EXHIBIT H

Management Plan Advisory Group Summary

H - 1

Seminole State Forest Management Plan Advisory Group Pre-hearing Meeting

October 5, 2010 Boggy Creek Camp Theater

Eustis, Florida

Management Plan Advisory Group Members Present Jackie Baker South Eastern Distance Riding Association (Volunteer, Seminole State

Forest Equestrian Group) Peggy Belflower representing Nadine Foley Supervisor, Lake Soil and Water Conservation Amy Clifton representing Warren Poplin Environmental Scientist I, Florida Department of Environmental

Protection, Wekiwa Springs State Parks Jean Marie Conner Biological Scientist III, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation

Commission Dwight Cutter representing Robert Hanly Hunter Rufus H. Davis Land Manager, St. Johns River Water Management District Francis Keenan Florida Trail Association Aaron Levine Conservation Forester, The Nature Conservancy Mike Penn Resource Administrator, Division of Forestry, Withlacoochee Forestry

Center (MPAG Chairperson) Linda Stewart County Commissioner, Lake County Board of County Commissioners Lance Walker Private Landowner (adjacent) Division of Forestry/Other Agency Staff Present Joe Bishop Forestry Supervisor II, Division of Forestry, Seminole State Forest Bill Korn Environmental Manager, Division of Forestry Ralph Risch Other Personal Services Biological Scientist II, Division of Forestry,

Seminole State Forest Donna Williams Other Personal Services, Senior Clerk, Division of Forestry, Seminole

State Forest Josh Little Officer, Office of Agricultural Law Enforcement Matt Quarterman Officer, Office of Agricultural Law Enforcement Jarod Beard Officer, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Gary Raulerson Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Wekiva River Aquatic Bill Korn convened the pre-public hearing meeting of the Management Plan Advisory Group (MPAG) at 6:00 pm and provided background on the draft Ten-Year Resource Management Plan history and process. He spoke of the role of the MPAG as defined in Florida Statutes, stating that the members of this group are appointed by the DOF director and as the SSF MPAG – they are to conduct a public hearing (tonight) and to provide input to DOF in developing the final management plan. He briefly explained the Florida Sunshine Law, stating that the law specifically instructs members of a governmental body or group in a decision-making capacity

H - 2

not to discuss agenda items outside the publicly noticed meeting. Mr. Korn then explained the management plan approval process and appropriate activities that may occur during the public hearing to follow emphasizing that tonight’s meeting and public hearing was largely their opportunity to “listen” to the staff presentation and to the general public… and that tomorrow’s MPAG meeting was more their opportunity to share their opinions on what should happen on the state forest. This whole process really serves to improve the quality of the management plan. Upon motion by Commissioner Stewart and seconded by Jackie Baker, members of the Board elected Mike Penn, to be the Chairperson for the MPAG proceedings. Mr. Korn further explained the review and adoption procedures for finalizing a proposed Management Plan to be submitted to the Acquisition and Restoration Council, in February 2011, for final approval. The Management Plan Advisory Group meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m.

H - 3

Seminole State Forest Management Plan Advisory Group Public Hearing

October 5, 2010 Camp Boggy Creek

Eustis, Florida Management Plan Advisory Group Members Present Jackie Baker South Eastern Distance Riding Association (Volunteer, Seminole State

Forest Equestrian Group) Peggy Belflower, representing Nadine Foley Supervisor, Lake Soil and Water Conservation Amy Clifton representing Warren Poplin Environmental Scientist I, Florida Department of Environmental

Protection, Wekiwa Springs State Parks Jean Marie Conner Biological Scientist III, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation

Commission Dwight Cutter representing Robert Hanly Hunter Rufus H. Davis Land Manager, St. Johns River Water Management District Francis Keenan Florida Trail Association Aaron Levine Conservation Forester, The Nature Conservancy Mike Penn Resource Administrator, Division of Forestry, Withlacoochee Forestry

Center (MPAG Chairperson) Linda Stewart County Commissioner, Lake County Board of County Commissioners Lance Walker Private Landowner (adjacent) Division of Forestry/Other Agency Staff Present Joe Bishop Forestry Supervisor II, Division of Forestry, Seminole State Forest Bill Korn Environmental Manager, Division of Forestry Ralph Risch Other Personal Services Biological Scientist II, Division of Forestry,

Seminole State Forest Donna Williams Other Personal Services, Senior Clerk, Division of Forestry, Seminole

State Forest Josh Little Officer, Office of Agricultural Law Enforcement Matt Quarterman Officer, Office of Agricultural Law Enforcement Jarod Beard Officer, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Gary Raulerson Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Wekiva River Aquatic

Preserve Others Present Ted Arthur Private Citizen Doris K. Arthur Private Citizen Geoffrey Arthur Private Landowner Linda Bysrak Oklawaha Valley Audubon Society James Quinn Adjacent Landowner Joan Quinn Adjacent Landowner

H - 4

Bert McDonald Adjacent Landowner Linda McDonald Adjacent Landowner Jim Lawrence Florida Trail Riders Bobbi Keenan Florida Trail Association Ron Roux Camp Boggy Creek Lee A. Musselman Private Citizen Kim Huck Equestrian Elaine Holt Private Citizen William E. Holt Private Citizen Management Plan Advisory Group (MPAG) Chairperson Mike Penn convened the public hearing at 6:30 p.m. The MPAG members introduced themselves to the members of the public present. Mr. Penn then introduced Bill Korn from the Division of Forestry (DOF) Director’s Office who would facilitate the meeting/hearing. Mr. Korn outlined the agenda for the hearing and provided an overview of the procedure for how the plan will proceed through the evaluation process. Joe Bishop presented highlights of the management plan via a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Bishop’s presentation noted the goals and specific objectives that DOF has for the Seminole State Forest (SSF) over the next ten years, including new proposed recreation activities and improvements. At the end of the presentation, Mr. Korn asked the DOF and Florida Fish and Water Conservation Commission (FWC) staff to assemble in front of the room so they could answer questions from the public on the presentation and/or the proposed 10-year goals for the state forest. He also explained the ongoing process for developing this management plan draft into an approved plan. Question 1: Bert McDonald Why is only 1/10 of forest open to the public? Why is there no access to Lake Tracy Unit? Answer: Joe Bishop (DOF) All of forest is open to the public. Approximately 12,000 acres of the forest has extensive horse, hiking and bicycle trails and open designated roads. The northern portion of the Seminole Tract, which includes the Lake Tracy Unit/Wildlife Management Area, is open for public access, but at this time there are limited trails and roads. Additional access will be evaluated as mentioned in the draft management plan. Question 2: Ted Arthur Yankee Lake is a source for running water. When will running water be available at Bear Pond Trailhead? Answer: Mr. Bishop (DOF) The forest is managed for primitive use. There are no plans to add water or electric. The future restroom is a self-contained vaulted toilet. Question 3: Ted Arthur Why is shooting near the Wekiva River being permitted? There is a ½ mile buffer along the river where shooting is restricted, as stated that in the Wekiva River Protection Act.

