[MassHistPres] Areas of Water on the NR

Tue Nov 10 14:25:51 EST 2009

I have to chime in here. This is an incredibly transparent use of  
"preservation" by folks who only want to defeat Cape Wind. I am an  
ardent preservationist - I've served on our local HDC for more years  
than I care to remember, and some of the decisions I've made have  
cost me some relationships in town - so be it. I have an 1892 farm in  
an area of Rhode Island I have to sell - but at the cost of a hefty  
discount on the price, I'm insisting the buyer place a preservation  
easement on it - I've sold land to conservation groups at deep, deep  
discounts. In short, I've put my money where my mouth is. I am also  
deeply concerned about our collective abuse of the environment.  
Climate Change is a very real threat that, if not dealt with swiftly  
and decisively, will certainly eclipse preservation concerns.  The  
notion of Nantucket Sound suddenly becoming a precious  historic  
resource coincident with the Cape Wind proposal is hog wash! Where  
were the Wampanoags and the "preservationists" on the issue of their  
precious sound 20 years ago?

Someone please tell me - is there any other 560 square mile area of  
marine bottom (or even dry land) currently on the NR on its own  
historic merits?  I didn't study the rulings but I did scan enough to  
get the flavor - Nantucket Sound was (when it was dry) probably the  
type of area the Native Americans might have hung out in. No one  
knows if they did - or if they didn't - it's just possible, maybe  
even likely. Does this seem a little thin to anyone else? Then let's  
ask - what would Nantucket Sound be preserved for? Will the public  
ever experience any of the history made there? Will it become a  
diving Mecca? If so, why isn't it one already? In short, what public  
good would come of listing it? I don't see one.

The ridiculous bending and twisting of "historic preservation" into a  
useful club to beat up a project unwanted by some for their own self  
interest does tremendous harm to those who are trying to legitimately  
practice preservation, which ain't easy.  If this was such a valuable  
historic resource, there would have been a push to protect it long  
before Cape Wind appeared on the horizon. If the push now is to  
preserve it, and it merits preservation on its own qualities, then go  
all out - start by banning all commercial fishing (the draggers have  
been ripping the bottom to shreds for decades). For that matter, ban  
all boat traffic because we could risk an oil spill, or a sinking, or  
anchors damaging some archaeological resource. Make the ferries go  
around (and the planes, too - have to protect those birds). Let those  
pushing for preservation pony up the bucks to pay for a massive  
underwater research dig.......

I'm all for historic preservation. I'm all for alternative energy.  
Both are vital - one for our physical survival, one for our cultural  
survival.  I'm all for a rational discussion and effective compromise  
to meet both goals but that is clearly not the case here - we simply  
have a bunch of Nimby's using whatever weapon they can find.

Sam Bird AIA, LEED AP
Concord

On Nov 10, 2009, at 10:42 AM, Paul Bourdon wrote:

> I certainly understand that there are potential archaeological  
> sites that would be lost but to solely focus on those underwater  
> sites would be to forget that rising sea levels will endanger low  
> lying sites in a lot of places (including the Cape and Islands).  
> Maybe nothing we do will stop rising sea levels but like trying to  
> save a building against the odds we need to try and Nantucket sound  
> is an obvious place.
>
> Paul Bourdon
> Southborough
>
>
> On 11/6/09 9:00 AM, "Aaron Marcavitch" <acornhp at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/green/greenblog/2009/11/ 
>> state_historic_ruling_may_add.html
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Obviously as a preservationist who is currently located on  
>> Nantucket, this has interesting implications.  For those not  
>> following along at home, the Wampanoag Tribe asked for a ruling on  
>> the NR eligibility of Nantucket Sound - where a wind farm is to be  
>> located.
>>
>> Personally, I like the wind farm.  Of course, reading this blog  
>> article, we get a good feel for the "Hysterical Preservationist"  
>> label.  I know that there are plenty of underwater archaeological  
>> sites in the sound and that there is a cultural landscape element  
>> to it.  The proponents of the wind farm (including our gov.) say  
>> that this is an end round to slow the process down because now it  
>> will require a Section 106 process.
>>
>> Obviously I can see the preservation angle on this and hope that  
>> the historical comissions on the islands and cape get pulled into  
>> the discussion.  I have had concerns about the archaeological  
>> impact for a while - but was assurred that nothing would be  
>> impacted.  On the other hand, I see the impact a wind farm could  
>> have for the region.
>>
>> Anyone have thoughts on this very historic preservation issue?   
>> How do we address broad areas of cultural landscape - which happen  
>> to be water.  Would we/have we put a lake on the NR?  How about a  
>> river?  Please dont get into your opinions on why the Tribe did it  
>> or why MHC did what they did - I am just looking for a more  
>> philosophical viewpoint.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Aaron
>> Housing Nantucket
>>
>>
>> --------
>> http://www.marcavitch.com
>>
>>
>> ******************************
>> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact  
>> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO  
>> THE WHOLE LIST.
>> MassHistPres mailing list
>> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
>> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>> ********************************
>
> ******************************
> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact  
> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO  
> THE WHOLE LIST.
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
> ********************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20091110/1dfd8133/attachment-0001.htm>