste Advisory Board o" o The People of Orange County Board of County Commissioners* Clerk to the Board I Assistant County Manager I Aging I Human Rights & Relations Health Non - Departmental Outside Agencies Recreation & Parks Child Support Cooperative Extension"" Housing & Community Development Library Social Services OPC Mental Health I County Attorney County Manager IEngineer I Economic Development Visitor's Bureau Personnel Planning PurchasingA Central Services Register of Deeds Sheriff* Soil & Water Environment and Resource Conservatio 31 IAssistant County I Manager I Budget I Information Systems Emergency Management Services Public Works Finance Central Land Records Elections Tax Assessor I Revenue I Solid Waste Informational Material Agricultural Preservation Board September 18, 2002 Carolina Farm.Stewardship Association (CFSA 17th Annual Sustainable Agriculture Conference a �. �-�i P, � November 15 -17, 2002 Broyhill Inn & Convention Center, Boone, NC Celebrating a Generation of Stewardship; Feeding Our Neighbors as We Would Ourselves A gYCt7t opp0111171ity to see olyd friends, nial(e nett; ones, and experience the liope and excitenient that the organic and local food inoveinen is represent. Friday Panel: Diverse speakers will discuss the key elements needed to develop a truly local food system in the Carolinas. Saturday & Sunday: OVER 55 WORKSHOPS! Experienced folks will share their expertise on topics including organic farming, gardening, and living; organic structural pest control and beneficial /pest insect identification; permaculture design; cut flowers; compost tea; organic Christmas tree production; mushrooms; medicinal herbs; sustainable agriculture education; organic fruit: sustainable Iivestock: local marketing; organic enterprise budgets; food politics; organic nutrition and health care; seed saving; seasonal cooking; and much more! Ke-yn� ote speaker: Elizabeth Henderson, local food system activist and author of Sharing the Harvest. Children's Program: Engaging activities offer participants the opportunity to explore many wonderful connections to nature and the farm environment. Ages 5 -12 are welcome. Delicious, nutritious meals trade with locally and organically produced food. Pre - conference event: Free organic certification workshop will help professional growers understand how to come into compliance with the USDA's National Organic Program, including record keeping templates, certification rrocess chart, and cost -share --soL rces. Registration and all materials included. Post- conference event: Free farm tours �1-i11 fea tore High Country highlights in the Valle Crucis area. Exhibits, poster session & silent auction will showcase books, organic food, gardening tools, crafts, farm & greenhouse supplies, like - minded organizations and recent sustainable agriculture research. Seed exchange, a key step to regionally -based food production, preservation of genetic diversity, and selection of regionally adapted and improved varieties. Bring old favorites and go home with new! Ongoing fun & entertainment, including a Contradance, regional meetings, CFSA storytelling, lively, debate, community gatherings and evening socials. For more information or fivers: CFSA- SAC, PO Box 448, Pittsboro, NC 27312 (919) 542 -2402 Email: cfsancarolinafarmstewards.org www.carolinafarmstewards.org (our NEW site!) Locking information: Brovhill Inn & Conference Center, (800) 951 -6048 PLEASE POST! Bush Signs Farm Bill Vol. 13, No. 3 July— September 2002 ■ The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act (usda.gov/ Editorial: Ed McMahon of The Conservation farmbill), signed into law May 13 by President Bush, in- Fund argues that community leaders don't cludes $17.1 billion in new funding for conservation pro- need to lower their standards to attract 2 grams over 10 years. development. Congress authorized spending $597 million over six years on the Farmland Protection Program, up from just $52.5 million over the past six years. The program pays half the cost for state and local governments to purchase development rights on farmland. Nonprofit organizations are eligible to participate in the program, which Congress expanded to include farm and ranchland with historic or archaeological resources. Legislators also authorized spending $1.5 billion through 2007 to boost enrollment to 2.275 million acres in the Wetlands Reserve Program, which pays landowners for 30 -year or permanent easements, and provides wetland restoration funding. See Farm Bill page 7 Grand Canyon, Gettysburg Battlefield Lands Preserved ■ Grand Canyon grazing rights: The Richard King Mellon Foundation, with assistance from The Conservation Fund, recently acquired 36,110 acres of federal grazing rights and 240 acres of private land from a willing seller in the Grand Canyon - Parashant National Monument. The property, known as Pakoon Springs, includes the most significant water