Laserfiche WebLink
spoke with the Board and they gave him a copy of the letter they <br /> had sent to the Board so he can review it. <br /> Tony updated them on Mr. Butlers information regarding the status <br /> of the conservation restrictions with The Trustees of <br /> Reservations . <br /> Mr. Art Traseck apologized for not sending the letter to Mr. <br /> Butler. They reviewed the proposed plan presented by Mr. Butler <br /> regarding the conservation restriction. <br /> They will return in 2 weeks (May 15 th at T:4 0) and Tom will <br /> notify Mr. Butlers office of that meeting. <br /> DISCUSSION <br /> Report from Dr, William Rerf oot of R-v Associates regarding <br /> completion of Mashpee/Santuit Rivers study. <br /> Dr, Kerf oot of Iry Associates was present and explained that this <br /> evening he would look at the broader ramifications of the study <br /> and then will return again with detailed, specific information <br /> and information on individual sites. <br /> At previous meetings he presented the results of samples from <br /> points of runoff and was dealing with nitrogen loading <br /> concentrating on the Mashpee River corridor <br /> Where are the sources coming from and haw can they be dealt with. <br /> He explained that the present condition of Mashpee River shows <br /> some rise in nitrogen in upper end of the esturine area. The <br /> region itself is not in too bad a condition but shows some stress <br /> at t-he head of the esturine area. A variety of sources from <br /> development which may be encouraging that. <br /> When you take full development for Mashpee River area and <br /> superimpose it on existing concentrations (based upon best <br /> information) it shows that individual septic systems are a major <br /> source. Concentrations are expected to rise from present figures <br /> to 1 . 2 parts per million. Most esturine experts agree that over <br /> 1 part per million is not desirable. <br /> Dr. Rerfoot explained that they have been finishing up <br /> information on the Santuit River and Shoestring Bay. They used <br /> the same approach as with the Mashpee River, broken down to <br /> groundwater contours, dividing it up, segmented to mixing <br /> characteristics. Using same calculations for loading (as Mashpee <br /> River) they are finding very similar situations but with a <br /> different twist - major predominance from individual septic <br /> systems . There is a need here for collection and reduction in <br /> the nitrogen, even more than in Mashpee River basin in terms of <br /> loading. <br /> 6 <br />