H - 5

Answers: Mr. Bishop (DOF), Ms. Conner (FWC) and Mr. Beard (FWC) All stated that they were unaware of any buffer, however Mr. Bishop would look into it. Question 4: Ted Arthur Can a place be provided on SSF to bury dead wildlife so that they are not dumped in the landfill? Answer: Ms. Conner (FWC) FWC does not dump wildlife in the landfill. Animals that have not been euthanized are taken to nearby state lands and left on the property. Chemically euthanized animals are buried at previously designated areas on state lands to avoid contamination of scavenging animals. Question 5: Jim Lawrence How do we calculate use on the forest? Answer: Mr. Bishop (DOF) Estimating use is not an exact science. Forest use is determined by self-service pay station collections, visual counts, recorded hunting use and formulas to estimate other forest use not captured by known entries. There are plans to install a counter at the pay station that will record the number of vehicles that travel past. Question 6: Ron Roux How do you transfer the plan into actuality in regarding to funding? Answer: Mr. Korn (DOF) There are more expenses outlined in the plan than there is money allocated. There has been a renewed emphasis to track performance measures and compare what is being completed and what is being spent to accomplish these objectives. Question 7: Jim Quinn Can the speed limit signs be placed? Answer: Mr. Bishop (DOF) The speed limit is on the permit issued to forest users. Signage is needed and is being considered. Question 8: Bert McDonald Why does Seminole State Forest access not match Withlacoochee State Forest? Answer: Mr. Penn (DOF) Withlacoochee State Forest was acquired in a previous era. Historical access was established when the property was under federal ownership. In some areas, adjacent landowners were allowed to access the forest from their private property. It did not become Withlacoochee State Forest until the 1950’s. Seminole State Forest was acquired beginning in 1990 and the properties were secure from public access by the previous owners. It was easier to keep the forest secure

H - 6

and develop designated entry points. This has helped reduce the amount of debris dumping and vandalism. Question 9: William Holt Why is area around Lako Road lacking of trees? Answer: Mr. Bishop (DOF) Scrub management is being conducted in the area. Recently, the sand pine overstory was removed as the first step in restoration. Plans for the scrub will be to manage in an early successional stage for scrub endemic species such as the scrub jay, sand skink and Florida mouse. During the overstory removal, pockets of oaks were kept from being disturbed along portions of some of the recreational trails. Question 10: Bert McDonald Why can’t people with disabilities ride horses on any trail in the forest? The American with Disabilities Act allows for it. Answer: Mr. Bishop (DOF) and Ms. Conner (FWC) Horses are only permitted on designated horse trails. The fishing dock and pavilion are both handicap accessible. The trailheads all have walk-through gaps that allow wheelchair access. Mobility impaired hunters use four wheeled drive wheelchairs, which are permitted on the hiking trails. These modified wheelchairs could also be used by non-hunters. Question 11: Bert McDonald Why is there no public access on the Jung property? Answer: Mr. Bishop (DOF) This property is not part of SSF. Question 12: Bert McDonald Why do we replace grass with pines and why are we not planting oaks? Answer: Mr. Bishop (DOF) and Mr. Penn (DOF) The Division of Forestry is not replacing grass with pines. Pines are planted as part of restoration activities. Pine planting is used as a step toward the restoration of natural communities. The pines provide needle cast to help carry fire and help shade out unwanted ground species such as bahia grass. Question 13: Bert McDonald Why are you not spraying your tropical soda apple and why do you not provide funds for treatment on my property? Answer: Joe Bishop (DOF) DOF is treating all known non-native invasive plants on SSF and has been cooperating with adjacent landowners regarding treatment of non-native invasive species. Examples were provided. There is also language in plan to address this issue.

H - 7

At this point, with no further questions, Mr. Korn closed this section of the public meeting and announced the meeting would now enter the public hearing phase. Speaker #1: Linda Bystrak, (Oklawaha Valley Audubon Society Board Member) She stated that she had kayaked and birded on Seminole State Forest. She has read the plan and has prepared a letter of endorsement addressed to Commissioner Bronson. She read the letter and provided a copy (see attached) . She asked that DOF forward the original to the Commissioner (NOTE: Forest staff mailed the letter the next day). Speaker #2: Ted Arthur (Private Citizen) He provided speaker comment form indicating that he would like to speak but did not provide a summary of comments. He left meeting prior to being called to speak. Speaker #3: Dr. James Quinn (Adjacent Landowner) He thanked DOF for good job done on forest. He read his written concerns about the hunting that has recently been allowed on SSF (Seminole West) adjacent to his property. He added that despite being told that hunters would only be allowed to access by foot, he talked to someone who was not handicap and was given permit to use ATV. He provided copy of written comments (see attached). Speaker #4: Bert McDonald (Adjacent Landowner) He stated that he’d lived here all his life. He stated that he did not think that DOF is doing a good job regarding managing forest. DOF is wasting millions of dollars. He said it is ridiculous for a $2.00 fee to be paid to access forest. His opinion is that state lands should be available at little or no costs. He has many concerns. He did not know that the plan was available and has not read it (NOTE: Forest staff provided Mr. McDonald with a written copy of the plan two days later). He asked what is the life of the MPAG? Do they go away after this? He is familiar with the state lands review committees. They provide significant input for forest management. He asked how long does he have to provide additional comment for plan? (Mr. Korn stated he’d address this before closing the meeting) He then stated that Cassia Church Road and Tanner Lane used to intersect but now both have locked gates that do not allow the two to connect. He asked why can’t they be open for public use? He stated that he has an issue with parking to fish (unclear of the location that he was referring to). He stated that birds are carrying seeds of tropical soda apple onto his property and he has to go through additional cost on his lands to treat it. He pointed out Lance Walker was the only adjacent landowner that was a member of MPAG. He would like his grand kids to be able to walk through forest to his connecting property. He said law enforcement had stopped his grand kids and told them that they could not walk through the forest. Speaker # 5: Jim Lawrence (Florida Trail Riders) He began using the forest in 2002 and is an equestrian with lots of friends. Someone has done a heck of a job for equestrians. The rangers are doing a darn good job. Fortunate to have the number of state lands available to equestrians. Recommends multiple-use trails. It is okay to have all users on all trails. Whenever possible, make trails multiple-use.

