[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6632826,"mediaKeyId","2670212-c8534c20c2410bcfe800bf5eea6c1860","parentId",2670212,"title","Commission agrees to let graduate student explore automated herring-counting tools; official counts to remain controlled","audioSeconds",104,"startMs",642000,"endMs",746000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2670212-c8534c20c2410bcfe800bf5eea6c1860&start=642&end=746","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2670212-c8534c20c2410bcfe800bf5eea6c1860/thumbnail_642000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6632826/Massachusetts/Commission-agrees-to-let-graduate-student-explore-automated-herring-counting-tools-official-counts-to-remain-controlled","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6632826-0f474ca74d962c09c0048188cb702f8d/orig.mp4?Expires=1777451734&Signature=XKYqnhWkWKqG0qnKzNiw~eKoKCMKbmIVDvgMo7b0lYP1DIgTAZaf5g~lnVynQMv1x4HUO1C~vl5Byeq6Ix9skuVgiV8KDmz~UxzphtkBCZQTWDksM~blcW2pt0gjXmRti-S7HdxWMmAGoUT6d4TsRtbIN14ecSJ6vYNdvuzaYjfBkWyiUIDJSpvGK3FlHvEkCVOkd3jtfPzAuv5j7LCYeWEqZEV6Lv6tvhY4X6O6Ro64gHvUkfdGxPZDSFtSRz5fzpu9d0ZnZIEddQbixeUZDs4lEN~GavxCH~dG9D1OyOHwls1Nfpi2ocTu~FYXI9A47sI1iILkhZ~RORdabqUFpw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town of Lakeville, MA","date","2025-03-18T14:59:17.317Z","article","Commission members discussed an offer from a UMass Dartmouth graduate student in computer and data management to develop a more integrated, online method for recording herring counts and scheduling counts. The student has volunteered time and proposed a system that could allow online viewing and data-entry tools.

The commission agreed the student may consult with the commission’s longstanding counter, Dave, but commissioners were clear that the public should not be allowed to edit official counts. Dave explained he spends personal time transcribing the paper counting sheets into the commission’s spreadsheet and welcomed any automation that would save time provided it preserved a stable, auditable record and matched the state’s reporting format.

Why this matters: reliable, consistent counts are the the basis of state reporting and local management decisions. Commissioners emphasized the need for controls and for preserving historic records (paper and electronic) rather than allowing direct public edits.

Discussion and decision
Members raised concerns about public data input via open forms (Google Forms) and the risk of inconsistent or erroneous entries. The commission’s decision: allow the student to work with Dave to explore automation and interfaces, but keep the official counts under the control of the commission’s designated counters. “We agree that he speaks to Dave. Him and Dave can make the decision, not not anyone else,” one member said, endorsing a restricted pilot approach.

Next steps
Dave and the student will meet to identify technical requirements (formatting that matches state reporting, ways to archive annual records and a method to preserve the current manual verification process). The commission asked that any pilot preserve one authoritative dataset and not permit public editing of those official counts.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Middleborough-Lakeville Herring Fishery Commission, 3-12-25","oneSentenceSummary","The commission agreed that a graduate student may work on an online/automated herring-counting system, but the commission reserved official data entry and final control to its existing counters and specifically to the commission member who maintains the records.","taxTitle","Town of Lakeville, Plymouth County, Massachusetts","taxId",58187,"location","Massachusetts","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6632831,"Commission reviews Oliver Mill bridge replacement plans, stresses herring passage protections",251,127000,378000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2670212-c8534c20c2410bcfe800bf5eea6c1860&start=127&end=378","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2670212-c8534c20c2410bcfe800bf5eea6c1860/thumbnail_127000.jpg","/articles/6632831/Massachusetts/Commission-reviews-Oliver-Mill-bridge-replacement-plans-stresses-herring-passage-protections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6632831-9fee37b0a9ae6538d389b5b94865b8a7/orig.mp4?Expires=1777451734&Signature=odmLvWbe8igRGE4sUIjwqjKaKt60zvQWaFzf8GVbyDmVLrKRrpm2Pwx45VcWdK1uLGRtiqHsPbIXSzCBeyJdc1kOt9bWhgcI-TANkp32WbI6D93F4oulImBy~1u7Z2aj~LH~AEtwaZ7r3GDfAIwf-YYIcxCqV7SAFoGOcP65bxN~-hEL8rwvBeqWqLKx4kdeviv4wApihD9z5wOzUkuAhSgGV6TIwvU0cdXNTz1e5GXy87MraR8SK8bkf3aWqnqLhVehSgZDsiE9d5NzORQBvPDb876YQRNdeBWkZaGBvCyIFaiUgXy7PLksGUVuZ5t0hIw11EQ6tlSLMGJJYPjk5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Town engineer Mike Orenberger sent plans for replacing the pedestrian bridges at Oliver Mill and for repairs to nearby channel walls; commission members reviewed the plan and discussed potential impacts on herring migration and channel stability.

