The Irony of it All

There was an interesting article in Monday’s Enterprise titled “Magazine Blasts Casino”. I call it interesting only because of the title. I would Oliver Mill Herring Run

think a more appropriate title would have been “Magazine Exposes Casino Impacts” because that is really what the Massachusetts Audubon’s recent magazine article is really about. You can read the Mass Audubon article in it’s entirely at CasinoFacts.org.

I must say I was moved by this article, because of its message, and specifically because it reiterates the haunting, yet moving words of Faries Dreaming Bear Gray, spiritual leader of the Massachusett Tribe when he spoke at the BIA EIS scoping meeting last March….his was a powerful and moving speech – here is what he had to say.
(please note that I am reprinting only a portion of his words. If you would like, you can watch and listen to his powerful speech yourself.)

My concerns in Middleboro are twofold. One - this is not Mashpee territory. Two - destroying trees, the four-legged, the winged ones, all the creatures that will be destroyed if they build a casino is not the native way. And I don't know how the Mashpee can not be ashamed to kill such things and then say that they are still connected to the land. That is not the way. I am the spiritual leader of the Massachusett. I have spoken with our ancestors - Massachusett and Wampanaog are not happy.

What about the trees. How many trees are going to die. How many? Does anyone know? What about the creatures? How many will lose their homes? The eagle, the hawks, which the Creator sees us through, will see the Mashpee destroying the land. The Mashpee should be ashamed. I don't understand how the Mashpee can make sense of what they are attempting to do. They say that they care about the land, they have been good stewards of the land. But they are going to destroy land. What little we have left they will destroy for financial reasons - to build a casino - because their tribe is struggling. What gives the Mashpee the right to take the lives of our brothers and sisters, our cousins - the creatures that live there? That is not the native way. That is the way of the settlers. That is not the native way - it never has been. I will not question the blood of the Mashpee .. but their spirit is gone. If their spirit is intact, they would know this is the wrong thing to do. You cannot replace those things that will die. As a native, they should know this.

- Faries Dreaming Bear Gray -

Well, it is quite apparent to me that there are many Native Americans who do know this …and many settlers, also. Unfortunately, we settlers do not have the same spiritual connection to nature as the Native Americans do, but there are many who honestly do try – and dedicate their lives to it.

For those who are not aware, Mass Audubon works to protect the nature of Massachusetts for people and wildlife and they are the largest conservation organization in all of New England.

THEIR MISSION: To Protect The Nature of Massachusetts.

THEIR VISION: A Commonwealth in which people appreciate and understand native plants and animals and their habitats and work together to ensure that they are truly protected.

THEIR ROLE: To serve both as a leader and a catalyst for conservation, by acting directly to Protect The Nature of Massachusetts and by stimulating individual and institutional action through education, advocacy, and habitat protection.

THEIR GOALS: To abate the principal threats to The Nature of Massachusetts. Broadly defined, these threats are:

-- habitat fragmentation
-- habitat loss
-- disruption of ecological processes
-- invasive species
-- incompatible human uses of the land.

- Mass Audubon website -

Well it is no wonder this carefully thought out and well written article gives us a true insight into what a mega resort casino can and will do to not only Middleboro…but to all the surrounding communities. It would seem to any rational person, that the Mashpee Wampanoag’s plan to build a mega casino-resort smack dab in the middle of forested wetlands easily falls under all five broadly defined principal threats to nature.

Heidi Ricci, senior policy analyst for the Audubon Society, and someone I would call a true steward to the land understands the threat we all face…and it is a threat….a threat to that land’s specific, fragile ecosystem and the wildlife that relies on it for survival. It is a threat to our quality of life and to our natural resources – those resources we so readily take for granted every time we turn the faucet, stop to admire the flight of a hunting hawk circling overhead, or look up at the stars on a warm summer night.

“It is a very environmentally sensitive site,” Ricci said of the 539 acres proposed for a casino. Ricci said if the land is taken into a trust for the tribe, it will be exempt from state and federal environmental law.

She said the impact to water, habitat and the transportation system in a remote rural area without infrastructure could be disastrous and far reaching.

