Laserfiche WebLink
_ 1 _ <br /> production. In addition, even if a cranberry grower could <br /> assert successfully that such dredging and filling is <br /> customary in the cranberry industry and necessary for <br /> cranberry production, the land may be subject to the <br /> regulations with respect to the manner in which the <br /> activities are conducted, <br /> Similarly, in my opinion, the installation of water control <br /> structures downstream from the bogs in either river does not <br /> render the rivers themselves land "presently and primarily in <br /> agricultural use" , It is more difficult to determine whether <br /> the installation of such structures in the rivers for the <br /> purpose of managing the water level in the cranberry bogs is <br /> use 'tin a nanner related to and customarily and necessarily <br /> used in" agriculture. Therefore, in my opinion, the <br /> commission may wish to require the filing of a Notice of <br /> Intent or a Request for Determination of Applicability in <br /> every case in which such activities are proposed in wetland <br /> resource areas or the Buffer Zone, <br /> If you have any further questions in this regard, please d <br /> not hesitate to contact me. <br /> Signature: Elizabeth A, Lane <br /> cc: Executive Secretary. <br /> VOTE: Motion made and seconded to release Town Counsel's <br /> opinion to the counsel for the cranberry growers. <br /> SHA : I asked Kate Connolly before she left if anything in <br /> the testimony she heard tonight substantially changed her <br /> legal opinion; she told me no. So, my recommendation is that <br /> there is still sufficient question as to whether or not we <br /> should consider this land in agricultural use. I believe <br /> portions of it, in my own opinion, are not, as obviously a <br /> point of contention. I believe we should issue a positive <br /> determination and let the matter be sorted out by DEP. <br /> ERRIDA to Atty. DiLuna : sir, would you like to make <br /> comment? <br /> I L NA: Unfortunately, I wish Kate and Betsy were here on <br /> several counts. This opinion, first of all I'm kind of <br /> amazed at the way this was done. I had my experts here and <br /> e were willing to discuss anything: I asked several times if <br /> there were any other questions. On no other questions, I <br /> asked my experts to go home and now the issue comes out that <br /> requires some expert interpretation. We don't have the <br /> lawyer here to answer questions on your behalf. This letter <br /> is not written not specifically to this hog and not <br /> specifically to this activity. Plus the fact your other bog, <br /> owned by other individuals that have been abandoned. Kathy <br /> specifically addresses that land in agricultural use is land <br /> within Ioo feet of the resource area. our bogs are within <br /> Ioo feet of the resource area. so, for this opinion to be, <br /> if youfre saying no. . . . SHRMAN# 100 feet applies only to the <br /> cutting of field edges, not to all agricultural activities. ) <br /> 100 Feetfrom the production of the bog. . . . . . (SHERMAN: For <br /> the cutting of field edges, for the management of field <br />