H - 8

Mr. Korn asked if there were any other speakers. No one further wanted to speak. At this point then, he explained the role of the MPAG and that they would be finished with their work on the plan after the meeting on Wednesday. Mr. Korn also advised about the plan approval process and that there would be another opportunity for the public to provide comment on the revised plan during the Acquisition and Restoration Council (ARC) meeting. Written comments will be incorporated as an exhibit to the plan. The next step would be to include the MPAG consensus items from tomorrow’s meeting and forward to the DOF Assistant Director and Forest Mgt Bureau Chief. After getting their edits, the next version of draft will be provided to the Division of Forestry Director, Jim Karels. The target date to obtain the director’s approval is November 10, 2010. If approved by this date, the plan would go before the Acquisition and Restoration Council in February. Mr. Korn then closed the meeting and announced the next MPAG meeting will convene at 9:30 a.m. Wednesday at this location at which point the plan will be rewritten and forwarded to Tallahassee. The public hearing was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

H - 9

Seminole State Forest Management Plan Advisory Group Meeting

October 6, 2010 Camp Boggy Creek

Eustis, Florida

Management Plan Advisory Group Members Present Jackie Baker South Eastern Distance Riding Association (Volunteer, Seminole State

Forest Equestrian Group) Amy Clifton representing Warren Poplin Environmental Scientist I, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Wekiwa Springs State Parks Jean Marie Conner Biological Scientist III, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation

Commission Dwight Cutter representing Robert Hanly Hunter R. H. Davis Land Manager, St. Johns River Water Management District Francis

Keenan, Florida Trail Association Aaron Levine Conservation Forester, The Nature Conservancy Mike Penn Resource Administrator, Division of Forestry, Withlacoochee Forestry

Center (MPAG Chairperson) Linda Stewart County Commissioner, Lake County Board of County Commissioners Lance Walker Private Landowner (adjacent) Management Plan Advisory Group Members Not Present Peggy Belflower representing Nadine Foley Supervisor, Lake Soil and Water Conservation Division of Forestry/Other Agency Staff Present Joe Bishop Forestry Supervisor II, Division of Forestry, Seminole State Forest Bill Korn Environmental Manager, Division of Forestry Ralph Risch Other Personal Services Biological Scientist II, Division of Forestry,

Seminole State Forest David Straub Officer, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Donna Williams Other Personal Services, Senior Clerk, Division of Forestry, Seminole

State Forest Others Present Susan Young Florida Outdoor Writers Association Mike Penn, Management Plan Advisory Group (MPAG) Chairperson, convened the MPAG meeting at 9:30 a.m. He turned the proceedings over to Bill Korn to facilitate the meeting. Mr. Korn briefly summarized the procedure for the meeting, Florida Sunshine Rules, and the Management Plan process from this point forward.

H - 10

Mr. Korn further defined “consensus” for purposes of the meeting as everyone having an opportunity to speak and everyone willing to live with any changes or deletions. He also indicated that occasionally it might be necessary to take a vote to see where everyone stood on a topic – but that the effort would be to find a compromise that best served the forest and that everyone could work with. He stated the positive value of having a DOF representative on the MPAG so that the managing agencies concerns could be heard too. He checked to be sure all members of the MPAG and additional staff had all necessary paperwork. A rough draft of the minutes from the public hearing and written comments from James Quinn (from last night) and Keith Schue (received in the mail) were provided to all MPAG members. Jackie Baker stated she had received eight (8) additional letters by e-mail the previous evening. She presented the letters to Bill Korn to be included with the other letters received. Mr. Korn asked that for purposes of the MPAG discussion today, that Ms. Baker as the equestrian representative, try to summarize the key points during her discussion time. Joe Bishop noted that Susan Young was present. She is a member of the public who was unable to attend the previous evening’s meeting and who had requested to provide comment to the MPAG. Mr. Penn asked if the group was okay with her speaking now. A motion was made and seconded to permit Ms. Young to address the MPAG members. The motion was unanimously approved. Susan Young stated she is an avid kayaker and a member of several kayaking clubs who use Blackwater Creek (BWC). Further, those who use the creek are pleased with the opening of BWC to kayaking and canoeing. She further stated that keeping the creek open from fallen trees, etc. and clean is very important and that she and others using the creek appreciate the efforts of Seminole State Forest (SSF) staff to those ends. Ms. Young proceeded to identify areas of concern and needed improvements for use of the creek including replacing the gravel at the launch site and identification marking of the kayak/canoe routes on BWC. She used the example of tree blazing /directional blazing to avoid confusion. Upon mention of some tree fall concerns downstream from the launching site, Mr. Bishop advised that only a short distance of BWC downstream from the bridge is actually within the SSF property. East of the confluence of Sulphur Run, the creek flows through the Lower Wekiva River Preserve State Park (LWRPSP). Ms. Young was referred to Amy Clifton, representative for LWRPSP. Jean Marie Conner of the Fish and Wildlife Commission Conservation Commission (FWC) suggested that there would be more value in blazing the upstream portion of BWC west of the concrete bridge. Ms. Young stated that they would prefer that black plastic geoweb filled with sand be used in place of gravel at the canoe launch. In continuing discussion, Ms. Young suggested that SSF consider allowing hand launch access of kayaks and canoes for use on Bear Pond, but no boats with motors, gas or electric. Joe Bishop stated that due to the small size of Bear Pond, it was felt that watercraft would be disruptive to people fishing from the bank. Mr. Bishop said that if boats were permitted then small hand launched jon boats with electric motors should also be considered. Ms. Young continued with the request that EXIT signs with directional arrows be installed north of BWC to help people keep from getting lost. Ms. Young stated she has written a kayaking/canoeing guide for Florida, which includes BWC, plus information on hiking trails and directions to SSF. She continued with positive comments concerning the activities at SSF such as Welcome to the Woods, suggesting that more of this type of activity be promoted, as well as

