Mid-Atlantic Exotic Pest Plant Council
Organizational Committee Meeting No. 5
Tuesday, January 11, 2000
10am-4pm

Meeting was held at Mather Training Facility, Harpers Ferry, West Virginia.

In attendance were:

John Beckman, Co-Chair, West Virginia DNR
Faith Campbell, Co-Chair, American Land Alliance
Carole Bergmann, M-NCPPC
Kathy Bilton, Potomac Valley Audubon Society
Karen Budd, The Nature Conservancy, Pennsylvania chapter
Kristen Gounaris, National Park Service, Yorktown, Virginia
Emily Grafton, Canaan Valley Institute
Fred Grau, Atlantic Seedsmens Association, American Seed Trade Association
Carol Jelich, Maryland Native Plant Society
Jennifer Kujawski, USDA National Resource Conservation Service
Kerrie Kyde, Hood College for Catoctin Mountain Park (took minutes)
Betsy Lyman, The Nature Conservancy, Pennsylvania chapter
Dale Nisbet, NPS, Harpers Ferry
Stacy Parsons, M-NCPPC, Brookside Gardens
Peter O. Rupp, Maryland Department of Agriculture
Lisa Smith, Western Pennsylvania Conservancy
Jil Swearingen, National Park Service
Louisa Thompson, Maryland Cooperative Extension, Irvine Natural Science Center
Bob Trumbule, Maryland Dept Agriculture, Plant Protection and Weed Mgmt.
John Whaley, PennDOT
Sue Wolfe, Hawk Mountain Sanctuary

I. Committee Reports

Team leaders or members reported on progress/recent activity for ongoing projects.

A. Regional Plant List

Team Leader John Beckman described a draft "master list" of 470 species he compiled from various state lists of invasive plants. He distributed a draft 30-plant subset of the master list composed of the plants that constitute major threats in multiple states. Following requests from group members to obtain the entire list, he offered to make it available via e-mail.

John mentioned the North American Seedgrowers trade association white paper delivered by Don Wertman at the November Swarthmore meeting and gave a synopsis of its contents as, essentially, "Don't list any of the species we grow, or we'll sue."

There followed discussion of how to determine the criteria used to add a species to the list, with these points raised:

• The need to include "alternatives" to listed plants for gardeners and commercial growers;
• Lists compiled by groups with different agendas could vary considerably, for instance, Heritage and MDA lists, and we need to be able to include all viewpoints;
• The need for a "risk assessment matrix" similar to the one used by Maryland entomologists for insect pests;
• Various gaps in the subset list, notably from Pennsylvania flora;
• Concerns about ranking plants by "invasiveness", especially as determined by number of acres infested - this task is difficult and highly politicized and potentially could downplay very invasive but not wide-spread species in favor of species widely spread due to length of time since introduction;
• The need for a disclaimer on the list, that ranking is not as important as a plant's potential for invasion
• The necessity to label DRAFT any proposed list until the list is reviewed and ready for publication.

The group brainstormed to produce a set of steps for approaching the formation of a master invasive species list:

1. Individual state representatives should examine John's draft subset list and fill in any species and/or geographical gaps
2. Perform risk assessment and justification for adding species
3. Rank by invasiveness
4. Provide alternatives for invasives - maybe should be saved for a second list
5. Develop common criteria for adding to list
6. Develop list of references for scientific justification for listing (Carol Jelich proposed at November meeting, and Sue Salmons and Kerrie Kyde agreed then to initiate project)
7. Include a "situational" context to a listing - how/where is the plant a problem
8. Notate authority for listing - who/what resource told MA-EPPC an individual species was a problem, based on what background? (concern expressed about credentials and scientifically documented vs observational or anecdotal citings)
9. Consult with agricultural industry about listings

John Whaley pointed out that the only currently existing Pennsylvania list with any "legislative teeth" is the noxious weed list, and any MA-EPPC list should not be called "official" until the state recognizes it. John Beckmann explained that most lists compiled by state agencies are peer-reviewed, and are official in that they are issued by a state agency. Group members expressed the view that any weed list need not have compliance mandated by law to be useful to natural area managers and state DOTs.

Louisa Thompson reported on the completion of the 1999 Patapsco Valley State Park volunteer weed removal project. Over 13 public work days, staff from individual parks and natural areas joined the volunteer groups to see how the project integrated ecology, native and exotic plant ID and weed control. Louisa has sent updates to the MA-EPPC list by e-mail, and she received 24 very positive survey responses about those reports from listserve members.

Jil Swearingen passed around a draft copy of the Weedbusters Handbook, a field guide to invasive exotic plants and methods to control them. The handbook should be ready for posting on the Native Plant Working group website in the next several months. She also passed around a review sign-up sheet, asking specific members to sign up to review the final product.

Louisa is preparing a manual for natural area managers that will provide guidance on how to organize a project like hers, and will get slides scanned so that there will be a slide show available to anyone who needs it. Carole Bergmann briefly described her Weed Warrior program in Montgomery County, Maryland, which educates the public about exotics and encourages community action against weeds in county parks. She will also have a slide show available for use shortly, after she uses it for a presentation at the Landscape Contractors Association meeting in February.

Some discussion followed concerning how MA-EPPC can serve as a distribution network for this kind of information. There are links from www.nps.gov/plants/alien to the SE-EPPC site at www.se-eppc.org. Jil suggested that we ask Steve Kilfer (sp?), the site manager for SE-EPPC to post any information that we send him. Kathy Bilton mentioned that anyone can add a useful URL to the Onelist listserve, so that a link is created to that site.

C. Development of Compatible Databases

Nancy Benton could not be at the meeting. Betsy Lyman reported that she did not know if Nancy had had a chance to do any work on this project, and the topic was shelved until the March meeting.