source in the national monument, which borders the Grand Canyon National Park in northern Arizona. The Foundation donated the property to the Bureau of Land Management. Earlier this year, the Fund, the Grand Canyon Trust and other partners, working with ranching families, acquired 43,000 acres of grazing rights, 400 acres of private land and significant water resources in the na- tional monument for permanent protection. See Grand Canyon, page 3 Small Tracts: Maryland preserves land faster than it is developed, fisheries rebound quickly in marine reserves, American 4 donations break record, and industry cuts its chemical releases. Corporate Notes: Dupont donates land to protect a greenbelt around a historic company town, Avista Utilities helps protect 6 Montana riverfront property, Cargill agrees to largest wetlands restoration in California history and MeadWestvaco protects reptiles and amphibians in habitat corridors. Also, Toyoto's hybrid gas- electric vehicle tops 100,000 in sales, and Coca -Cola helps inaugurate a corporate effort to develop sustainable water strategies. Award: International Paper honors an' environmental educator in Washington and a land trust leader in New Jersey with $10,000 grants. COMMON GROUND VOL. 13 NO. 3 JULY- SEPTEMBER 2002 • All Development Is Not Created Equal ctn mr? III is published quarterly as a service to the conservation community by The Conservation Fund Patrick F. Noonan Chairman Lawrence A. Selzer President Mike McQueen Editor Jack Lynn Editorial Consultant Meg West Art Director For address corrections and information, contact: April Berry Circulation Manager The Conservation Fund 1800 N. Kent St., Suite 1120 Arlington, VA 22209 703/525 -6300 COMMON GROUND routinely grants permission for reprints. Address editorial correspondence and reprint queries to: COMMON GROUND 940 Stillwater Lane Earlysville, VA 22936 434/973 -7324 coground @aol.com COMMON GROUND is available on the World Wide Web at www..conservationfund.org Printed on recycled paper. 2 Has your planning commission ever been pressured to lower standards to gener- ate economic development? Do you have elected officials who think all growth is good regardless of long -range costs? A few years ago, during a workshop I conducted in Virginia, a commissioner told me that a restaurant chain wanted to erect a huge sign —more than double the size per- mitted by county ordinance next to a pro- posed restaurant along the interstate. The developer suggested that he might locate the business elsewhere unless he received the variance. What was my experience with this kind of request? the official asked. I responded that a community's image is important to its economic well- being. The best places to live, work and visit are those that are willing to uphold their standards in the face of pressure to allow lowest- common- denominator development. The bottom line for most businesses is se- curing access to profitable trade areas. They evaluate locations based on their economic potential. If they are required to address local design, landscaping or signage requirements, they will usually do so. They might prefer a gaudy 100 -foot tall sign, but they will settle for the 20 -foot tall sign everybody else has. By chance I had with me several slides of a restaurant from the same chain located across the border in Maryland. This restau- rant had a low sign —and a full parking lot! I later learned that the Virginia commissioners denied the variance request and that, despite the bluster, the restaurant had opened on time in the location originally proposed. Too many communities delude them- selves into thinking that it doesn't really mat- MCNER ter whether a project is good or bad, consis- tent with the local plan or inconsistent, so long as it produces jobs and tax revenue. Though officials may say that imposing standards to assure high - quality growth will scare off economic development, the truth is just the opposite. In his book, Planning America's Communities: Paradise Found? Para- dise Lost? Herbert. Smith, a former planning director of Albuquerque, examined planning successes and failures in 15 cities. He con- cluded that developers of quality residential, commercial or industrial property "want no part of an unstable, unplanned, uncontrolled environment, as they know this is not a place to make a long -term investment." Look at Denver's Lower Downtown. Be- fore it was designated a historic district, it had blighted conditions and low property values. Developers could build anything they wanted —but there was almost no pri- vate investment because there were no stan- dards. After the designation, it boomed. Businesses and investors were lured by the area's historic warehouse buildings and the knowledge that investments would be pro- tected by strong zoning standards. It is hard to say no to the promise of im- mediate jobs and development. But success- ful communities