My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/21/1997 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
8/21/1997 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:33:01 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 1:57:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/21/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MLASHPEE CONSERVATION COMMISSION <br /> Minutes of 21 August 1997 <br /> C nunissi ne s present: John Fitzsimmons, Elliot Rosenberg, Marry <br /> esosiers, Ralph Shaw. <br /> THE E CORDED TAPE IS NOT PAR'S OF THE MEETING, IT IS FOR <br /> TRANSCRIPTION ONLY. <br /> The Chairman called the meeting to order at 6:55 p.m. <br /> 6:55 PUBLIC COMMENT T PERIOD: Deirdre Greehsh, vaster <br /> Commissioner, came before the Board. <br /> She s aid she was here tonight to address comments on the draft E IR on <br /> Holland Mills. You began that we did not identify potential impacts on the <br /> Pine Barrens Buck Moth and yet in the next sentence it is noted that the <br /> weffs power lines should be underground rather than overhead because the <br /> Natural Heritage program has long planned a controlled burn in the area. No <br /> evidence was given that a municipal well s buck moths, while burning <br /> down the pine barrens where they live does not. Fault was found with their <br /> offer to focus on spotted turtle investigation on identifying charges In its <br /> habitat which is favorable to it. They offered to specifically move any turtles <br /> found during construction to another location. Yet, you wondered, "it i <br /> interesting to ponder how turtles consider these things. Will they be polled?", <br /> You added, 'FIs the DEIR postulating the changes to a well-functiommg <br /> ecosystem may be favorable? Any capable ecologist knows that tampering <br /> with the natural ecosystem is seldom beneficial. l would question, would <br /> burning the pine barrens constitute tampering with an ecosystem? <br /> You expressed the criticism that our report didnft adequately discuss water <br /> conservation and alternative sources of water supply. That sent the message <br /> � <br /> to the state that Mashpee does not need the water, that it cans end. another ' <br /> greey ears looking for water some place else. if it could be shown that a <br /> munici al well destroys the environment then you may have grounds to <br /> conclude that Holland N[il].s well site should be abandoned and the current <br /> pain <br /> and suffering of a moratorium is justified. But, no one has identified <br /> valid basis for the fear that Holland Mils will destroy the environment or <br /> secifica .y the cedar swamp, 650 feet away. You know that cedar swamps <br /> draw water from mall and stere it in peat layers? They do net draw from <br /> the groundwater directly. Holland Mills running at capacity 24 hours a day <br /> indefinitely would affect the groundwater table underneath the cedar forest <br /> by a mere 2". Weigh that against nature's affect on the water table when 180 <br /> days without rain could cause a drop of as much as 2 feet. If the cedar swamp .2. <br /> has survived a 2 foot drop during dry spells over the past few hundred years, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.