[MassHistPres] ACHP Comments on the Cape Wind Project

Bjdurk at aol.com Bjdurk at aol.com
Sat Apr 3 17:02:50 EDT 2010


Thank you, Mr. Bird, for this acknowledgement and  for providing your 
comments.  I offer that many ardent  preservationists, including more than 25 
Federally recognized Tribes, the SHPO,  ACHP, National Trust, National Parks 
and the Keeper identify Nantucket Sound as  a significant traditional, 
cultural, historic and archaeological  property.  Given the political firestorm 
associated with competing  interests, I consider their individual and 
collective actions to be courageous. 
 
Take heart as Salazar has said, "what happens to  Cape Wind, whether it 
goes up or it goes down, will not be determinative of the  future of (offshore) 
wind energy in the United States." 
 
Thank You,  
 
Barbara Durkin 
Northboro, MA  
 
    
 
 
In a message dated 4/3/2010 2:27:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
greenbird-architect at comcast.net writes:

Ms. Durkin,
I confess, I made a shorthand and sarcastic response as  a follow up to my 
earlier comments on this listserve and on this topic.  Perhaps you missed my 
original comments which are copied below.  Perhaps  I was too flip, however 
I hoped to emphasize the absurdity of this decision,  in my humble opinion. 
 



To: Paul Bourdon
Cc: _masshistpres at cs.umb.edu_ (mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu) ; 
_Forum-L at lists.nationaltrust.org_ (mailto:Forum-L at lists.nationaltrust.org) 
Subject:  Re: [MassHistPres] Areas of Water on the NR
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 Apr 3, 2010, at 11:27 AM, _Bjdurk at aol.com_ (mailto:Bjdurk at aol.com)  
wrote:


We are all entitled to our opinions, Mr. Bird.  I do take  exception, 
however, to what I consider to be disparaging and  unsupported accusations made 
against the Tribes, SHPO, ACHP, National  Parks and the Keeper, with whom you 
disagree. 
 
Sincerely, 
 
Barbara Durkin 
Northboro, MA 




=
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20100403/95f467ea/attachment.htm>


More information about the MassHistPres mailing list