understand that saying no to development that is contrary to their long -term health will almost always bring better development in its place. In the long run, all development is not created equal. — Edward McMahon The author is vice president for land use programs at The Conservation Fund. The edito- rial is excerpted from TCF's Growing Greener and the Planning Commissioner's Journal. zZ �el�O�e See 9 Vt11 SIJ)S a9e en Unplanned Groff Co mmuni� a y Or h S a Q 0 0 a v w a Grand Canyon, froiti page 1 ■ The Friends of the National Parks at Gettysburg recently purchased the last commercial property within Gettysburg Na- tional Military Park thanks in part to a grant from the Katherine M. McKenna Foundation and an anonymous donor. The Conservation Fund negotiated and helped finance the transaction. The friends group will hold the $1.2 million property, currently the site of a motel, until the National Park Service ob- tains funding this fall to buy the property. The site of the famous Pickett's Charge, the property saw fierce fighting between the Confederate and Union armies in July 1863. Plans call for the motel to be razed and the site restored to an open field. ■ More than 600 acres on Rocky Face Ridge, the site of the first battle that led to the siege of Atlanta during the Civil War, have been preserved, culminating a multi- year effort to protect the land. Partners in- cluded Whitfield County, the City of Dalton, the Dalton / Whitfield Chamber of Com- merce, the Georgia Community Greenspace Program, the National Park Service, the Community Foundation of Northwest Geor- gia, the Turner Foundation, and the Gilder Foundation. The Conservation Fund worked with the Looper family and Rex Investments to purchase the land for conservation. Whitfield County plans minor enhance- ments to preserve the Confederate fortifica- tions and tell the story of the 1864 battle. ■ Sand Creek, Colo.: A 240 -acre tract in Colorado, recently acquired and conveyed by The Conservation Fund to the National Park Service, represents the first piece in an assemblage of land from willing sellers that will become the Sand Creek Massacre Na- tional Historic Site (nps.gov /sand). The Fund has secured another 640 -acre tract un- der contract, with transfer to the park ser- vice expected by the fall. The Southwest Ca- sino and Hotel Corp. has contracted to buy 1,465 acres, which it intends to donate to the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma. The property ultimately will be managed by the park service as part of the national his- toric site. On Nov. 29, 1864, U.S. Army troops killed at least 150 Arapaho and Chey- enne women, children and elderly tribal members in a surprise attack. The massacre, which occurred near present -day Eads, in Kiowa County, Colo., was recognized as a national disgrace and condemned by Con- gress and a military commission. Sen. Ben COMMON GROUND VOL. 13 NO. 3 JULY- SEPTEMBER 2002 Nighthorse Campbell (R- Colo.) introduced legislation, which President Clinton signed on Nov. 7, 2000, to create the 12,480 -acre site. ■ The Conservation Fund has received a second grant from the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation to increase the new Great Lakes Revolving Loan Fund to $5.75 million. The program provides bridge funding to groups in the eight- state, Great Lakes watershed for land acquisition and conservation easement projects. As of June, two loans have been completed, including $1.07 million to The Nature Conservancy to protect 6,000 acres on Michigan's Keweenaw Peninsula. To run the program, the Fund has hired two representa- tives: Jennifer LeBlanc (jleblanc @conserva- tionfund.org), who most recently worked in the Fund's real estate department at its Ar- lington headquarters, and Mike Kelly (PO Box 111, Auburn, MI 48611, 989 / 662 -6024, mkelly @sysu.edu), who also administers the Saginaw Bay Watershed Initiative Network (saginawbaywin.org). ■ Alaska, S.C., representatives: The Conser- vation Fund welcomes new representatives in its Alaska and South Carolina offices. Glenn Elison (6400 Andover Drive, Anchor- age, AK 99516, 907/868 -7974, glennelison@ alaska.com) comes to the Fund after 26 years with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, most recently as assistant regional director for mi- gratory birds and state programs. He joins Brad Meiklejohn, who has worked for the Fund in Alaska for several years. Harry Lesesne (PO Box 5226, Columbia, SC 29250- 5226, 803/422-1408, hlesesne @conservation fund.org) most recently taught history at the University of South Carolina at Columbia. ■ Top ranking: The Conservation Fund, with its 17o fund raising costs and 9570 program allocation, has been recognized as the nation's top environmental non- profit by two prominent charity watchdog organizations. Charity Navigator, in its Guide to Intelligent Giving (charity navigator.org), awarded the Fund its top four -star rating for