II. Application to IRS for Tax-Exempt Status

Lisa Smith explained that the first step in preparing any application as a 501(c)(3) organization is to draft a set of Bylaws, a document that states our purpose and guides us. Next, we will need to incorporate under formal Articles of Incorporation.

Lisa presented the set of Bylaws that she drafted for the group's use, drawing heavily on the Bylaws used by other EPPCs, notably SE-EPPC. Discussion followed about details of the Bylaws as drafted. The group agreed to send Lisa any comments or questions within a month. She will incorporate the changes discussed at this meeting, and prepare a list of issues that remain to be clarified for discussion at the March meeting. Emily Grafton, who helps watershed groups incorporate and seek tax-exempt status, will help guide the group through the steps. The following issues were raised concerning the Bylaws:

• Louisa Thompson, Lisa Smith, Emily Grafton, Bob Trumbule, Betsy Lyman contributing: The appropriate size of the Board of Directors - the current working group (those present at most meetings) is larger than the Board as drafted. The BOD must be large enough to represent all constituencies in the group, but small enough to be a workable size, less than 20.
• Faith Campbell: BOD members should be elected to staggered terms, to allow for continuity in the leadership.
• Carol Jelich, Betsy Lyman, Emily Grafton contributing: There must be a mechanism for Board representation on all committees, either by assigning at least one Board member to each standing committee, or by making committee chairs temporary Board members. The latter was deemed unworkable due to possible confusion about BOD voting and administration. The Board will have a representative on each committee.
• Bob Trumbule, Emily Grafton contributing: The Object section of the Bylaws should parallel our adopted Mission Statement. Include the Mission Statement as Article I of the Bylaws.
• Faith Campbell: Should the BOD's chosen advisors be ex-officio members? Why not simply Advisors?
• Faith Campbell, Kerrie Kyde contributing: Is draft Article VII, Section 4 necessary? Yes, because it allows the BOD to deflect potentially immaterial motions.
• Bob Trumbule, Lisa Smith, Faith Campbell contributing: Add some provision to Article VII, Section 3 to assure timely delivery of agendas to the membership prior to the meetings. Same for minutes and proposed changes to the Bylaws.

With regard to incorporating, Emily Grafton explained the process. After deciding in what state we wish to incorporate, we obtain from the appropriate Secretary of State and complete the papers necessary for filing, returning them with a fee of $600.00. For 501(c)(3) status, we must answer many questions about the group's formation and intent. Usually a lawyer or accountant helps with this step.

Lisa Smith explained that MA-EPPC has the option of obtaining tax-exempt status as an affiliated member of the Tennessee EPPC, which is changing its name to SE-EPPC. Under its new name, SE-EPPC will have group tax exemption, which they can extend to each subset of their group, under individual SS-4 tax ID numbers. We would have to have a representative on SE-EPPC's Board. The group discussed the pros and cons of this approach.

Pros: Much easier for us, and less expensive, as we pay only a portion of the $600.00 filing fee.

Possible Cons: Bob Trumbule, Emily Grafton, Faith Campbell, Kerrie Kyde contributing: What are the "trickle-down" effects of becoming a SE-EPPC affiliate? Do they have any Bylaw restrictions or policies that would affect subgroups? Any lawsuits brought against one affiliate would apply to all. Would we be able to remain independent, representing our own defined interests on a regional or national scale? Would we have to report to SE-EPPC in any way? Would SE-EPPC affiliate status compromise any advocacy position we may want to take within the bounds of our tax-exempt status?

III. Weed Awareness Week

Faith Campbell reported that we had been approached by the Weed Sceince Society of America with an invitation to submit a proposal for an exhibit at its Weed Awareness Week February 29-March 3 at the Russell Senate Office Building rotunda. With such little notice, there was no time to put together an original exhibit. Kerrie Kyde volunteered to supply an exhibit, a poster prepared last fall about invasive alien plants in Catoctin Mountain Park. She will obtain permission from the park to use the exhibit and submit the appropriate materials to the Weed Science Society coordinator, Rob Hedberg. Stacy Parsons, Carole Bergmann, Jil Swearingen, Louisa Thompson and Kerrie Kyde all volunteered to help staff the exhibit.

IV. Joint Sponsorship of Weed Conference with Morris Arboretum

Betsy Lyman asked if the group wished to work with the Morris Arboretum on an invasive plant conference similar to the one held in Swarthmore in November 1999. She explained that we would need to begin seeking funding now for a conference to be held in the fall of 2001. Last year's conference was thought by many to be too expensive. An outside sponsor would help reduce the registration fee for individuals wishing to attend a 2001 conference. Individuals or groups could also reduce the cost of the conference by, for example, picking up the tab for speakers' expenses.

After some discussion of the timing, cost, organizational status and location for such a conference, the group decided to proceed. Betsy will contact Bob Gatoski (sp?) at Morris Arboretum to tell him that MA-EPPC is interested, and that we will try to get a funding researcher working in order to make the conference cheaper. She asked that the request for such a person be sent out on the listserve.

V. Millersville Native Plants in the Landscape Conference

The group discussed whether or not the MA-EPPC should have a presence at the Millersville conference in June. Louisa Thompson suggested that we organize a session - the conference topic is stewardship. Several people (?Louisa, Betsy Lyman, Karen Budd, Carole Bergmann?) planning to meet later that evening, after the EPPC meeting adjourned, agreed to prepare something for submission to the Millersville conference planners.

VI. Next Meeting

The next MA-EPPC meeting will be held Thursday, March 9, in Annapolis at MDE or somewhere on the Maryland side of the Beltway. Bob Trumbule will secure and confirm location. Agenda items not addressed at this meeting will be carried over to the March meeting.