And the effects won’t be limited to Middleboro, she said. She predicts substantial impact to natural resources and infrastructure in surrounding communities — the possible filling of wetlands, threats to the Taunton River and its 582-square-mile watershed and irreplaceable ecosystems, air pollution and threats to several aquifers in the region.“The impacts are far more than local. While the Native Americans negotiated with Middleboro, nothing’s in place to address the impacts to the rest of the region,” Ricci said.
- enterprise article -

Yes, the impacts are far more reaching than Middleboro, and are far from being easily mitigated. As you all know, I am a bit passionate about the environment. I am because I truly believe that we are responsible and need to be held accountable for the health and well being of this planet we call home. I have no real problems with development, just a really big and huge problem with a project slated to destroy pristine forested wetlands that under any other circumstances, would be considered too sensitive for development. Oh, and the one other thing that really grinds my gears is people who continue to tout that the impacts can be mitigated and no harm will come to anyone because the EIS will fix it all!

Phew!....and here I was, actually worried, that building a casino that rivals the likes of Foxwoods might actually ruin this forested wetland area – hey, that land isn’t called Meeting House Swamp because it’s uplands – is it??

Well, here is some food for thought. The environmental consulting company (one of many) that has been hired by the Mashpee Wampanoag Indian Tribe...eeer...I mean hired by the Tribe's investors.....have a few interesting things to say about “the project” (aka – the casino). Please keep in mind that this consulting company was hired solely for the purpose of gathering information for the EIS because it is a requirement for the LIT process. If the Tribe can get the land placed into trust, then what the Tribe does after the fact will essentially be none of our business because they are a sovereign nation – and all the blogging by a certain Middlboro BoS member won’t mean a darned thing because the Tribe will have gotten what they wanted from the Town….land....land for a casino - land that will be exempt from local, state and most federal regulations – the very regulations that have been put in place specifically to protect the very same natural resources we all rely upon for survival…two legged, four legged and winged alike.

So, here is a breakdown of the scope of environmental work to be done by this company. This company’s job will be to assess the land for wetland delineation, secure specific permits under the Clean Water Act and ensure “the project” will be able to go forward smoothly. I have purposefully left out the name of the environmental company.

Based upon the current concept plan, XXX understands that 3 to 5 acres of wetland will be filled for this project. It is XXX’s experience that, for this amount of wetland impact, it will be difficult to obtain permits at the federal review level…

Now pay attention here…this is important….

At the federal level, there will be a standard of avoidance of wetland impacts that will need to be addressed. For example, under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act, no filling of wetlands or waters is to be allowed unless it is the “least damaging alternative” (or LEDPA). Accordingly, both on-site alternative layouts as well as alternative sites will need to be evaluated.

Huh…I wonder what alternative sites the Tribe has looked at in the area that would be of less impact to wetlands? I mean, the letter I am quoting was dated August 16, 2007 and was submitted as part of the LIT application. Did they look at alternative sites even though their buddy Herb Strathers had already bought the land in Middleboro long before August of 2007 for them specifically to build an Indian Casino – to which good ‘ol Herb was hoping to cash in on???

In short, the regulatory process of reviewing and permitting this project will be long and complex, and it is not possible to fully predict the course that will be taken or the fee required for it….

The amount of wetland fill propped in association with this project will undergo an intensive review under the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines of the Clean Water Act…as proposed impacts exceed the one acre threshold……the amount of wetland impact proposed for this project is relatively high for the Corps New England District. The federal agencies are likely to view this site as essentially wetland dominated, with high value wetlands surrounding the site.

Wow…even the engineering company the Tribe ...whoops....I mean investors, hired recognizes that this property is forested wetland, and will run into issues with the project as it is being proposed for the EIS.

Now the thing here is that this project clearly does not meet Clean Water Act requirements, yet the Tribe will insist on doing whatever they can to fill these wetlands and build their casino. Don’t get me wrong here…the CWA does have provisions for allowing projects to go through even though they may exceed one acre of wetlands filled, but let us please keep in mind why we even have and act called “Clean Water”.