exceeding industry standards and outperforming all environ- mental charities. For the second year, the American Institute of Philanthropy (charitywatch.org) gave the Fund an A+ for unsurpassed effectiveness and effi- ciency. In both charity rankings, the Fund earned the best score among more than 40 environmental nonprofits. Nominees sought The deadline for sub- mitting nominations for the American Land Conservation Award is Aug. 16. The award recognizes outstanding volunteer leadership in land and water conser- vation. The recipient receives $50,000, the largest such award in the U.S. For more in- formation, visit www.conservation fund.org or call Gretchen Stone (703/525-6300). Many thanks to these recent donors to the COMMON GROUND Research Fund: Dr. & Mrs. U.C. Bartlett H. Meade Cadot, Jr. Deborah Duke Page Hungerpiller Raymond Schamel Twenty-seven donors have given $1,005 to the COMMON GROUND Re- search Fund this year. If you would like to made a gift, send your check c/o The Conservation Fund, 1800 N. Kent St., Suite 1120, Arlington, VA 22209 -2156. `J COMMON GROUND VOL. 13 NO. 3 JULY- SEPTEMBER 2002 The Conservation Fund Vital Statistics Land protected by TCF and partners, 2002: Acres protected: 187,586 Est. value: $102,643,050 Land protected, 1985 -2002, by TCF and partners: Acres protected: 3,349,378 Est. value: $1,753,586,899 TCF has received top ratings from Charity Navigator and the American Institute of Philanthropy for its program effectiveness and 1% fund- raising expense. The Conservation Fund is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization established to advance land and water conservation in America. The Fund is a member of Earth Share and participates in the Combined Federal campaign as #0930. A . .Earth Share Conservation leadership Courses "Conserving Lands with Conservation Easements," Aug. 4-7, San Diego, Calif. Contact Land Trust Alli- ance, 202/638-4725. "Balancing Nature and Commerce in Gateway Communities," Sept. 24-27, Seattle, Wash. 304/876 -7462. "GIS Design for Regional Conservation Planning," Nov. 18-22, Shepherdstown, W.Va. 304/876 -7452. n Maryland's Rural Legacy Program has awarded $22.8 million in grants to protect more than 9,400 acres this year. Now in its fifth year, the model program (dnr.state.md. us/ rurallegacy) has awarded grants totaling $132.9 million to permanently protect nearly 52,000 acres. The state's land preservation programs have permanently preserved more than 1 million acres. "Maryland is now pro- tecting more land than we are losing to de- velopment," said Gov. Parris Glendening, in announcing the latest grants. "The strength of the Rural Legacy program is that it allows local communities to determine which areas are most deserving of protection." The pro- gram encourages state and local govern- ments to work with private landowners and trusts to protect large, contiguous blocks of land. Target properties include endangered species habitat, farm and forest land, stream buffers and historic villages and battlefields. "We must protect those special places that define us as a nation," said Patrick Noonan, chairman of The Conservation Fund. "Mary- land and Gov. Glendening continue to dem- onstrate how to make that happen." Creating marine "no- take" reserves can quickly improve fisheries, a review of more than 80 studies of reserves around the world has found. They also appear to double den- sity, triple biomass and raise the size and di- versity of fish up to 30% compared with un- protected areas, according to "The Impact of Marine Reserves: Do Reserves work and Does Reserve Size Matter," scheduled for publication this summer in Ecological Appli- cations. Author Ben Halpern of the Univer- sity of California at Santa Barbara (halpern@ lifesci.ucsb.edu) found that small reserves can double biomass per unit area just as likely as large reserves can. One tiny reserve in St. Lucia (6.7 acres) in the Caribbean ap- peared to benefit large, mobile fishes, raising the possibility that small, strategically placed reserves on spawning grounds or migratory routes could boost fisheries and species con- servation. Although small reserves achieved impressive results, Halpern cautioned that larger reserves attained greater improve- ments in absolute terms because of their size. In a separate report that appeared in May in Ecology Letters, Halpern and colleague Rob- ert Warner found that marine life in no -take fisheries returned within 3 years to average levels of density, biomass, size and diversity. S M A L L Despite surging interest in open space pro- grams, they rarely are incorporated into urban growth policies, according to "Open Space Protection: Conservation Meets Growth Management," a report prepared by the Solimar Research Group (solimar.org) for the Brookings Institution (brookings.edu/ur - ban). The 84 -page study looks at how open space programs have helped shape metro areas, examines the open space programs of federal, state and local governments and the contributing role of land trusts. The authors conclude that open space is protected through a complex, decentralized system that often is reactive and hard to assess. Larger -scale efforts by government and large conservancies may be forward - looking and strategic, but they tend to focus on resource value rather than the impact on metropolitan growth, the report said. Protecting working landscapes appears likely to play an impor- tant role in open space protection efforts, but the goals of such efforts should be clearly re- lated to public benefits and efforts to shape metropolitan growth, the report said. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in April that a 32 -month moratorium on development imposed by the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency in the early 1980s did not constitute a taking that required compensation. The 6-3 ruling, with Chief Justice Rehnquist and Jus- tices Scalia and Thomas dissenting, rejected property owners' claims that whenever the government imposes a deprivation of all eco- nomically viable use of property, no matter how brief, it effects a taking. Writing for the majority, Justice Stevens called a moratorium "an essential tool of successful develop- ment." Go to supremecourtus.gov/opin- ions / 01 slipopinion.html to read the April 23 decision in Tahoe - Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. The education bill signed by President Bush in January provides opportunities to broaden schools' environmental education curriculum. The National Environmental Education and Training Foundation (202/ 833 -2933) has produced a Web -based analy- sis and guide to the No Child Left Behind Act (neetf.org/education/index.shtm). It highlights opportunities to obtain funding for after - school environmental education programs and incorporate environmental education in state plans. TRACT S Americans gave a record $6.41 billion to en- vironmental charities in 2001, up 4.17o from 2000, according to Giving USA 2002 ($65,. aafrc.org, 888 / 544 - 8464), published by the AAFRC Trust for Philanthropy. Total giving reached a record $212 billion, dispelling fears that recession and terrorism severely dampened giving. "Americans' commitment to philanthropy remained strong even in the face of downward economic pressures," said John Glier, chair of the American Associa- tion of Fundraising Counsel ( AAFRC). Total giving eked out a 0.57o increase over 2000, down from a 6% hike the previous year and over 107o increases in the previous four years. Individuals donated $160.7 billion last year ( +1.17o), noncorporate foundation grants increased 5.4% to $25.9 billion, be- quests dropped 4.57o to $16.3 billion and corporate gifts fell 12.17o to $9 billion. The Sustainable Forestry Board has chosen new leaders for 2002 and three new mem- bers. Colin Moseley, chairman of Simpson Investment Co., is chairman; Larry Selzer, president of The Conservation Fund, is vice chairman and secretary; and Bill Banzhaf, executive director of the Society of American Foresters, is second vice chairman and trea- surer. New members are James Speth, dean of Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies; Paul Portney, presi- dent of Resources for the Future and John Luke Jr., president of MeadWestvaco Corp. Chemicals released into the environment decreased to 7.1 billion lbs. in 2000, an 8% drop from 1999 and 487o drop from 1988, according to the Toxics Release Inventory (epa.gov / tri) issued in May by the Environ- mental Protection Agency. About 697o of the chemicals were released to land, 277o to air and 47o to water. Releases from the metal mining industry dropped 14% from 1999, but still accounted for 477o of all releases (3.4 billion lbs.). Manufacturers accounted for 327o of releases (2.3 billion lbs.), a 2.67o decrease from 1999. Electric utilities gener- ated 167o (1.15 billion lbs.), a 37o decrease from 1999. The inventory includes data on releases and waste management methods for 650 toxic chemicals and chemical categories. This year's data are based on reports from 23,484 facilities. Data can be analyzed by facility, chemical or industry; and at the county, state or national level. COMMON GROUND VOL. 13 NO. 3 JULY- SEPTEMBER 2002 State departments of transportation com- mitted a record $586 million in fiscal 2001 for transportation enhancement projects, re- ports the National Transportation Clearing- house (enhancements.org). Over 10 years, $3.66 billion has been committed to such projects, with the most popular ranging from bicycle and pedestrian facilities and rail - trails to historic preservation and preser- vation of historic transportation facilities. Alaska (1007o), Minnesota (100 %), Wyoming (99.87o), Florida (89.5 %) and Vermont (89.37o) had the highest rate of committed funds while Massachusetts (38.6 %), Louisi- ana (43.97o), Wisconsin (44.1 %), Texas (48.3 %) and Virginia (48.4 %o) had the lowest. Current land use trends show that one - fourth of the nation's coastal area will be developed by 2025, up from 147o in 1997, according to a new report from the Pew Oceans Commission (pewoceans.org, 703 / 516- 0624). The development pressure will come as more than half of the U.S. popula- tion increase over the next 15 years -27 mil- lion people —will occur along the nation's coasts. Land use reform based on regional watershed - protection plans will be key in protecting the coasts, concludes Dana Beach of the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League (843/723-8035, scccl.org), who wrote "Coastal Sprawl: The Effects of Urban De- sign on Aquatic EcoSystems in the United States," for the commission. Vast improvements in land use manage- ment in the Washington, D.C. /Baltimore region could save 550,000 acres from devel- opment by 2030. Land use trends gathered from 15 years of satellite data show that 817,000 acres — mostly forests, farms and wetlands —could be developed over 28 years in the 5.2 million acre region in the lower Chesapeake Bay watershed. The acreage rep- resents an 80% hike over currently devel- oped land. Without better land management, outer -ring counties in Maryland and Virginia will absorb up to 150% increases in devel- oped land by 2030, according to "Future Growth in the Washington, D.C. Region," a joint project of the Chesapeake Bay Founda- tion (save theb ay. org /land), University of Maryland (geog.umd.edu / resac) and the U.S. Geological Survey. Under an aggressive growth management scenario, developed land would increase only 20% by 2030. Alaska, Minnesota, Wyoming, Florida and Vermont has the highest rates Of committed fiends for transportation enhancement projects. Land use reform based on regional zvatershed-protec- tion plans will be key in protecting the coasts. 5 COMMON GROUND VOL. 13 No. 3 JULY- SEPTEMBER 2002 ,CORPORATE N • Dupont 's land and easement donations nov, total 60,000 acres, valued at $100 million. Cargill has agreed to sell 16,500 acres of salt ponds in the an Francisco Bay. C� ■ DuPont recently donated 855 of open space surrounding the historic company town of Louviers, Colo., to Douglas County. The land, valued at $3.7 million, provides habitat for elk and black bear and recreation opportunities for town residents. Dupont's land and easement donations now total 60,000 acres, valued at $100 million. Through DuPont's Land Legacy program, The Conser- vation Fund helps identify company prop- erty that has important habitat, and designs and implements long -term conservation strategies. Dupont, now in its 200th year, founded Louviers in 1908 to provide housing for its employees. ■ In the largest wetlands restoration project in California history, Cargill has agreed to sell 16,500 acres of salt ponds in the San Fran- cisco Bay for $100 million to the state and federal governments. Cargill also agreed to donate salt - making rights on an additional 8,000 acres in the future. Acquisition funding will come from the state ($72 million), four foundations ($20 million), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ($8 million). The agree- ment, announced May 29, also calls for a five -year, $35 million stewardship and resto- ration program for the bay front and tidal marsh habitat along the southern end of the bay and the Napa River. The land is valued at $243.3 million, and Cargill plans to donate the excess above $100 million. Closing is planned for December. ■ For the first time, the Washington Busi- ness Journal (bizjournals.com / washington) has recognized a conservation project —the preservation of the Holly Beach Farm along the Chesapeake Bay —in its annual "Best Real Estate Deals" awards. The Conservation Fund acquired and protected the 300 -acre farm last year in partnership with the Mary- land Department of Natural Resources, Na- tional Park Service, Chesapeake Bay Founda- tion and a conservation - minded landowner. ■ The Keystone Center has honored officials from American Water Works and DuPont for their leadership in consensus building and creative problem solving. Marilyn Ware, chair of the board at American Water Works, received the Leadership in Industry Award; and Paul Tebo, vice president for safety, health and environment at DuPont, received the Spirit of Keystone Award at a ceremony June 17 in Washington, D.C. The center (keystone.org) is a public policy and educa- tional group based in Keystone, Colo. ■ Avista Utilities of Spokane, Wash., and The Conservation Fund have purchased a 716 -acre property on the Bull River in north- west Montana to help fulfill the company's mitigation obligations needed to relicense hydroelectric dams on the Clark Fork River. A portion of the property is expected to be protected with a conservation easement, while the remainder will be transferred to the state or federal government for