H - 11

events for children such as a fishing day at Bear Pond. She further noted that neither she nor any of the kayakers with whom she is associated have objections to BWC being closed to watercraft during prescribed burns or wildfire conditions. Bill Korn asked for opinions and input on Ms. Young’s comments. Jackie Baker queried as to whether there were any canoe/kayaking volunteers who work on BWC and if SSF staff does tree removal on other areas of the creek. Joe Bishop responded that there were no specific volunteer groups for the creek and that the portion of BWC south of Lake Norris was not navigable due to hundreds of trees that have fallen across the creek from previous hurricanes. Mr. Bishop continued that local DOF staff does limited clearing of trees along BWC, and that the bulk of the clearing is done by recreational users or by other state personnel and contracted laborers that are involved in non-native invasive aquatic plant control. He also noted that the limited cutting of fallen trees on BWC is discussed in the plan and also in other joint documents with neighboring agencies. Dwight Cutter noted the use of Bear Pond by children’s groups and handicapped persons, and expressed concerns that the suggested uses of boats could disturb the “quiet enjoyment” by many users of Bear Pond. Mr. Cutter inquired about a boat launch at Bear Pond. Mr. Bishop indicated that a launch was already available and would need little work for it to be functional for users. Discussion continued with R. H. Davis asking how the SSF volunteer program works, with regards to Susan Young’s comments. Joe Bishop explained the volunteer program on SSF, and the means by which volunteers could be signed up, and how they could be utilized and what the benefits were to being a forest volunteer Mr. Korn mentioned volunteers are covered by workers compensation in the event of an injury, are often provided with a volunteer uniform, and provided service hour recognition. In addition, they are given special access opportunities. Additional discussion ensued with Ms. Young expressing concern about trailer-launched jon boats at Bear Pond. Jean Marie Conner stating she believes hand-launched electric motor-powered jon boats should also be allowed at Bear pond if un-powered canoes, kayaks, and non- motorized jon boats are allowed. Francis Keenan stated he was opposed to allowing boats on Bear Pond due to small size and potential conflicts with other users. Linda Stewart stated her opposition, indicating she felt that SSF would be “opening a can of worms” in that there could be an overload of vessels on the pond at one time, thus interfering with those who enjoy fishing off the pier. Dwight Cutter suggested having a system where boaters must call in to get a day use permit for pond access, to prevent overuse. Bill Korn called for a consensus regarding allowing canoes, kayaks, jon boats with and without electric motors use of Bear pond for recreation. The vote was 7 in favor and 3 opposed. Two members who were not in favor of allowing watercraft on the pond said that they could support it if electric motors were banned. Dwight Cutter suggested limiting the number of boats on the pond though the use of State Forest Use Permits. R. H. Davis stated that permits are not needed. His experience is that people will police themselves. Additional discussion ensued regarding the pros and cons of allowing watercraft on Bear Pond. Mike Penn asked if a new vote should be taken. Bill Korn suggested some language be added to the plan that DOF take steps to assess opportunities for providing access to Bear Pond to hand launched, paddle and electric motor boats. He stated that the details of any implementation or operation regarding the use of boats on Bear Pond would be the responsibility of local DOF staff, but that the general principle to take a look into boating access at the small pond would be established with such language. Mr. Penn initiated a new vote based on Mr. Korn’s statement. The new vote was 9 in favor and none opposed.

H - 12

Bill Korn began consideration of written comments provided by the public, with the first item of consideration being the comments of Dr. Quinn and Mr. Keith Schue. It was noted by Mr. Korn that Dr. Quinn’s letter and page 7 of Keith Schue’s letter referenced hunter access and parking issues near the SR 46 bear underpass The first item on Mr. Schue’s 10 pages of written comments was in reference to recreation carrying capacity on Goal 2, Objective 2, page 8 of the plan. Mr. Schue wanted the language changed to clarify that the current carrying capacity is 400 users per day and that the future goal is 600 users per day. A consensus by the MPAG members was reached to clarify the increase in carrying capacity Bill Korn introduced the issue stated in Dr. Quinn’s letter that was precipitated by increased use of SSF by expanding hunting areas. Dr. Quinn’s letter stated that he is having a problem with hunters trespassing on his property from a newly opened hunting area adjacent to his property, and included concern about hunters interfering with the long established wildlife/bear crossing (tunnel) area at SR 46. Joe Bishop clarified that the area to the south and east of Dr. Quinns’s property is part of the Wildlife Management Area, but both are closed to hunting. The area to the west of Dr. Quinn’s property was opened to hunting this season. The wildlife crossing on SR46 is located within the portion of the WMA that is closed to hunting. Ms. Conner added that many types of wildlife besides bears use the wildlife crossing, and that most of SSF between SR44 and SR46, has been hunted since 1992. Discussion continued concerning the property lines, fencing of the properties, available access by the public and the responsibilities of property owners, both private and public entities. During this discussion, Joe Bishop noted that the Dr. Quinn asserts hunters cannot see boundary markings and sign postings due to trees and vegetation. In response to these and other comments concerning the lack of boundary fencing, Jean Marie Conner stated that it is the responsibility of the landowner to post and fence their own property, if desired, and that the boundary on the west side of Dr. Quinn’s property is legally and properly posted. Jackie Baker stated agreement that it is the landowner’s responsibility to post their property and asked if SSF or FWC staff could provide a better map (in addition to the WMA brochure/map) just to hunters using this particular area. Ms. Conner responded that an additional map could be provided. Lance Walker commented that it is the hunters’ responsibility to know where they are and where the can hunt. Dwight Cutter stated that the new hunting area is causing a “first time growing pain situation”, and suggests more efforts should be made towards educating property owners and hunters. Discussion continued concerning ways in which to better identify boundaries, making hunting signs more visible, and providing more directional information to hunters in general. Bill Korn, in the interest of responding to the issues with a course of action, stated specific instances and situations should be worked out procedurally and operationally, and called for a consensus of whether the area west of (and adjacent to) Dr. Quinn’s property, currently open to hunting, should be closed to hunting in the future. Joe Bishop brought up Dr. Quinn’s concern regarding hunters disrupting wildlife use of the wildlife crossing on SR46 and creating a safety issues for wildlife and people. Dr. Quinn was also concerned about hunter vehicle use. Joe Bishop provided orientation to areas in question on a map and stated that vehicles are permitted on closed roads by SUV/AMP permit holders, but vehicles still do not get closer than 0.4 miles to the wildlife crossing and 0.15 miles to Dr. Quinn’s property. Ms. Conner added that wildlife use of the crossing is being documented and that, in her opinion, hunters are not disrupting wildlife from using the crossing. Bill Korn, Jean Marie Conner, and Jackie Baker all commented on various reasons for opening public areas to hunting. Linda Stewart questioned whether hunting areas near Dr. Quinn’s property need to