The objective of the Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.

It is the national goal, that wherever attainable, an interim goal of water quality which provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on the water be achieved by 1981.

The Clean Water Act also has regulations to protect wetland areas. The EPA does realize the critical importance of wetland areas for the propagation of wildlife, and as a system unto itself that actually helps ensure clean groundwater. In fact, if you go to their wetland webpage, here is what they have to say….

Wetlands are among the most productive ecosystems in the world, comparable to rain forests and coral reefs. An immense variety of species of microbes, plants, insects, amphibians, reptiles, birds, fish, and mammals can be part of a wetland ecosystem.

In a nutshell, wetlands are very special and sensitive areas. They are where water and land come together, much like an estuary, the areas on the coast where fresh and salt water mix… and a place where the plants have wet feet themselves, while enjoying a warm summer breeze. Wetlands are the place where upland and aquatic wildlife gather and thrive. These wetlands provide the most productive habitat possible and a critical habitat for an abundance of wildlife, including ducks, geese, swans, herons, frogs, turtles, snakes, otters, beavers, and scores of other animals. Wetlands provide spawning and feeding areas for fish and homes for rare plants and insects. They are considered the base of several major food webs.

Oh – but that can be mitigated!

Here is what that environmental consulting company said about on-site and off-site mitigation:

…XXX will work with the proponent to identify on-site and off-site mitigation areas....at a minimum XXX anticipates wetland creation or compensation on the order of at least twice the amount of area to be filled and this may greatly increase based on the…Corps compensatory mitigation guidance which requires 3:1 wetland restoration, 4:1 wetland replication and 20:1 wetland protection/preservation of forested wetlands.

Well, since the “Stewards of the Land” obviously have no interest in forested wetland protection/preservation to the tune of 20:1 ratio (if they did, they wouldn’t be destroying any to begin with)….XXX gives them this as an alternative…

There appears to be opportunities for wetland mitigation on or in proximity to the current K.F. Brick site in Middleboro.

Huh? Correct me if I am wrong here, but isn’t this the long abandoned brick site that is currently being used as a trash transfer station??? Gosh, the frogs, turtles, and all the other wetland dependent critters must be absolutely thrilled with this…..not to mention, when you consider the success rate – or lack there of – with wetland mitigation, one tends to worry just a tinsy bit about this little plan….

Here is what the CWA says:

Under the federal, and various state and local, regulatory programs, land development activities which may adversely impact wetlands require consent through permit approval from the regulating agency. At the federal level, under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines of the CWA (codified at 40 CFR 230) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulations (codified at 33 CFR 320.4(r)), the Corps is obligated to require mitigation (i.e., compensation) for any unavoidable impacts on a wetland as a condition of permit approval. The developer can be required to enhance, restore, or create wetlands on or near the development site. Mitigation projects are meant to replace, on at least a one-to-one basis, the lost functions and values of natural wetlands affected by development activities.

Here is some interesting insight into wetland mitigation:

Although mitigation ideally provides a mechanism for accommodating both development and the protection of wetland functions and values, the low rate of success of mitigation projects is a subject of concern (Wolf et al. 1986, Kusler and Kentula 1990, Dobberteen and Nickerson 1991, Salveson 1995).

Successful wetland creation and major restoration projects still involve a great deal of uncertainty, particularly those that attempt to create or restore difficult wetland types (Kusler and Kentula 1990). Many types of freshwater wetlands that are slated for development are difficult or perhaps impossible to reproduce (Dahl and Johnson 1991, Kentula et al. 1992b 1990).

In a given permitting scenario, a decisionmaker faced with proposed wetland impacts must decide whether a functional equivalent of the wetland that will be eliminated by the permitted activity can be successfully created. Given the uncertain technology of mitigation, regulators sometimes face difficult decisions on what is too questionable, often in the face of substantial pressure to permit the activity.

