Comments on Wetland Regulations in Cherry County Development Plan and Zoning Regulations

Submitted at monthly meeting of Planning and Zoning Board; January 3, 2017. The comments herein indicated have been slightly modified from those provided at the meeting.

After reading my statement, none of the members of the board made any comment, and the chairman moved to the next agenda item. When a question was asked later in the meeting on how the board would address this matter, this request was once again basically ignored as no member of the zoning board made any effort — nor indicated any interest — to address this issue. It was obvious that the planning and zoning board members basically ignored this request to get the comprehensive plan and zoning regulations to have similar details.

The planning and zoning policy of Cherry county needs to be revised to indicate an accepted regulation based upon a clause indicated by the Cherry County Comprehensive Plan. Currently, this is not the situation.

Denoted in Implementation Strategy for Policy 4; Point A. Item 2 in the Cherry County Comprehensive Development Plan:

“All development (again, development does not include agriculture) potentially affecting wetlands must comply with state and federal wetlands protection programs.” (Cherry County Comprehensive Plan, 1997) “Development shall leave a naturally vegetated buffer surrounding all wetlands. Roads and utility lines may cross these buffers, but the project’s site plan should minimize such crossings.”

The verbiage is different in the zoning regulations where the provision indicates that all wetlands will be identified. Yet, there are no further indications of the purpose(s) for this clause.

The discrepancy is obvious. Therefore the variance needs to be actively considered and changed to indicate current conditions.

Any applicant should be required to provide written documentation with any Conditional Use Permit request to indicate compliance with, most notably, federal regulations, as well as any applicable state regulations regarding wetlands.

According to a representative of the Nebraska regulatory office of the Corps of Engineers at Omaha: "In order to determine if a wetland is isolated, and that the Corps does not have jurisdiction," an Approved Jurisdictional Determination should be completed by the person proposing the work, or the landowner. This determination would determine "whether a wetland or pond is a Waters of the U.S. (jurisdictional) or Waters of the State (not jurisdictional). "If it is jurisdictional a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit is required for impacts." ... "For the most part, the type of wetland is irrelevant to jurisdiction." The Corps cannot require that this determination be completed. An email response also indicated that only the Corps of Engineers can determine the "jurisdictional" status.

The zoning regulations should be updated to conform with the clause given in the county plan.

Habitat Management Through Deadfall Removal at Government Canyon

Removal of deadfall trees on a portion of Government Canyon is underway. This effort, sponsored by the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission is being done to reduce "fuel-load" and for habitat management purposes.

Deadfall trees may be cut and removed during January, 2017 on a 3.125 acre portion of the 720-acre Government Canyon tract.

A completed authorization form, which includes a signature of the "harvester," has to be provided to the NGPC. Stipulations indicate that only non-commercial firewood users may remove dead, fallen trees from an indicated area at the southern portion of the area. Other than this form, there is no assurance that someone could not remove suitable fire wood and then subsequently sell it.

This is the first time that this sort of project has occurred at Government Canyon, according to a Game and Parks Commission official at the adjacent fish hatchery office.

Essential details were quite noticeably bereft in the local radio and newspaper reports. Neither the radio announcements or newspaper article indicated that the removal of only deadfall trees would be allowed, and only on a small portion of the area.
During a birding visit on December 31st, it was obvious that the removal of dead fall had already started. Just the larger portion of a tree trunk remained of a larger extent of a dead tree, along the west side of the access road – and also west of the designated removal area – was obvious due to the chips left from chain-saw cutting.

This seemed to be an obvious illegal action by some miscreant.
　
Another notable item that needs to be carefully considered for this endeavor regards giving away state property. All of the resources at Government Canyon are owned by the citizens of Nebraska. This includes trees, whether living or dead. It is not proper to give away state resources, no matter what the purpose. Even though allowing people to take away deadfall trees may be an important step in area management, this still apparently involves freely "giving away" resources owned by all Nebraskans.