H - 13

be adjusted due to the upcoming Wekiva Parkway construction. After a brief discussion regarding the impact of the proposed parkway on SSF access, the wildlife crossing, and the area in general, Joe Bishop provided a brief outline of the parkway project indicating the hunting area would not be affected by the parkway’s current planned route. Bill Korn once again asked for a consensus as to whether the area open to hunting on SSF adjacent to Dr. Quinn’s western property boundary be closed to hunting in the future. The consensus of the MPAG was to leave area open to hunting. Bill Korn asked if there were any suggestions for DOF as to operational changes that might help mitigate the issues raised by Mr. Quinn. R.H. Davis asked if the view along the boundary was clear, to which Joe Bishop responded that it was not. Lance Walker then questioned if SSF/FWC should tell the hunters that the boundary between the private landowner and the SSF land remains unfenced, to which both R. H. Davis and Jean Marie Conner responded that would be a good thing to do. Bill Korn then returned to Keith Schue’s list of comments and directed the group to Goal 8 on page 12 of the plan and then referred to page 2 of Keith Schue’s comments. Mr. Schue suggested adding an eighth objective for Goal 8 regarding acquiring additional land for the habitat connectivity in the Wekiva corridor. Lance Walker queried who the lead agency is for land acquisition in the Wekiva-Ocala corridor, to which Joe Bishop responded that the responsibility falls to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Division of State Lands. Bill Korn gave additional details in response to Joe Bishop’s comments. Lance Walker inquired whether SSF, FWC, and other involved agencies were getting DEP’s attention with regard to contacting other land owners for land acquisition, in response to which Bill Korn commented in detail on the “local politics” nature of the land acquisition process as it related to the importance often times for the local county and their “environmental or sensitive lands folks” to generate support for particular acquisition projects. Jackie Baker posed the question of whether future acquisitions in that area have been dropped from the priority list since 90 percent plus of the Wekiva-Ocala corridor acquisitions are completed. Bill Korn asked for consensus regarding adding an eighth objective for Goal 8 of the plan to address the need to provide for future habitat connectivity. The group consensus was reached to add an eighth objective. Bill Korn continued with Mr. Schue’s comments, noting the request to add a new objective to address negative human-wildlife incidents. Linda Stewart questioned whether the Boy Scouts should or could be involved in bear-proof receptacle construction. R. H. Davis felt that this was the landowner’s responsibility and it would be cost prohibitive and cumbersome to attempt to supply the public with bear-proof receptacles. Jean Marie Conner stated that help is already being provided through the use of Boy Scouts and educational programs. Lance Walker duly noted that in that case - it need not be in the plan. Bill Korn asked the group should a new objective be added regarding negative wildlife-human interactions. The was no consensus and it was determined to leave this item out of the plan. Bill Korn then directed the group to the Administrative section on page 17 of the plan and page 2 of Mr. Schue’s comments, where he suggests the table starting on page 17 of the plan should be updated to include more recent properties acquired by Lake, Orange and Seminole counties, and correct “Agency” for Lake Norris Conservation Area. Several group members commented

H - 14

on correcting and clarifying the directions in the “DISTANCE” column of the chart, to which Joe Bishop noted need for correction. After further discussion, during which time it was noted by R. H. Davis that St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) is responsible for resource management of the Lake Norris Conservation Area, the members agreed by consensus that the table on page 17 should be updated to include recent acquisitions and correct managing agency. Bill Korn then referred to page 19 of the plan, Section B, “Acquisition Information – Additional Land Needs” and to Mr. Schue’s comments on page 3 suggesting that the optimal boundary map reflect a defendable target that excludes impractical acquisitions due to existing development. After brief discussion, the consensus of the group was to consider suggestions by Mr. Schue regarding changes to the optimal boundary map. Bill Korn next presented the comments on page 4 of Mr. Schue’s, letter regarding the Resource Section, Endangered or Threatened Species on page 25 of the plan. A general discussion was held on Mr. Schue’s comments, with regard to the importance of completing missing linkages within the Wekiva-Ocala corridor and the elevated service road (local traffic) concept. Joe Bishop and Francis Keenan continued discussion of the proposed parkway design to allow for local traffic versus tolled traffic and also the incorporation of the trail system to cross the Wekiva River. Mr. Bishop stated that the current proposed parkway design incorporates a separate local road that would be bridged along side the parkway and that the trail crossing would be suspended under the parkway bridge crossing the Wekiva River. Jean Marie Conner advised that there are three public meetings upcoming to discuss the current parkway design if anyone would be interested in attending. Bill Korn called for a consensus regarding Mr. Schue’s suggestion on completing missing linkages and the service road. A consensus was reached to incorporate Mr. Schue’s suggestions into the plan. Discussion continued with Bill Korn noting Mr. Schue’s additional comments in the Endangered and Threatened Species section regarding the long-term need to ensure that wildlife can traverse areas within the corridor that are divided by roads that include SR44, CR44A and CR42. R. H. Davis stated that it is not the responsibility of the DOF to identify wildlife crossings. After a general discussion by the group, a consensus was reached that language should be incorporated into the plan addressing Mr. Schue’s concerns. The group’s consensus was to include similar language suggested by Mr. Schue but to state that DOF only partner in accessing future wildlife crossings, and not be responsible for the location and/or construction of the bridges or wildlife crossings. Bill Korn continued review of Mr. Schue’s letter with regard to Item IV, Management Concepts by Natural Communities and Proposed Management Activities, plan page 36. On page 5 of Mr. Schue’s comments, he suggested that maps be provided that depict areas where specific management has occurred or is planned. Lance Walker and R. H. Davis noted that this is information is already included in the 5-year operational plans. The consensus of the group was that there is no need for additional maps. Bill Korn asked if there was consensus on adopting Mr. Schue’s suggestions on page 5 of his comments regarding acquiring parcels and normalizing boundaries. The consensus of the group is that it was already covered in plan and that there was no need to change the plan. There was further discussion on this item. However, no change was made in the consensus of the group.

