Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHughes to Concom 9-13-22The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries 251 Causeway Street, Suite 400, Boston, MA 02114 p: (617) 626-1520 | f: (617) 626-1509 www.mass.gov/marinefisheries CHARLES D. BAKER KARYN E. POLITO BETHANY A. CARD RONALD S. AMIDON DANIEL J. MCKIERNAN Governor Lt. Governor Secretary Commissioner Director September 13, 2022 Barnstable Conservation Commission 367 Main Street Hyannis MA 02601 Dear Commissioners: The Division of Marine Fisheries (MA DMF) has reviewed the Notice of Intent (NOI) by Helen Hughes to remove an existing pier, ramp, and float and replace the structures with a permanent access boardwalk, pier, gangway, and two 6 foot by 16.5 foot floats at 94 Long Beach Road within the Centerville River in the Town of Barnstable. A shellfish survey performed by BSC Group on April 5, 2022 found ribbed mussels (Geukensia demissa) within the salt marsh habitat and no shellfish within the substrate. The project was reviewed with respect to potential impacts to marine fisheries resources and habitat. The project site overlies salt marsh vegetation. Salt marsh provides a variety of ecosystem services, including habitat and energy sources for many fish and invertebrate species [1-3]. The project site lies within mapped shellfish habitat for northern quahog (Mercenaria mercenaria). Subtidal waters within the project site have habitat characteristics suitable for this species. Land containing shellfish is deemed significant to the interest of the Wetlands Protection Act (310 CMR 10.34) and the protection of marine fisheries. The Centerville River has been identified by MA DMF as diadromous fish passage, migration, and/or spawning habitat for alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), and American eel (Anguilla rostrata). MA DMF offers the following comments for your consideration: • Construction plans indicate rebuilding the wooden access that overlies salt marsh and leads up to the proposed pier. This is an opportunity to raise the access to a higher elevation above the salt marsh and reduce shading impacts. MA DMF conducted two field studies to assess the relationship between shading, marsh growth, and dock design; these studies collectively indicated that a height-to-width (H:W) ratio of 1.5:1 between the base of horizontal stringers and salt marsh reduced shading and marsh loss relative to the typically required 1:1 H:W ratio [4-5]. MA DMF recommends establishing a minimum 1.5:1 H:W ratio across the full extent of the marsh to reduce shading impacts [6]. • Any activities requiring a barge should be coordinated to avoid barge grounding or operation in intertidal habitat or shallow water (less than 2 feet between motor skeg and substrate) over mapped shellfish habitat. • Construction activity, including staging of construction material and equipment as well as equipment transit to and from the construction site, should avoid intertidal habitat to the greatest extent practicable. As much work as possible should be conducted from the upland portion of the project site to minimize impacts and avoid compaction of sediment in mapped shellfish habitat. Any work in the intertidal zone should be limited to low tide such that work is conducted in the “dry.” Questions regarding this review may be directed to Amanda Davis in our New Bedford office at Amanda.davis@mass.gov. Sincerely, Amanda Davis Environmental Analyst MA Division of Marine Fisheries cc: Daniel A. Ojala, Down Cape Engineering, Inc. John Logan, Emma Gallagher, MA DMF Robert Boeri, CZM AD/eg References: 1. Boesch, D.F. and R.E. Turner. 1984. “Dependence of Fishery Species on Salt Marshes: The Role of Food and Refuge.” Estuaries 7(4):460-468. https://doi.org/10.2307/1351627. 2. Deegan, L.A. and R.H. Garritt. 1997. “Evidence for spatial variability in estuarine food webs.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 147:31-47. https://doi.org/10.3354/MEPS147031. 3. Deegan, L.A., J.E. Hughes, and R.A. Rountree. 2000. “Salt marsh ecosystem support of marine transient species.” In: M.P. Weinstein and D.A. Kreeger, eds. Concepts and Controversies in Tidal Marsh Ecology: Kluwer Academic Publisher, The Netherlands. pp. 333-365 4. Logan, J.M., A. Davis, C. Markos, K.H. Ford. 2018. “Effects of docks on salt marsh vegetation: An evaluation of ecological impacts and the efficacy of current design standards.” Estuaries and Coasts 41:661–675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-017-0323- 1. 5. Logan, J.M., S. Voss, A. Davis, K.H. Ford. 2018. “An experimental evaluation of dock shading impacts on salt marsh vegetation in a New England estuary.” Estuaries and Coasts 41:13–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-017-0268-4. 6. Logan, J.M., A. Boeri, J. Carr, T. Evans, E.M. Feeney, K. Frew, F. Schenck, and K.H. Ford. 2022. A review of habitat impacts from residential docks and recommended Best Management Practices with an emphasis on the northeastern United States. Estuaries Coasts 45: 1189–1216. https://www.mass.gov/doc/dock-bmp- recommendations/download