This conundrum could be readily address by charging any participant a nominal fee – perhaps $10 – to apply and receive authorization to participate. Any funds could be used to minimally benefit efforts to manage Government Canyon. A ten-dollar fee for unlimited removal is certainly, dramatically less than what it costs to purchase small amounts of firewood at any local food market. A fee would also help cover administrative expenses.

Government Canyon is an important resource for nearby Valentine residents and others that enjoy birding, hiking and other outdoor activities at this unique wildland. Suitable and ongoing management in a manner that meets management goals while making certain that any sundries are properly considered will continue the value of this special place in Cherry county.

Suspension on Turbine Applications in Cherry County

A suspension on any applications for any industrial wind turbine facilities has been approved for an indefinite time for Cherry county. 

During this period, three items approved by the Board of Commissioners would be completed by members of the Planning and Zoning Commission:
1) An independent appraisal of any land valuation changes associated with wind turbine facilities
2) A plan for how local fire departments would respond to any turbine fires
3) Are there any health related issues; information from Lancaster county would be reviewed.

These three items would need to be completed in a “timely manner, not to exceed six months.” Any proposal would then be acted upon by county commissioners.

Commissioner comments included:

Tanya Storer: “these are reasonable and proactive steps";

Mark Adamson: regulations concern “personal property rights versus those of neighbors”;

James Van Winkle: regulations need to “support all landowners in property rights” and “that the commissioners “can’t make arbitrary decisions” on any decision regarding a moratorium on wind developments. A “suspension” is an effective “taking” of landowner rights, he also said.

The vote on a motion to undertake these steps was Mark Adamson and Tanya Storer, yes for approval. James Van Winkle - a member of Cherry County Wind L.L.C. - voted no.

Wind development opponents had requested the minimum of a one year, with some people having also suggested either two or six years, according to public testimony during the review process for the BSH Kilgore application.

The commissioners would work with planning and zoning to determine any costs, especially for the land valuation study.

Commissioners would not address any wildlife or wetland issues, as they are considered through other “venues,” Storer said (i.e., the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission and the Army Corps of Engineers).

The Planning and Zoning Commission has been meeting monthly, primarily working on an update of the zoning regulations. Several county residents have also been in attendance, providing suggestions and comments.

Request for an Immediate Moratorium on CUP Applications for Wind Turbine Facilities in Cherry County

Comments by James E. Ducey at December 27, 2016 meeting of the Cherry County Commissioners, Valentine; this item was placed on the agenda after personal request on December 21, 2016 at the county clerk office.

On July 19, 2016 a six-month moratorium on requests for any conditional use permit request for a wind energy conversion system was recommended by Planning Commission.

After the initial recommendation, with an unanimous vote, commissioners did not act.  There were also subsequent requests - notably in October - by several county citizens that the county commissioners enact a moratorium.

Commissioners have continually and repeatedly not acted, based upon notably prevalent words heard at various venues where inaction - based upon verbal proclamations - has been the norm.

Six months later, there has still not been any action taken on enacting a moratorium for conditional use permit requests to place industrial wind turbine facilities within the county.

This is another request, today, that the county commissioners immediately enact a moratorium on any requests for a conditional permit to construct an industrial wind turbine facility within Cherry county.

This moratorium should be for at least one year, and perhaps longer. There are ongoing changes being considered for the zoning regulations. Any new requests should not be allowed until all proposed changes are considered and passed by the zoning board; and then as considered and either accepted or rejected by the county board.

There are several other essential topics also associated with any permit requests for any wind turbine facility that need to be clarified and specifically identified to ensure that each suitable - and more importantly, legal - requirements are properly met by each and every permit request.

It is very obvious that consideration of wind turbine facilities by Cherry county officials is in a dramatic condition of flux. There has , however, already been enough delay in making a decision on this topic.

Until there is some agreement and stability in the county development plan guidelines and planning regulations, no further permit requests should be considered. This would allow not only the commissioners to evaluate accepted provisions, but also - more importantly - provide an accepted and common set of guidelines for county residents and any development interests to consider.

Cherry County Commissioners need to make an immediate decision, without any further delay.