H - 15

Bill Korn referenced Mr. Schue’s comments on page 5, regarding Soil and Water Protection. Mr. Schue’s referenced the document “Protecting Florida’s Springs-Land Use Planning Strategies and Best Management Practices” (DCA/DEP-November, 2002), Mr. Korn asked if it should be added to the springs section of the plan. A consensus was reached to add the reference to the plan. Bill Korn referenced page 6 of Mr. Schue’s comments for planned recreational activities in the upper Blackwater Creek on page 44 of the plan. Mr. Schue felt that the two recreational boardwalks planned adjacent to the SR44 and CR44A bridges could hinder wildlife movement. Linda Stewart asked if there was a “bottleneck” issue for wildlife dispersal in that area. Joe Bishop advised that due to adjacent developed private ownership, a bottle neck is created at the SR44 and CR44A bridge locations, and that construction of the boardwalks could bring increased human use, thereby hindering wildlife movement. Mr. Korn asked if the language in the plan should be modified to discourage recreational use of this corridor. The consensus of the group was that the planned boardwalks at SR44 and CR44A should be removed from plan, or that the language be modified. The following language was suggested: “It has also been determined that these two bridges may warrant improvement to facilitate passage of terrestrial wildlife along the Blackwater Creek riparian corridor underneath SR44 and CR44A. Further study and coordination will be needed to address the potential conflicts for conservation and recreation improvements in conjunction with the wildlife passage”. Bill Korn referred to Mr. Schue’s comments on page 6 of his letter regarding the Wekiva Trail. Mr. Schue provided suggested language that he felt should be included in the Planned Recreational Section on page 43 of plan. Mr. Korn asked the group if Mr. Schue’s proposed language or similar language should be incorporated in the plan. Discussion ensued with Jackie Baker and Linda Stewart including the issue of coordination and/or conflict between the proposed Wekiva Trail and the new parkway, with regard to location and compatibility, and the inclusion of bicycle use on the Wekiva Trail. Joe Bishop stated that he thought that Mr. Schue had a valid point and that some language should be included in the plan. Mr. Korn asked the group if Mr. Schue’s language regarding the Wekiva Trail should be included in the plan. The group consensus was to include the language in the plan. Bill Korn referenced Mr. Schue’s comment on page 6 regarding inclusion of a map of previous and proposed burn units. Mr. Korn asked the group if the maps should be provided in plan. The consensus of the group was to not include burn maps in the plan. This information is provided in a separate Fire Management Plan. Bill Korn then addressed Mr. Schue’s suggestions on page 6 regarding commitment to the use of BMPs and page 7 regarding hunter access. Mr. Korn asked if a statement should be added in the plan regarding controlling hunting access in the vicinity of the wildlife crossing on SR46. A general discussion of the issue ensued. Joe Bishop stated that hunting access is currently not allowed within one-quarter mile of the wildlife crossing. The group consensus was to include a statement in the plan to ensure that hunting does not occur in the vicinity of the wildlife crossing and to continue the enforcement of closed area north of the crossing. Bill Korn questioned the group whether Keith Schue’s comments regarding commitments to use BMPs be included in the

H - 16

plan. The group consensus was that no additional commitments need to be made. The references to BMPs in the plan are sufficient. At this point Bill Korn noted that it was after 12:00 pm and asked the group if they wanted to break for lunch or proceed. The consensus was to continue with the meeting. Bill. Korn then referred to written comments provided by Linda Bystrak of the Oklawaha Valley Audubon Society. These comments were read during the Public Hearing. In her comments she suggests a boardwalk in the BWC floodplain, improvements to canoe launch sites at SR44 and CR44A bridges and a boardwalk around the spring boils. Joe Bishop and Jackie Baker discussed where boardwalks might be appropriate. Jackie Baker spoke in opposition to boardwalks at or near the springs, stating that SSF is not a state park, and that it should remain more primitive. Joe Bishop then indicated that maybe a boardwalk to Palm Springs, which is already heavily impacted, would be a possibility. An additional suggestion was made by Jackie regarding boardwalks at BWC. Mr. Bishop pointed out the potential for a boardwalk to the Wekiva River in a location that was used as a firebreak during a 2007 wildfire. The group consensus was that the inclusion of boardwalks in SSF should not be written into the plan. Bill Korn noted that Jackie Baker had brought in a number of written comments and letters provided by equestrians. Ms. Baker stated that she would like to have these letters individually included with the other written comments. The consensus was to accept these letters as written comments for the record. The letters were given to Joe Bishop. Ms. Baker would represent the written comments when it was her turn to provide comments.

Bill Korn noted completion of addressing all written comments and advised that each board member would now be allowed to add his or her comments, starting with Jean Marie Conner.

Jean Marie Conner (FWC / Wildlife Biologist) acknowledged that she was satisfied with the plan and had no issues. Amy Clifton (DRP / Biologist) noted she had several questions and edits and proceeded with her first reference on page 3 of the plan, indicating that the second to last bulleted point should read “current since 2001-2002” instead of “in fiscal year 2001-2002”. This change was approved by consensus of the group. Ms. Clifton indicated that restoration needs to include restoration of ground cover and not just restoration of canopy. Bill Korn spoke extensively about how DOF does more ground cover “enhancement” through growing season burning versus full-scale ground cover “restoration” through the “replanting” native grasses, etc. Joe Bishop noted that much of the restoration on SSF has started with the planting of trees to provide canopy cover to shade out non-native grasses and that some limited planting of wiregrass has occurred. Bill Korn explained that the likelihood of direct ground cover restoration in the near future as being highly unlikely due to the fact that it is cost prohibitive and funds are not readily available. Joe Bishop advised that ground cover restoration is stated clearly in Goal 1, Objective 7, page 8 of the plan. Mike Penn stated canopy restoration is possible at this time and will permit ground cover restoration in the future, and that income from thinning operations will help fund future ground restoration. Lance Walker also commented that it is very expensive to restore ground cover. He stated that, however, seeds can be harvested from healthy areas nearby and used later to restore

