10/09/2025 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission 16 Great Neck Road North Mashpee, MA 02649 floodplain and accelerating downstream water flow. The proposed restoration would rework soils, fill ditches, and remove berms and culverts to restore the natural floodplain wetland. A key feature of the plan is to restore Quaker Run by adding sinuosity—lengthening the stream by approximately 600 feet to slow flow and increase water retention. The restoration design also introduces both floodplain wetlands and deeper marsh areas, ensuring hydrologic and habitat variety. Existing aquatic habitat, such as a pond in bog 3, will be retained. Mr. Soares also described additional site improvements. An old pipe connecting the restoration area to active cranberry bogs to the east will be sealed to prevent hydrologic interaction, safeguarding both the restored and agricultural systems. Tee boxes located near bogs 1 and 2 will be relocated, and old bulkheads will be removed to allow natural grading into the wetlands. Existing irrigation utilities will be maintained, with connections shifted to accommodate the new layout. Two existing culverts at the site's upper and lower ends will remain intact. He concluded by noting that this concept plan provides the foundational understanding of the site's opportunities and constraints, setting the stage for more detailed design and permitting steps once the project receives conceptual support from the commission. Discussion on Hydrologic Connectivity and Restoration Benefits Mr. Soares concluded his presentation by emphasizing that the bog restoration project offers significant potential to improve both hydrologic and wildlife connectivity. By reestablishing connections among the bog cells, the project will enhance the movement of water and wildlife, allowing the restored wetland to function more naturally. He noted that the restoration will also slow the rate at which water exits the site, helping to retain it longer on the landscape. This will attenuate peak flows entering downstream waterbodies such as Shoestring Bay and promote nutrient uptake. He further mentioned that the project scope includes coordination of a nitrogen sampling program to monitor water quality both before and after restoration, as required by the Planning Board's prior approval. Mr. Soares reiterated that the team is prepared to move quickly into detailed design and permitting if the commission expresses support. The performance bond in place, he said, ensures that the restoration will move forward regardless of other project outcomes. Ms. Pitt asked whether the pond on-site was natural or manmade. Mr. Soares responded that although he had not yet reviewed historic imagery, he suspected it was constructed during the bog's development. He confirmed that none of the bogs in question are currently active, so no fertilizers or other agricultural inputs are being applied. She inquired about the upstream cranberry bog located across the road. Specifically, she wanted to know whether changes to Quaker Run could affect water management on the opposite side, where another bog exists. Mr. Soares explained that the upstream bog has its own water control structure at the bottom of its cells, allowing operators to retain water if needed. However, modern cranberry operations generally rely more on sprinkler irrigation than on flooding for frost protection, meaning the upstream property is unlikely to restrict water flow into the restoration area. He also noted that drought conditions have a much greater effect on site hydrology than upstream water management, referencing the recent summer when sections of Quaker Run dried up while the pond retained some water. Ms. Godfrey commented that the project had evolved significantly from the original plans and appeared much improved. Regulatory and Compliance Considerations Ms. Thornbrugh noted that the submitted letter dated September 24 was addressed to the former Chair, though the Commission had since reorganized and Steve Cook now served as chair. She appreciated that the project was not being adjudicated that evening but wanted to clarify several regulatory points before the next submission. Ms. Thornbrugh referenced the June memorandum addressing the Wetlands Protection Act,pointing out that several local regulatory thresholds would be triggered by the proposed impacts. Specifically, she cited