Survey of December Birds of the Niobrara Valley, Cherry County

With moderate weather, it was an appropriate time to visit some waterfalls along the Cherry county portion of the Niobrara National Scenic River. The purpose of the outing on Friday, December 23rd, was to evaluate winter conditions of the water and ice at Fort Falls and Smith Falls and record winter season bird occurrence. Records were kept at other locales along the route. Gordon Warrick of the Niobrara National Scenic River and myself visited two prominent waterfalls.

The extent of ice on the river varied. At Fort Falls at Ford Niobrara, less than one-half of the channel width was open water. At Berry Bridge, more than half of the channel was open water flow. At Smith Falls, the river was nearly entirely ice-free across its entire width.

Looking westward at the Niobrara River as seen from Berry bridge. The waterfowl here were congregated along the northern portion of the river water at the bend in the upper portion of the picture.

Looking eastward at the Niobrara River as seen from Berry bridge.

Available riverine water provided foraging habitat for the goldeneye and mergansers. Ice ridges along the river at Smith Falls State Park provided a suitable roosting place for a bunch of Canada Goose. The other waterfowl were predominantly at the refuge ponds.

These are some of the particular highlights at the country places:

Open water creek below Smith Falls; the banks of which provide foraging places for the Winter Wren.

• Lapland Longspur: with the horned larks; foraging in a livestock pen at Smith Falls state park. They were found after locating the larks, with the common flock then checked in detail; plumage details were obvious and well seen, and just minutes after their observation, these features were compared to a field guide to make their identification certain. The last known record of this species in Cherry county was in 1974. There are numerous records from the 1930s from Wood Lake and a two from the 1910s at Niobrara Game Preserve.
  
• Winter Wren: after viewing Smith Falls and discussing geologic features and ice characteristics, as well as a discussion of management needs to ensure aspen survival, this wren was seen below the falls, just a short distance southward of the lower falls; it behavior was characteristic and well seen. A previous known records as last seen here was 18 December 2004. The water edge habitat here is distinctly similar to other sites with open flowing water throughout during even the coldest days of winter.
  
• Golden Eagle: soaring above the Niobrara River at the refuge.
  
• Northern Harrier: one soaring above the grasslands in the vicinity of the ponds east of the refuge buildings.
  
• Great Horned Owl: heard hooting at 1:11 a.m.
  
• Great Grey Shrike: well seen at the confluence of the Minnechaduza Creek; was it flew past closely, it was to be carrying a small prey item.
  
• Bald Eagle: in addition to the three at the refuge, three were seen later in the day just north of the refuge, apparently feeding on a road kill in a field west of Highway 12.
  
• American Crow: numbers were seen along Highway, in close proximity to two roads kills, one was known to be a deer.
  
• Wild Turkey: prevalent at the state park and foraging in open ground areas on the north side of the valley, where sunrays had melted away part of the snow-cover.
  

Many of the other species seen are regular area residents, and some of them are appreciating the feeders within the heart city.

This list of 34 species is also based upon personal records kept while walking to the NPS office soon after sunup, and then back to my residence in mid-afternoon.

Each of the localities are well known places, with the exception of west Berry Pond, a small pond along the county road west of Berry Bridge and before the east boundary of the federal refuge.

This tally is based on 61 distinct records kept during the day, starting at 8:30 a.m., with departure from Valentine starting at 10 a.m. and ending shortly after 2 p.m.