H - 17

ground cover. Amy Clifton and others suggested a change of wording to Goal 1, Objective 7 to state: DOF considers canopy replacement a priority in restoration. As funding becomes available, and as sound scientific methods are identified in the restoration of native ground cover, greater emphasis will be placed on the restoration of ground cover. Native ground cover seed assessments are to be conducted in natural communities that are in fire maintenance. This potential seed source should be considered for use on ground cover restoration areas. The consensus of the group was to use the foregoing language in Goal 1, Objective 7. Ms. Clifton briefly commented on the success of the control burn effort on SSF for 2009-2010 and noted that on page 46 of the plan, the language for fire return interval needs to be changed to be consistent with those on pages 60 and 79. She further noted that on page 49, the “Florida Park Patrol” should be changed to “Florida Park Police” and on page 51 requested the addition of language regarding Bobwhite Quail abundance and opportunities for monitoring quail. On page 53, Ms. Clifton noted that, Lantana camara is a category I invasive and that the earpod tree’s invasive category needs to be checked, along with other plants that do not show a category listed. Ms. Clifton referred to page 53 and page 57 with regard to control of wild hogs and asked what is being done to control feral hogs on SSF. Dwight Cutter suggested a signed form or card should be created for land cattle grazing lessees and/or their agents to have on their person(s) authorizing trapping/shooting of feral hogs. It should be included in the lease agreement packet. Jean Marie Conner noted that three feral hog hunts have been added to the Lake Tracy WMA hunting season for 2010/2011. Ms. Conner requested that Joe Bishop add language to page 53 of the plan to that effect. R H. Davis spoke about the effective methods of hog control procedures used by SJRWMD for their lessees. Bill Korn called for a consensus on adding language to the plan to explore opportunities with FWC to increase feral hog control efforts. The group reached a consensus to add appropriate language regarding opportunities to increase control of feral hogs on SSF. Ms. Clifton noted that on page 17 of the management plan the direction of Lower Wekiva River Preserve State Park needed to be changed from West to East. With regard to the appendices starting at J-6, if the list of wildlife is meant to be comprehensive, many more species must be added. Joe Bishop requested that Ms. Clifton provide the species lists used by DEP for the Wekiva Basin so that it can be compared with Exhibit J-6. Aaron Levine (TNC / Conservation Forester) requested that Section C (Impact of Planned Uses On Property Resources) on page 93 be included as a subsection of Section A (Existing and Planned Uses) starting on page 36, and suggested that it could become item 19 under Section A. Mr. Levine identified a correction on page 3, bullet 3, noting that the parking area for Bear Pond Day Use Area should be south. He further stated that on page 7, Goal 1, Objective 5, the aim should be for a 50% to 75% increase in acreage within the target fire interval. This suggestion was discussed further and it was noted that the increase stated in the plan is now greater that 50%. After a brief discussion as to the procedures and conditions affecting control burns, the current objective in the plan was considered appropriate. Aaron Levine suggested that in Goal 1, Objective 6, page 8, the restoration acres to be treated need to be put into context of total acres requiring restoration. The group agreed with other changes to the plan suggested by Mr. Levine. Mr. Levine further noted that on page 21 of the plan, item #8 (Surplus Land Assessment), with regard to the Warea Tract, Lake County should be included as a potential agency that could be involved in land swap. Lake County has property in the Royal Trails area that could be swapped for the Warea Tract. This was briefly discussed and a consensus was reached by the group to

H - 18

identify Lake County in the plan as a potential agency to consider a land swap for the Warea Tract. Mr. Levine noted a typographical error on page 27. The FNAI ranking needs to be shifted to the right for swallow-tailed kite. Mr. Levine further noted that on page 31, the word “area” should be changed to the word “are” in the second to last paragraph. He also noted that the sentence structure needed to be reworded. Lance Walker (Adjacent Property Owner & SSF Cattle Lessee) noted that on page 13 of the plan, the priority costs do not match the budget, noting that the budget is much too low, and further inquired as to how much of the priorities set by SSF in the plan are unfunded, and also asked how project priorities were established. Bill Korn explained that the general categories for funding follows the structure adopted by the Land Management Uniform Accounting Council in Tallahassee who track and consider priorities of DOF and all other state land management agencies. Mr. Korn explained that the approach in the management plans for showing the funding for priority activities is being reviewed by DOF. Mr. Walker further noted that on page 17 there are missing Lake County properties, referencing Keith Schue’s report (the Bear Tract, Lake County Water Authority lands). Mr. Walker referenced the Florida Scenic Trails, on Page 43 of the plan, and asked if DOF has a preferred route, and if so, he suggested that the preferred route be identified. Joe Bishop identified the two routes to the group and stated that route west of Lake Norris would be the primary route, and that the trail east of Lake Norris would be the alternate route during wet conditions. Francis Keenan added that the preferred route is the west route around Lake Norris, although funding may be the limitation, due to the need to construct extensive boardwalks. It was concluded that the preferred route would be identified in the plan, along with language regarding options related to funding. R. H. Davis (SJRWMD / Land Manager) referred to page 39 regarding ADA access to closed forest roads throughout the year and questioned the possibility of SSF writing a special permit, using the FWC SUV/AMP permit, to allow access. This would be similar to what SJRWMD allows on areas that are not open to hunting. Jackie Baker noted that other agencies should be researched to see how they deal with the issue. A consensus of the group was reached to add language to the plan to consider an increase in the mobility impaired recreation opportunities. Mr. Davis referred to page 60, Table 8 and inquired as to the accuracy of the hydric hammock and floodplain swamp acres currently mapped as compared to the historical mapped acreage. He noted total acreage changes and queried as to this being the result of new mapping. Joe Bishop indicated that recent ground truthing as part of the DOF forest inventory process has reclassified some FNAI natural communities types. Mr. Bishop would review the historic community types and current community types to determine if the acreage listed is accurate. Mr. Davis then referred to page 96 and noted that a typographical error (“been”) occurred in third paragraph. Dwight Cutter (Hunter) made brief comments and complimented SSF staff efforts and the quality of the plan. Jackie Baker (South Eastern Distance Riding Association & SSF Volunteer) also complimented SSF staff efforts and the quality of the plan. She inquired as to whether more educational and interpretive programs could be arranged. The group agreed through consensus that language in the plan should be added to consider additional interpretive/educational programs on the forest. Ms. Baker stated that the reference in the plan on page 44 to the planned horse corral at Cassia

