My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/12/2001 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
7/12/2001 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2018 5:12:40 PM
Creation date
2/28/2018 1:29:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/12/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
amplitude located at one hundred twenty-five 1 foot area,. <br /> being approximate beginning of riverfront area is inundated by <br /> spring tides (indicated by tidal amplitude data in addition to <br /> salinity data) . This area is not tidally dominated, however it <br /> can be tidally influenced. <br /> Mr. DiGregorio made references to the transition zone area. <br /> At this point the Chairman inquired as to the location of <br /> the beginning and end of the Rivers Protection Act. Mr. <br /> DiGregorio regorio pointed out "the green area. ,, <br /> Mr. DiGregorio responded Applicant is requesting a partial <br /> decision be made by the COnservation Commission with reference t <br /> the lower portion of Riverfront (riot the northern portion) area. <br /> Mr. Sherman expressed concern for determination of the <br /> intermittent area, noting this ratter has not yet been resolved. <br /> Again, Mr. DiGregorio made references to the visual . <br /> There was some discussion as to whether~ the area in <br /> question is in fact tidally dominated. <br /> 1r. Sherman stated the criteria studied and interpretations <br /> made thereof are reasonable. However, he strongly recommended <br /> the area be investigated by the Conservation Commission. <br /> It was determined that an area described as tidally <br /> dominated would not be subject to the Fivers Act . <br /> The Chairman asked if this matter should be referred to DEP <br /> for determination; to which Mr. Sherman replied "I don' t think we <br /> should, " <br /> Summary of criteria used to distinguish tidally dominated, <br /> r non-riverain/estuarine from tidally influenced or fresh <br /> riverain. Determination has been made in the Freezer Point <br /> Decision whereby an estuary is not a river~. <br /> Salinity - If the average salinity of the stream is greater <br /> that fifty o percent of the salinity of Shoestring Bay, it is <br /> tidally dominated, estuarine in nature. The salinity in <br /> Shoestring Bay is approximately twenty-three/twenty-five (23/25) <br /> parts per thousand. whereby, ten/twelve 10parts per <br /> thousand would calculate as fifty percent salinity rule. <br /> water Depth - Tidal amplitude, as the water rises and falls <br /> on a regular basis twice a day with the tides would indicate a <br /> tidal influence. If the tidal changes in the strewn, water depth <br /> at high tide are at least twice as great, the stream depth at low <br /> tide and tidal changes are regular two lows and two highs per <br /> day) the stream would be tidally dominated, or part of the <br /> estuary. <br /> -9- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.