| MEANDERINGS
by Patrick Garner
No Good Deed
During the last decade I have been the trouble shooter on several
problem projects. Invariably, the developer fails to install proper
mitigation, or to maintain it, or to anticipate major storms when
acres of land are stripped bare. Adjoining wetlands and streams
are then impacted by siltation. We have all seen these sad projects.
They tend to be more common than not.
I am usually called in after a Stop Order has been issued. At
that point, I analyze the extent of impacts and walk the violators
through a remediation and restoration process with the Conservation
Commission. Mitigation and/or restoration are almost always successful.
Nevertheless, despite my white hat, I have found in the last year
that “no good deed goes unpunished.”
All of my rescues and restorations were recently turned inside
out by a disgruntled owner of a small on-line town newspaper.
She is unhappy with a proposed 40B project I represent in her
town. The project is doggedly opposed by local residents. To discredit
the project team, she “researched” my background,
and published a lengthy article decrying the “long trail
of woe” that followed my projects. She cited the very projects
I had saved.
In a reasoned reply, I challenged each misinterpretation with
a complete explanation of the project, the circumstances, and
the results. Without belaboring the effort and the time this exercise
cost me, suffice to say that she never accepted my invitation
to meet, nor apologized for her accusations. Following my letter,
she dropped her written crusade . . . for a few months. Then,
during a ConCom meeting, she repeated the same empty accusations,
trying to discredit the project.
While public forums are intended to give the public voice, they
are not intended to serve as opportunities for mischaracterization
and untruths. Separating truth from fiction is difficult, and
without savvy Boards to see the difference, these contests, unfortunately,
too often end up in litigation.
*****
Canoeing on the Nashua River
Late in September, my younger son persuaded my wife and me to
canoe part of the Nashua River. The weather was marvelous, and
vast cumulous clouds drifted across a deep blue sky. We launched
our 15-foot canoe at the small landing on Route 117 in Lancaster
and headed northerly toward our pickup car, 5 miles downstream
in Harvard.
We paddled steadily down the center channel of the river for about
a mile before the machine gun fire began. Then, as we threaded
our way between fallen trees and occasionally muddy shoals, the
rat-a-tat-tat of M-16s and heavy weapons became louder and louder.
The irony was quintessentially American: here we were, deep in
a stunningly beautiful nature preserve, an area set aside by the
Commonwealth as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC),
and gunfire coming from the adjacent military reservation at Devens
was so loud that we grew increasingly concerned about being hit
by shrapnel and stray ammunition.
By the time we pulled up to the Harvard landing in Still River,
the gunfire was constant. We might have been smarter wearing flak
jackets instead of our life preservers. We survived, but I tried
to imagine the effect of the constant gunfire on wildlife, including
migratory birds.
The Central Nashua River Valley ACEC consists of 12,900 acres
of terraced farmlands, undeveloped woods and wetlands. Here is
a portion of the description for the ACEC, taken from the ACEC
Program web site:
“...the river valley provides significant linkages between
important wildlife areas. At least 19 state-listed rare species
occur within the ACEC. These figures do not include several federal
or state-listed rare bird species that are known to utilize the
area, but are not listed on the State's rare species database
because they are not known to breed within the area. Rare species
habitats cover approximately 4,975 acres, or 39% of the ACEC.
The wetlands and tributaries are federally listed as priority
wetlands, due to their importance to the Atlantic Flyway for migrating
birds.”
Yet, a major Army firing range lies deep in the heart of this
pristine preserve. As constant reminders, in addition to the gunfire,
military “No Trespassing” signs line the river banks
lest some boating party imagine stopping briefly among the giant
willows to stretch their legs.
Preservation of this vast sanctuary is laudable. However, the
coexistence of sensitive, and often secretive, wildlife with an
active military heavy weapons firing range seems impossible. The
usual beatific experience of canoeing is destroyed as well. Nowhere
in the ACEC description of this preserve is there mention of the
firing range, even though it dominates and defines the core of
the natural area.
I recommend that the ACEC staff rewrite their web site to emphasize
the realities of the military presence, and to describe the assets
of the “Atlantic Flyway” with extraordinary caution.
The rare Blue Grosbeak and guns are not compatible, and we should
not pretend they are.
|
|
<BACK |
