Laserfiche WebLink
Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission <br /> 16 Great Neck Road North <br /> Mashpee, MA 02649 <br /> The 2023 runneling project aimed to lower water levels and encourage vegetation regrowth. She presented <br /> representative data showing that average water levels in one monitored pool dropped significantly after the <br /> intervention, confirming the effectiveness of the runnels in improving drainage. Within the first year, <br /> vegetation cover increased by approximately 13% in manipulated areas compared to untreated zones. Although <br /> results from the most recent monitoring season were not yet available, the early indicators were highly <br /> positive. <br /> Ms. Tyrell emphasized that the runneling method appears to be an effective, low-impact tool in the salt <br /> marsh restoration"toolbox," helping to prevent valuable vegetated marsh from converting into open water. She <br /> concluded this portion by noting that the team is proposing similar restoration work at Sage Lot Pond. <br /> Proposed Work Areas <br /> Ms. Tyrell presented an overview map of the proposed runneling project areas. The turquoise lines on the <br /> map indicated the locations where new runnels would be dug, while pink dots represented sites where <br /> excavated peat would be deposited to form small elevated"microhabitat islands." She explained that these <br /> islands could provide nesting areas and additional habitat diversity within the marsh system. <br /> Expansion to Jehu Pond and Related Considerations <br /> The proposed work extends to both Sage Lot Pond and Jehu Pond. Ms. Tyrell clarified that, while the two <br /> efforts are related in terms of planning, they could be pursued independently. Jehu Pond presents more <br /> complex conditions due to the presence of berms and the fact that much of the surrounding land is owned by <br /> the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as part of a federal refuge. <br /> She displayed maps identifying proposed restoration areas and specific berms under consideration for <br /> breaching. Upon recent field visits to set up vegetation monitoring plots, her team discovered that some berm <br /> areas initially considered degraded were in better condition than expected. Consequently, they are now <br /> reconsidering or reducing the extent of proposed berm breaching—possibly limiting it to one or two breaches <br /> or omitting them entirely to avoid unnecessary disturbance. <br /> Ms. Tyrell further explained that permitting for these projects is temporarily on hold as the team navigates <br /> state-level approval processes. Some severely degraded marsh sections identified in the southern portion of <br /> Jehu Pond will likely be excluded from the project because the peat substrate has collapsed too extensively for <br /> restoration to be feasible. <br /> She then showed a cross-sectional diagram of a runnel and a microhabitat island, explaining that excavated <br /> peat is piled nearby to form slightly elevated zones that could serve as nesting habitat for saltmarsh sparrows. <br /> At Doghead Marsh, she reported very poor rates of marsh accretion and extensive conversion of vegetated <br /> areas into open water. However, the site still has potential for inland marsh migration, which is important since <br /> Mashpee owns substantial land there. She also pointed out that a culvert beneath McGregor Road(state- <br /> owned)restricts tidal flow and could benefit from remediation. She suggested that this might be a future <br /> partnership opportunity for the Town to improve tidal flushing and overall marsh health. <br /> Permitting Pathways and Coordination <br /> Chair Cook asked about next steps, specifically whether the team would need to file a Notice of Intent <br /> (NOI). Ms. Tyrell responded that this is likely. She explained that the previous runneling work had been done <br /> in collaboration with Cape Cod Mosquito Control, under a different permitting structure, and that they intend <br /> to partner with them again. However, the state now recommends pursuing an "ecological restoration" <br /> permitting pathway, which would require filing an NOI. <br /> She noted some uncertainty about which specific subcategory applies, since the state's ecological restoration <br /> criteria focus primarily on tidal restriction removals, which differ from their current goals. This project, she <br /> clarified, seeks to alleviate impounded water caused by historical alterations rather than by modern tidal <br />