Common Name	North Lake Shore Hills	Valentine Mill Pond	Valentine	Fort Niobrara NWR	West Berry Pond	Berry Bridge	Smith Falls State Park
Canada Goose	- -	- -	- -	35	- -	- -	55
American Wigeon	- -	- -	- -	- -	6	- -	- -
Mallard	- -	- -	- -	185	5	- -	- -
Ring-necked Duck	- -	- -	- -	18	5	- -	- -
Common Goldeneye	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	4	- -
Common Merganser	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	4	2
Wild Turkey	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	37
Sharp-tailed Grouse	- -	- -	- -	2	- -	- -	- -
Golden Eagle	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -
Northern Harrier	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -
Bald Eagle	- -	- -	- -	3	- -	- -	- -
Rock Dove	- -	- -	20	- -	- -	- -	- -
Eurasian Collared Dove	15	- -	6	- -	- -	- -	- -
Great Horned Owl	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Downy Woodpecker	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Hairy Woodpecker	1	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -
Northern Flicker	1	- -	1	1	- -	- -	- -
Great Grey Shrike	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -
Blue Jay	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
American Crow	3	- -	- -	4	- -	- -	2
Black-capped Chickadee	- -	2	- -	- -	- -	- -	1
Horned Lark	- -	- -	- -	10	- -	- -	15
Winter Wren	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	1
Red-breasted Nuthatch	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
White-breasted Nuthatch	1	2	- -	1	- -	- -	1
Common Starling	- -	- -	- -	5	- -	- -	- -
Eastern Bluebird	- -	- -	5	10	- -	- -	- -
Townsend's Solitaire	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	1	- -
American Robin	- -	8	- -	45	- -	10	- -
House Sparrow	- -	- -	10	- -	- -	- -	- -
House Finch	2	- -	35	- -	- -	- -	- -
American Goldfinch	- -	3	5	4	- -	- -	- -
Western Meadowlark	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -
Dark-eyed Junco	6	- -	2	8	2	- -	7
Lapland Longspur	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	4

Signs of river otter, as well as other mammals, were also noticed, both at Fort Falls and Smith Falls.

Weather conditions were sunny skies, temperatures in the lower to mid 40s and winds from 10-15 which increased in the afternoon hours. Snow cover of two to three inches was prevalent on the southern slope of the river valley.

---

Winter Horned Larks and Lapland Longspurs

A reason the flock of Horned Lark at Smith Falls State Park were given a closer look, is that other species are known to mingle with larks at feedlots during the snow times of the winter season. A video clip illustrates this occurrence. These birds were at a cattle feedyard just northward of Ainsworth during a snowstorm on March 20, 2006. Horned Lark were more prevalent. Notice during one short segment of the video, that blackbirds can also been seen in the background. Waste grain and somewhat bare ground associated with the cattle are two especially notable reasons for the presence of the wild birds.

November Birds in the Valentine Vicinity

During this month, records were denoted for ten distinct days. In addition to the usual places given attention — especially at the north side of the city — there was a distinctive visit made to Government Canyon and its woodly haunts, as well as a morning hike about Borman Bridge WMA, on the east side of the ever-flowing Niobrara River.

It was quite a diverse month of avian sightings. Numerous geese were continually at the Mill Pond. An occasional Bald Eagle soared above the gathered fowl, apparently looking for a weak something to eat.

Regular bird residents continued their prevalence. There was on particular sighting while bicycling along Government street to the grocery store. A small-sized raptor was holding a Rock Dove on the ground at the parking lot of the livestock market. Its identity was not immediately obvious, but after circling around, stopping to get a better look while the bird held the pigeon on the ground until it would die. The details of size and coloration were then given special consideration. It was a feisty Merlin. This was an initial sighting of the month. At this time many American Robin were present northward of the Mill Pond.

A highlight subsequent to this sighting of significance, was seeing - once again - this species flying above the scene at Borman Bridge WMA the next day. On this same Sunday, there was a Great Grey Shrike in the treetops.

Quite surprising for one day of the month, a bunch of flying birds became dramatically noticeable. The trill of the Eastern Bluebird was prominent. The initial thought was that it was a single-species flock. Thankfully most of the flyers landed upon a nearby powerline. With further consideration, the approximate count was more than a hundred American Goldfinch, 60-70 House Finch and an approximate 45 Eastern Bluebird. For the bluebirds, this was a new primary peak count for the county. These species continued to occur in numbers for the next three days at the same locality.