preservation. The land includes several miles of riverfront and provides habitat for three threatened species —the bald eagle, bull trout and griz- zly bear. It also adjoins the Cabinet Mountain Wilderness Area. In April, the National Hydropower Association honored Avista in its annual Outstanding Stewardship of America's Rivers report for the company's conservation work on the Clark Fork River. ■ Research on MeadWestvaco timberland in South Carolina suggests that forested cor- ridors may help maintain populations of reptiles and amphibians on intensively man- aged forests. Beginning in 1997, company researchers have monitored these species on four 50 -acre tracts on loblolly pine plan- tations. Three were clearcut except for a 330 - foot forested corridor. The fourth was un- harvested. Sixteen months of preharvest and 50 months of postharvest monitoring found 59 species and more than 15,000 individuals on the four sites, with similar numbers and species in the corridors as in the unhar- vested stand. Researchers speculate that in- creased soil and litter depth may help main- tain the populations on the fertile coastal plain sites. One family of salamanders also may be more resistant to habitat changes than others previously studied. Overall forest management had very little effect on populations of reptiles and amphibians in these intensively managed pine plantations. MeadWestvaco maintains an extensive forested corridor system throughout the 485,000 acres it owns in the state. Company officials suggest that future research should focus on examining the scale and time of harvest in various habitat conditions; as well as the width, spacing and position of corri- dors on the landscape. For more information on the research, contact Mac Baughman, PO Box 1950, Summerville, SC 29484. ■ Earthshell Corp. and DuPont have an- nounced an alliance to boost sales of biode- gradable products in the $1 billion food service packaging market. Earthshell (earth shell.com) makes disposable packaging, Farm Bill, from page 1 Lawmakers authorized spending $1.517 billion on the Conservation Reserve Pro- gram, to up enrollment to 39.2 million acres. Under the program, landowners are paid to convert working farmland to a less intensive use by planting grass, trees, etc., to conserve and improve soil, water and wildlife habitat. Congress created a $254 million Grass- land Reserve Program to use long -term rental contracts, permanent easements and restoration funding to conserve 2 million acres of grassland, rangeland and pasture- land, beginning in 2003. The Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Pro- gram received an authorization of $360 mil- lion through 2007 for cost -share payments to landowners to develop upland and wetland wildlife, threatened and endangered species, and fish and wildlife habitat. Lawmakers replaced the forestry and stewardship incentive programs with a $100 million Forest Land Enhancement Program. CORPORATE NOTES Continued front page 6 such as bowls, plates and cups, from lime- stone and starch. DuPont (dupont.com/ packaging) produces hydro /biodegradable polyester coatings and films. ■ Sales of Toyota's hybrid vehicles, led by its Prius passenger sedan, have topped 103,000, representing 9070 of the world's hy- brid vehicle market. Toyota began market- ing the gas - electric car in Japan in 1997 and the U.S. in 2000. Last year, the Center for Responsibility in Business honored Toyota with its Environmental Stewardship Award for the Prius. Earlier this year, the National Wildlife Federation recognized the Prius with a National Conservation Achievement Award for Toyota's efforts to protect the en- vironment. Last year, the company intro- duced two hybrids in Japan, the Estima Hy- brid minivan and the Crown luxury sedan. ■ With more than 1,000 beverage manufac- turing plants in nearly 200 countries, Coca - Cola Co. is keenly aware of the value of water. To boost corporate interest in devel- oping sustainable water strategies, company officials teamed with ConAgra Foods and the Global Environmental Management Initiative to produce "Connecting the Drops Toward Creative Water Strategies: A Water Sustainability Tool." The 60 -page report COMMON GROUND VOL. 13 NO.3 JULY- SEPTEMBER 2002 Under the program, nonindustrial, private forest landowners will be eligible for cost - share assistance from state foresters to ad- dress watershed -based forestry resource objectives such as sustainable forestry man- agement, habitat enhancement and water quality improvement. Congress also created a. $2 billion Con- servation Security Program beginning in 2003 to pay farmers for up to 10 years to implement and maintain conservation prac- tices on working agricultural lands. Another $5.8 billion was authorized for the Environmental Quality Incentives Pro- gram, which provides funding to help farm- ers and ranchers protect soil, water and air quality and improve wildlife