ATTENDANCE: Terry Charles, Arvid Haugen, Rebecca Power, Bob Hess, George W. Bartels, Mark Gawron, and John DuPlissis

WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
Terry Charles and Arvid Haugen welcomed the group and gave an overview of the Wisconsin Basin Partnership. John DuPlissis presented an overview of the working group, the process we are currently engaged in, and the outcomes that we hope to achieve through this process. John D. gave a brief report on who was invited to attend the meeting, how the list was generated, and who was contacted. The partnership mailed a letter of invitation including the white paper to 21 individuals representing various sectors of the agriculture industry, forest industry, private consultants, County Parks and Forestry Departments, and Conservation organizations. The letter invited these people to review the enclosed white paper, provide us with feedback, and to participate in the partnership and help us as we work our way through the issue identification and project selection process.

REVIEW OF THE WORKING GROUP’S WHITE PAPER
Although turnout was low, the group had received prior comment by phone and letter from several invitees. This helped to frame the discussion and provide the group feedback to help revise the white paper.

There was a general discussion of the issues presented in the white paper. There were several recommendations for changes to help clarify specific points in the white paper and to correct errors. It was also noted that the group needed to clarify the need for pre-settlement historic information. Additionally, there were several issues that were raised that did not appear in the white paper. These included landowner’s rights, the need to generate income from the property to retain ownership, the role that land valuation and taxation play in land fragmentation, and economic and social disincentives to sustainable management. The group also recommended the addition of relevant data to each of the ecosystem types listed in the white paper to help provide a context for discussion. It was also recommended that the group add information concerning the ecologic, economic, and social value of each community to help identify resource management issues.

DISCUSSION OF THE WORKING GROUPS DIRECTION
The group reviewed the potential projects listed in the white paper and made several recommendations for potential projects that the group could explore. These include the establishment of an invasive species task-force, the development of curriculum and teacher training program to help utilize school forests, and working with Wisconsin Family Forests to help provide education and the exchange of information between landowners.