During a morning hike through Government Canyon with Gordon Warrick on the 24th (Thanksgiving), we were talking about some sort of bird species which maybe be seen. Red Crossbill were mentioned. Quite nicely - within less than a minute - a bunch of about ten were seen actively foraging atop a nearby pine tree. To add to the nicety, another flying flock of about 45 were at the same place. This is largest occurrence of this species, based upon an evaluation of more than 80 sandhills' region records for this species. The other extensive count was at the former Circle J Reserve - now Chat Canyon WMA - when 35 were counted on April 20, 2004. There was determination of the subspecies present.

A local addition to this vicinity was a Townsend's Solitaire perched atop one pine or another in the pine trees on the hills north of the Mill Pond.

Also appreciated during the month, was a calling Eastern Screech Owl and to the west was a Great Horned Owl, each heard to cap the evening as a "super moon" became increasingly evident above the eastern horizon, as seen from a prominent hilltop at the Water Tower Tract, north of the city park.

Narrative about the resident species in the Valentine vicinity is notably less, even though individual records are kept of their presence. Eurasian Collared Dove, Northern Flicker and other woodpeckers are denoted, as well as the diminutive nuthatches and chickadees with their cheery call. Always appreciated is the sound of the Red-breasted Nuthatch. The Northern Cardinal is not pervasive, but a bird or two is seen once in a while. They are appreciated visitors to bird feeders. Rock Dove are always present in the vicinity of the livestock market.

This is the tally for the month.

Common Name	310	311	312	320	324	326	328	329	332	335
Canada Goose	22	- -	- -	73	- -	85	- -	525	- -	275
Cackling Goose	- -	- -	- -	2	- -	6	- -	5	- -	2
Mallard	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	2
Bald Eagle	- -	2	2	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	1
Red-tailed Hawk	1	1	- -	1	1	- -	- -	3	- -	1
American Herring Gull	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Rock Dove	45	- -	- -	55	- -	- -	12	- -	- -	- -
Eurasian Collared Dove	4	- -	- -	9	- -	4	6	- -	4	- -
Eastern Screech Owl	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Great Horned Owl	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Belted Kingfisher	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Red-bellied Woodpecker	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Downy Woodpecker	- -	- -	1	1	- -	- -	1	1	- -	- -
Hairy Woodpecker	1	1	- -	2	- -	- -	- -	1	1	1
Northern Flicker	1	2	- -	1	- -	3	1	3	3	- -
Merlin	1	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Great Grey Shrike	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Blue Jay	- -	- -	1	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
American Crow	3	14	- -	- -	1	1	2	6	- -	2
Cedar Waxwing	9	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	2	2	- -
Black-capped Chickadee	- -	- -	- -	4	- -	2	- -	6	- -	2
Red-breasted Nuthatch	- -	- -	2	- -	- -	- -	- -	3	1	- -
White-breasted Nuthatch	- -	- -	2	4	2	2	- -	2	- -	3
Common Starling	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	2	- -	25	- -	- -
Eastern Bluebird	4	1	- -	1	- -	- -	45	19	6	12
Townsend's Solitaire	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	1	1	3	- -	- -
American Robin	65	10	- -	40	- -	25	- -	39	30	- -
House Sparrow	- -	- -	- -	- -	5	- -	- -	2	- -	- -
House Finch	2	- -	- -	2	- -	8	65	42	100	12
Red Crossbill	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	55	- -	- -
American Goldfinch	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	2	110	44	35	13
Pine Siskin	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -
Red-winged Blackbird	- -	- -	40	2	- -	7	- -	20	- -	- -
Song Sparrow	- -	- -	- -	2	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Harris's Sparrow	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
White-throated Sparrow	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -	- -
Dark-eyed Junco	18	2	- -	- -	6	7	15	24	20	25
American Tree Sparrow	- -	- -	- -	- -	4	6	5	- -	- -	3
Northern Cardinal	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -	- -	1	- -	- -

The number of species seen during this month, this year — perhaps due to a broader extent of time afield and timely bird hikes — was 39. This compares to 32 species during the same month of outdoor observations in 2015.

After many months of record-keeping, the yearly calendar of species occurrence is becoming better known, and perhaps better understood in the Valentine vicinity.