Mitigation activities for forested and shrub wetlands typically result in out-of-kind creation because of the difficulty, expense, and uncertainty associated with creating such wetland systems (Kentula et al. 1992a, Bohlen and King 1994). Some forested wetlands represent advanced successional stages, and perhaps the most successful replacement efforts for these systems to-date have attempted to relocate system components intact, which has required large up-front financial expenditures (Gannon, pers. comm.). These efforts have been few in number. In a significant percentage of cases, the verdict is not yet in because of the decades-long time frames minimally required for the functional establishment of these mature systems.
- information courtesy of North Carolina State University-

Gee…..I guess Herb better had get some investors real quick…he is going to need all the money he can get for wetland mitigation…or will that cost fall to Sol and gang?

The letter goes on to explain that under the CWA and the Massachusetts Water Quality Certification Program (314 CMR 9.00) a 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) is required for the proposed fill of wetlands over 5,000 square feet to ensure the project will comply with state water quality standards and protection of state and federal wetland resource areas…..

Wait a minute….who cares, right? The Tribe is federally recognized, deserves the land, so I am told, and has already stated in their scoping report that they will not be following state environmental protection laws….but here is the thing… this is a federal statute, so they need this permit....but it is the state DEP who typically issues said permit.

Tsk..tsk….now, I have to imagine that the MA DEP is going to be none too happy about the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe…aka…people of the first light…aka…stewards of the land, totally dissing their regulations in their EIS scoping report – the very regulations that have been put in place specifically to protect the natural resources unique to the needs of our state. Yes, it will be quite interesting to see if the MA DEP will follow Massachusetts or federal laws for this permitting process – and please keep in mind that Massachusetts environmental regulations are more stringent than Federal environmental regulations.

The irony of this entire situation is that the Mashpee Wampanoag cannot or will not build a casino in Mashpee. Want to know why? Well, let me have the Tribe explain it to you as they did to the BIA and DOI in their Land in Trust application.

Lands in the town of Mashpee are unsuitable for a gaming facility or for other economic development ventures. First, lands owned by the Tribe or related entities in the Town of Mashpee are already being used for other purposes, and are not available for a gaming facility, hotel, etc. In addition, there are no readily available large tracts of land in the Town of Mashpee that could be used for a major economic development project such as that contemplated by the Tribe. There just are not sufficient lands available for purchase and/or development, and the available lands that are not developed are environmentally sensitive due to wetlands. In addition, the Mashpee area could not handle the traffic that would be created by a major casino resort given that Mashpee is located on Cape Cod which is accessed by only two bridges of four lanes each and all roads to Mashpee are two lane. This road infrastructure simply could not handle thousands of additional cars per day nor is it economically feasible to expand that road system.
- taken verbatim from the Mashpee Wampanoag Land in Trust Application-

Jeekers….that sounds a lot like our concerns! First of all, the available undeveloped land in Middleboro that the Tribe bought to build their monstrosity is also environmentally sensitive due to wetlands. How is it that they can mitigate the wetlands in Middleboro and not in Mashpee??

Oh, and the last time I checked….the land in Middleboro may not have a bridge separating it from 495, but it does have a nightmare of a rotary and only two lanes as opposed to the four lanes on the two bridges going to the Cape – which actually makes it eight lanes…ooh….sure….the new route 44 extension coming from route 3 is really nice – until it loses a lane at route 58 in Carver, that is. That, and all the other side roads going to the land in Middleboro are also two lanes…heck – on some of those back roads, your lucky if you have 1 ½ lanes….So again, how is that the road infrastructure in Mashpee is so less economically feasible than the roads in Middleboro…and Carver…and Plympton…and Bridgewater….and Lakeville…and Halifax….?

Sigh……the irony of it all.

I want to extend a big thank you to MA Audubon for the fantastic article, and for all that the organization and its members do to protect our wildlife, and educate the public about its wonderous opportunities as well as its much needed contribution to the health and well being of Mother Earth. In this chick's eyes, you are true stewards of the land.

The love for all living creatures is the most noble attribute of man.
- Charles Darwin

The question is not, Can they reason? nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?
- Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)

“And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.”

Bald Eagle over casino site


- be the change you want to see in the world -