Volunteers Got Expert Help
To the editor:
I appreciate Tessera Knowles-Thompson’s article on the 95 Lawrence Road project to create affordable homes in Wellfleet as it makes its way through the many steps it takes to become a reality [“Wellfleet’s Big Plan Goes Out for Bids,” March 18, page 1].
I want to clarify that the “volunteer” committee recognized by select board member Justina Carlson for developing the RFP has been assisted all along the way by town staff and has worked hand in hand with Laura Shufelt, director of community assistance at the Mass. Housing Partnership, a service provided at no charge to the town. Ms. Shufelt has decades of experience in helping communities create affordable housing and is also a longtime resident of the Cape.
Wellfleet is fortunate to have such a skilled and caring expert by our side.
Elaine McIlroy
Wellfleet
The writer is chair of Wellfleet’s 95 Lawrence Road Task Force.
Meeting Problems Head On
To the editor:
It was so delicious to read about “Wellfleet’s Big Plan” in last week’s issue. I have always known the town as a quiet, quaint, off-the-beaten-path refuge, a scenic “playground of the gods” with a smart, open, creative community vibe. (I chose to retire to the Cape 14 years ago and could afford nearby Eastham.)
So, I was not surprised to read that this community was able to bring all of its dynamic parts together to meet two big problems head on: building affordable housing while cleaning its estuary. It is such a contrast to Truro’s dynamics and, no doubt, it will bring great joy to the community.
Mary Jane Samuel
Eastham
The Plaintiffs’ Motives
To the editor:
When K.C. Myers wrote that some of those who joined as plaintiffs in the lawsuit to block the Cloverleaf development lived more than a mile away from the site [“More Plaintiffs Sign On to Fight Truro Housing,” March 18, page 5], I assumed she meant that they all lived in the Pond Road area. Almost all of the people who originally raised water quality issues lived there.
However, when I looked at the addresses of those new plaintiffs, I noticed that many of them lived several miles away. One can only speculate on their motives for opposing this desperately needed housing development in Truro.
Jim Bisceglia
North Truro
Don’t Dredge the Marsh
To the editor:
Planning is underway for dredging the sensitive Nauset Marsh estuary to benefit a very small commercial fishing fleet, whose full-tidal-range access to the marsh is inconvenienced, but not prevented, by channel shoaling.
This is a bad idea. Sea level rise and climate change are affecting an already dynamic outer beach and estuary inlet system, including increased northerly movement of sand towards and partially into the inlet. Sand dredged from the back channel behind the Orleans barrier spit would quickly be replaced by new sand transported from offshore. The dynamics of the inlet system have deposited the sand where it now lies. If removed, it would quickly be redeposited. So, maintenance dredging would be required, perhaps annually.
The environmental consequences of the dredging have not been fully evaluated. We cannot let this sensitive ecosystem become a Petri dish for measuring potential unintended consequences.
Eastham’s shallow-draft emergency response boat allows full access to the inlet, so dredging is not needed for that purpose.
Project costs will likely exceed $3 million. Is this how we should spend our taxpayer dollars? Eastham residents can contact our select board to register their opposition.
Harrison Swift
Eastham
The writer, a member of the Nauset Estuary Stakeholder Group, is expressing his opinion here only as an individual.
Protecting the Nauset Estuary
To the editor:
I oppose the proposed dredging in Nauset Marsh.
Barrier systems provide a soft boundary between ocean and marsh. The openings move and are affected by many natural factors. There is a constant interplay between tide and wind. The movement of sand is constant and unpredictable, and will inevitably mean continual follow-up dredging.
Estuaries are rich in ecological communities both seen and unseen, with enormous value for a wide range of fish, birds, and mammals. We are not doing enough to protect our estuaries in general, and Nauset is one of the few that are still in relatively good condition.
I cannot speak to the impact that choosing not to dredge will have on commercial and recreational navigation. But the consequences for humans of not dredging are far less major than the consequences we will face by continually disturbing these critical habitats. We can no longer put immediate human needs above the greater good of the natural environment. Ultimately, what is good for the environment is good for mankind.
We need to shift our way of thinking. The more we try to work against nature, the greater the consequences for everyone.
Kait Logan
Eastham
The writer is a member of the Eastham Open Space Committee and Climate Action Committee.
Our Police and ICE
To the editor:
I appreciated last week’s article concerning Sheriff James Cummings’s signing on with ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) over three years ago. It was a sad time. Many of us spoke out, with Assembly Delegate Brian O’Malley, against that proposed partnership.
I recall it being noted at the time that police departments across the Cape believed they were capable of managing immigration situations as they arose without ICE, which has frequently been viewed as intolerant in relation to race and ethnicity.
Only three sheriffs in New England signed up to partner with ICE — in Barnstable, Plymouth, and Bristol counties. That is testimony that ICE should remain a federal agency, not branching out into local or state jurisdictions.
Bruce Mason
Provincetown