Comments on Request for Wind Turbine Project at Kilgore

Written testimony provided for the public record on December 7th, 2016 at Valentine High School public hearing with two Cherry county commissioners.

In addition to numerous other reasons to not approve this permit request, there are three points of particular concern that need to be given attention and consideration.

Wetlands

In regards to wetlands, the applicant has not fulfilled the process required to receive a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers.

“In order to determine if a wetland is isolated, and that the Corps does not have jurisdiction, we must complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination. The AJD is requested by the person proposing the work of landowner,” – John Moeschen email, Nebraska Regulatory office, Army Corps of Engineers.

Based upon recent correspondence with the federal agency, no request has been made so the project applicant is not in compliance with federal law. The consulting company that prepared the permit request document, as amended, has stated that they cannot determine whether the wetlands at the project site are jurisdictional.

It needs to be indicated that the Cherry County Comprehensive plans states that “All development ... potentially affecting wetlands must comply with state and federal wetlands protection programs.” The permit applicant has blatantly ignored this provision. There is no information within the permit application indicating how any of the proposed development will a) “leave a naturally vegetated buffer surrounding all wetlands,” or b) how the site plan for turbines, roads or utility lines will minimize placing fill in the myriad of wetland features on the project site.

Wildbirds

A "draft bird and bat conservation strategy” was prepared for BSH Kilgore in July 2016. This document states that “various processes will be employed to:

• “Comply with all state and federal bird and bat conservation and protection laws and regulations during the Project.
  
• “Ensure that impacts to bird and bat resources are identified and analyzed.
  
• “Implement various avoidance and minimization measures to address any impacts that result from the operation of the Project.”
  

This document does have informative details, yet there is only some light words that address these stated goals.

There is nothing indicated on how the project would comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, where it is a violation of a federal law if any single wildbird is killed due to collision with the turbine blades. It is a well-known fact, as shown by multiple studies, that migratory birds are regularly killed by turbines.

In regards to the second item, there is an allusion to “post-construction monitoring,” yet it supposedly will occur for only one year. The project plan is for 20 years and any habitat impacts or deaths due to collisions would for this entire period. There is no indicated plan for any sort of post-construction evaluation on impacts to wild birds or the bats present.

There are more than 300 bird species that are known to occur in Cherry county. The draft document mentions very few of these. During the past 34 years, starting in May 1982 in Cherry county, it has been readily obvious that numerous surveys during every month of the year are required in order to determine the overall extent of bird occurrence at any place. After doing multiple hundreds of bird surveys within the Sandhills, my realization is that bird-related knowledge and understanding requires extensive study and research. These key aspects are not apparent in the slight report prepared by some big-city consultant company.

One section of the report is about “adaptive management.” However, none of these so-called “strategies” are indicated by definitive details. They are not expressed within the conditional permit application, so the project developer has not documented how any of these items will actually occur.

The consultant report states: “To minimize risk to Whooping Cranes and other birds, bird flight diverters will be installed on all Project overhead transmission lines in accordance with Avian Power Line Interaction Committee guidelines.” This is a superbly ridiculous statement as the next line in this report states that all inter-project transmission lines will be buried. The project developers will seemingly thus do nothing of this sort.

It also needs to be pointed out, that a few days of survey time in June does not convey the entirety of bird use for a locality. This is what the applicant report is using to try to indicate how there has been a suitable evaluation of the local avifauna. The report is misleading and inadequate. There are species likely to occur yet are not listed for the breeding bird survey tally, including very common species in the county such as the Killdeer, Downy Woodpecker, White-breasted Nuthatch and Common Nighthawk.

Cultural Resources

There has been no survey done to determine the occurrence of any cultural resources at the project site. Once again, the applicant is indifferent to undertaking a proper determination, and disregarding this possible legacy of the historic landscape, and the many people that have been present at one time or another at the project site land.

Summary

Each of the items indicated in my public testimony have not been suitably considered by the project applicant. Much of what has been said is simply empty words on paper.

It would be a travesty for county officials to approve this application because this permit request is wrong in so many ways.