habitat. Congress also created a Conservation Corridor Demonstration Program on the Delmarva Peninsula in the Chesapeake Bay watershed to integrate federal agriculture and forestry conservation programs with state and local farm conservation efforts. (gemi.org /water) uses case studies and a five -step approach "to identify water - related opportunities and risks, determine the busi- ness case for action, and identify approaches to engage an organization in developing and implementing an effective water strategy," said Coca - Cola's Harry Ott, who co- chaired the GEMI work group that produced the re- port. In the company's largest bottling plant in Brazil, Coca -Cola cut water use by 4070 and spent $2 million on wastewater and landfill improvements to boost the quality of water reaching the local reservoir in the Jundiai River watershed. ■ Carly Fiorina, chairman and CEO of Hewlett- Packard Co., recently received a Corporate Environmental Leadership Award from Global Green USA (globalgreen.org), the U.S. affiliate of Green Cross International (GCI). Fiorina received the award for HP's product recycling and energy efficiency. ■ Call for papers: The Journal of Industrial Ecology is seeking papers for a special issue (yale.edu/jie/cfpbiobased.htm) that will examine the environmental implications of increased use of bio -based materials and fuels, including biopolymers, bioethanol, biodiesel and bulk commodity chemicals and intermediates derived from biomass. The deadline is Dec. 2. Under the new $100 million Forest Land Enhancement Program, non- industrial, private forest landowners will be eligible for cost - share assistance. In Brazil, Coca - Cola cut water use by 40% and spent $2 million on wastewater and landfill improve- ments to boost water quality. COMMON GROUND VOL. 13 NO. 3 JULY- SEPTEMBER 2002 Harlan Kredit 's students -2,000 to date —have built and operated a salmon hatchery for 23 years. *Xl 'NaLONIHSVM Et,6F. 'ON .LIINSHd (I IVd ROV.LSOd 'S'1] MOIIAO id-NON International Paper- Awards $10,000 Grants - - " A school teacher in Washington state with a passion for environmental education and the director of a land conservation group in New Jersey have received 2002 En- vironmental Excellence Awards from Inter- national Paper and The Conservation Fund. The awards, accompanied by $10,000 grants from the International Paper Com- pany Foundation, were presented June 25 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on En , , tality, delivered the keynote iddress. Harlan Kredit, a hig' -: school teacher at Lynden Christian School in Lynden, Wash., won the International Paper Environmental Education Award. Formerly the Gene Cartledge Award for Excellence in Environ- mental Education, the award recognizes people who have shown skill in encouraging a better understanding of the complex rela- tionship between a clean environment and a healthy economy. Kredit has developed a model environ- mental education program that is centered on long -term watershed restoration while incorporating student leadership and com- munity involvement. Kredit's students - 2,000 to date —have built and operated a salmon hatchery for 23 years. To improve salmon habitat, his students have planted more than 15,000 trees and shrubs along the riparian zone of Fishtrap Creek, the stream that borders the high school campus. His students completed stream surveys that form the basis for streamside restoration by local planning agencies. As he has for the past 17 years, Kredit will spend this summer working as a park ranger/ naturalist in Yellowstone National Park and teaching environmental education at The American Wilderness Leadership School in Wyoming. Linda Mead, director of the Delaware & Raritan Greenway in Princeton, N.J., re- ceived the International Paper Conservation Partnership Award. Formerly the Alexander Calder Conservation Award and now in its 14th year, the award honors individuals who protect habitat in the U.S. through partner- ships between business and conservation. Under Mead's leadership, the organiza- tion applied innovative techniques to protect 14 properties last year worth more than $42 million. To accomplish this, Mead built strong, effective and productive partnerships with communities, public agencies, corpora- tions and individuals. Mead also founded the Delaware River Greenway Partnership, Significant Natural Areas Protection Program and the Land Use Forum of Bucks County that resulted in a $59 million bond referendum in the south- eastern Pennsylvania community. She is a cofounder of the Delaware River Sojourn, an eight -day annual canoe trip that high- lights protection of the Delaware River thtough corporate sponsorship and partner- ship with federal, state, and local agencies. T8T8-8LZLZ JN 'HJno'do9SllIH 18 T 8 X09 Od 1d34 'd3SNOD S3d Q dIAN3 ALA 39NV'd0 2i01MWO II:)NV-S 4IAba 2dW 60ZZZ VA `uOlnutllV OZLL 9IMS � .IS luaX 'N 009L IF 0 k dit 6 id I