H - 19

Trailhead should be deleted. Horse corrals at neighboring public lands have been eliminated due to lack of use. It was a consensus of the group to delete proposed horse corral from plan. Jackie Baker also spoke concerning Goal 3, Hydrological Restoration and Preservation, Objective 3, on page 9. She noted that the performance measure should be the restoration of hydrology and not number of roads and trails closed. It was suggested to change the language of the objective to eliminated the first word “Close” and add mid sentence “restore and as necessary close roads…”. For the performance measure, the suggested change was something like – the total number of roads and trails identified as having negative impacts on hydrology and number of corrective actions taken to mitigate those impacts. A consensus of the group was reached to adopt language similar to that suggested above. Jackie Baker made suggestions with regard to relocating the Yellow Horse Trail off Sand Road and posting motorized vehicle speed limit signs. Bill Korn suggested that there might be great value in establishing user group meetings, since protocols and procedures are already in place for adopting above suggestions. Mike Penn commented broadly on the uses of liaison groups; both the up sides and the down sides of doing so. Jackie Baker spoke further with regard to adding more trails, suggesting a tie-rail for horses at Blackwater Creek canoe launch area so equestrians can stop and eat lunch at the picnic table located there; adding a picnic table at the Cassia trailhead, perhaps inside the rail fence, or maybe even a small pavilion; and wash racks for horses at the trailheads. Consensus of the group is that user group access and needs should be re-evaluated on an annual basis to assess the need for more trails, trail improvements, additional needs such as picnic tables, and that regular user group meetings should take place at least two times a year to allow input from local user groups (hikers, canoe/kayak, horse riders, bicyclers). Language should be added to Goal 2, Objective 3, page 8 to reflect the above evaluation of needs and obtaining input from user groups. Linda Stewart (Lake County Board of County Commissioners) stated that she liked the plan overall, and asked if equestrian primitive camping facilities could be set up. Joe Bishop explained that equestrian facilities are available on the public lands adjacent to SSF and that there has not been to his knowledge a demand for any additional facilities. Francis Keenan (Florida Trail Association) stated that he likes the plan overall, and further that it is a complicated document. He added that it would be helpful to use fewer abbreviations for the sake of the general public. He suggested adding an abbreviations glossary. The group agreed by consensus that the addition of a glossary of abbreviations be added to the plan. Mr. Keenan then commented that, as noted by others, SSF’s goals are in conflict with its income and/or state funding. He stated further that in order to get more feedback, more financial information needs to be added to the plan. He further stated that information on staffing levels needs to be added to the plan, including volunteers and other persons or contractors who are essential to the operations. He also noted that the plan’s format, though mandated from Tallahassee, can be confusing. Additionally, he commented that building an office site at SSF (presently the staff office is in Leesburg) should possibly be moved to priority 1. After considerable discussion on the benefits of an onsite office, including convenience, availability to the public, and reduced staff time and fuel costs spent in back and forth travel - a group consensus was reached to move the field office relocation to priority 1. Mr. Keenan further noted that on Page 5, of the plan, for 2009/2010 fiscal year, user numbers are significantly down from 2008/2009, and questioned why. Joe Bishop stated that a new accounting method has been put in place which changes the calculations from the past method. Mr. Keenan requested that an

H - 20

asterisk be placed at the top of that column with a note at the bottom of the page to indicate this change. By consensus the group directed that this identification procedure be done. Mr. Keenan inquired as whether the prescribed fire goals on page 7 are realistic. In response, Joe Bishop stated they probably were not given historical accomplishments on SSF, but that they are what needs to be done at a minimum to maintain healthy fire-dependant communities. Mr. Keenan then referred to Page 5 of the Plan pertaining to grazing income and asked if it is in conflict with SSF ground cover restoration goals. Joe Bishop responded that it was not because the funds are not available to restore highly impacted grazing land. SSF’s resources are prioritized towards saving and improving the ground cover in intact and nearly-intact natural communities. Bill Korn commented in agreement with Joe Bishop’s assessment and provided additional detail regarding this matter. Mr. Keenan inquired as to whether there are more opportunities for grazing leases, to which Joe Bishop responded that there are and that they are currently being explored. Mr. Keenan noted that he is disappointed with the low amount of input from the public on this plan and questioned that possibly there should have been more advertising. Lance Walker suggested doing a bulk mailing of post cards to some of the zip codes surrounding SSF, to which Jackie Baker agreed and further suggested putting up the public notice at the trail head kiosks several months (ex. 6 months in advance) ahead of time instead of the one month ahead as required by Florida Statutes. At this time, with all MPAG member comments being heard, Bill Korn returned to the speaker comments from the public hearing the night before to review comments offered from Bert McDonald which he didn’t think the group had addressed as of yet today. Mr. Korn then led the group through a discussion of the specific comments and recommendations made by Mr. McDonald. First, Mr. McDonald is an adjoining landowner/neighbor to SSF and he felt like the access fee of $2.00 is too much. After some discussion, the group consensus is that the fees are reasonable. Mr. McDonald further requested that Cassia Church Road and Tanner Road, which junction on SSF, should have free public access, and their gates should be removed. Joe Bishop stated that the area in question is adjacent to the barn for storage of all SSF equipment and it would not be prudent to open area up for general public access. He also stated that prior to state purchase these two roads were private and gated at the same location they are gated now. It is the only area on the forest where both public vehicle and foot traffic is restricted. The group consensus was to leave the gates in place. Mr. McDonald further indicated concern that tropical soda apple was being transported from SSF to his land. Aaron Levine commented on the effectiveness of involvement with the Cooperative Invasive Species Management Area (CISMA) in the fight against invasive exotics. Bill Korn inquired whether language should be inserted into the plan supporting cooperative interaction with CISMA. The consensus of the group was to include language in the plan for DOF to establish and maintain cooperative relations with CISMA. With no further comments from MPAG members, Mr. Korn reiterated the next step would be for DOF staff here to work on plan to incorporate all of the MPAG consensus items for change and improvement to the plan draft. Copies of the new draft would be forwarded to them in digital form along with copies of the meeting minutes. Mr. Korn asked them to contact Joe Bishop if they saw any problems with the minutes. The plan would then be submitted to Tallahassee for review by the Forest Management Bureau Chief and the Division Assistant Director and Director. From there it would go to the Division of State Lands and the Acquisition and

H - 21

Restoration Council. He stated DOF’s appreciation for their time and participation in the process. Meeting adjourned at 2:35 pm. Editors Note: The minutes for the pre-hearing and public hearing on October 5th, 2010, and meeting on October 6th, 2010, were sent to the MPAG members for review. Six of the MPAG members responded. Minor edits were provided and included in the final minutes. Peggy Belflower, representing Lake Soil and Water Conservation, was unable to attend the October 6th meeting. She provided written comments that echoed the comments from Linda Bystrak, and stated that the plan is an excellent document that should be adopted as written.

   

H - 22

   

H - 23

   

H - 24

   

H - 25

   

H - 26

   

H - 27

   

H - 28

   

H - 29

   

H - 30

H - 31

   

H - 32

   

H - 33

   

H - 34

   

H - 35

   

H - 36

   

H - 37

   

H - 38

   

H - 39

   

H - 40

   

H - 41

   

H - 42

   

H - 43

   

H - 44

 

H - 45