My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/27/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
07/27/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2018 5:12:21 PM
Creation date
2/28/2018 12:48:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/27/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
27 July 2000 <br /> Page 12. <br /> have a team that has the oversight to do it right. <br /> Dr. Mitchell stated Hamblin Pond chemically is a success, biologically it is a <br /> mess. They watched the pH climb up from 6.8 to 9.4. <br /> Mr. smith described the recovery of Hamblin Pond. <br /> Dr. Mitchell stated it was an adverse short term with the fish kill. There <br /> were signals, if someone chose to interpret thein long before the 'fish kill <br /> occurred. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated he agrees that this can be ars effective treatment. It i <br /> the ancillary effects he is concerned about and how it is done. The relevant <br /> performance standards which he discussed with Spence smith and Mike <br /> Moroge have been addressed. He cannot say he is sure they have been <br /> addressed fully. 310 CMR 10.56 talks about "you shall' not impair ground <br /> and surface water quality" and surface water quality is a concern here, <br /> especially with methyl mercury and aluminum "and the capacity of said land <br /> to provide breeding habitat, escape cover and food for fisheries." while it i <br /> acknowledged in the Notice of Intent that the benthic i.n ertabr t <br /> community may be temporarily impaired, specifically, alum may create <br /> acutely toxic environment, short term however, but the Wetlands Protection <br /> Act do.no make a distinction between short term and long term. They say <br /> 49shall'not impair". The fact that we don't have a complete grasp of the <br /> benthic community as it exists today and has existed in the recent past, how <br /> it will be impacted by this treatment. There is also 10-60, wildlife habitat <br /> evaluation requirement which this work triggers. The contention is made <br /> that the 1388 IEP document #2, the checklist would allow not doing the <br /> wildlife habitat assessment. There is considerable information that the <br /> checklist is inadequate. Dr. Joseph Larsen of UM ss, Bead of the scientific <br /> advisory panel for IEP, has a report which he will provide copies of, <br /> indicating that he. thinks it is inadequate. It is being re-evaluated new and <br /> re-done. secondly, it has been established legally over and over again that. <br /> policies and guidance cannot override regulations. A guidance document <br /> cannot create an exemption that the regulation does not give in the <br /> beginning. He would not favor they interpretation. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated the Commission has a lot of confidence in Bill Fisher <br /> who has gone through the EIB treatment at the Quashnet Bogs, with all the <br /> associated problems there and his report indicates there are some <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.