Why this matters: the river’s annual herring migration peaks in mid-March through April and, according to commission members, any construction that affects fish ladders, the main channel or migration corridors could harm runs. The commission’s stated focus is protecting herring passage rather than aesthetic features.

What was discussed
Orenberger’s materials — circulated electronically and too large to print at the meeting — describe two bridge replacements (Channel A and Channel B) and repairs to channel walls within the temporary cofferdam footprints for replacement. Commissioners noted there is a bid alternative for repair of the Lehi Channel A wall; that alternative may or may not be funded depending on bids. Members also recalled a 2018 commission letter that raised no objection to the proposed bridge reconstruction provided any cofferdams remain within the footprint of existing dam structures and walls, sandbagging around stone piers would not impact herring habitat, and removal of current bridges by hand or small machines would not disrupt migration.

Commission perspective
Some members questioned whether replacing decorative bridge elements is a good use of money when channel handwalls need repair. “The only thing we have to be concerned with is whether it’s gonna impact herring passage or not,” one commission member said, adding that individual residents are free to express design preferences to the powers that be but the commission’s role is to monitor fish passage impacts. Another member noted a building inspector previously found no structural problem with an earlier replaced bridge, and characterized some bridge work as largely cosmetic.

No formal action was taken on the bridge plans at the meeting. Commissioners said Orenberger will keep them informed and that they will have an opportunity to provide input as contractor bids and a notice-of-intent application proceed.","Town engineer plans for replacing two footbridges at Oliver Mill were discussed; commission reiterated its 2018 no-objection stance provided work stays within existing cofferdam footprints and does not block herring migration.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6632836,"Herring commission agrees to accept Nature Conservancy funding for weed removal, with conditions",937,1509000,2446000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2670212-c8534c20c2410bcfe800bf5eea6c1860&start=1509&end=2446","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2670212-c8534c20c2410bcfe800bf5eea6c1860/thumbnail_1509000.jpg","/articles/6632836/Massachusetts/Herring-commission-agrees-to-accept-Nature-Conservancy-funding-for-weed-removal-with-conditions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6632836-8a5cd0d9f240355e03789966ebce1cf9/orig.mp4?Expires=1777451734&Signature=lYu55~PX22FT6F-GnOTQqax3H~tgEQ5bqCP9eeuWrqo5ltSNarFtkPx3CUhpx5ZY6CTf0e5oxjhz2OkCIoszMtyf9ZrIZjlJeEVhN8VuK6Fx9R7K0rUhoXt77N5gkyP1NbaKNkVS9OYJR9DwjEK9NuSUq9Dj--TrxWiMhm01RJiJ1qmqiC93g9yAb2tECblB66TXPTN~ql~AjAMnslZT-9ulChr-CKGDe727dtfpeX3wveQwESRwhH0QUamNmsMzebQjP6XUIJXHaCIjYpqM~yqtCJFwrqWU9FBsguMT4mP2F~fg9mtNAYIUfUG4MeAih8NveUgPbY7dEgAshm1Nug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Tom Brock, a member of the Middleborough-Lakeville Herring Fishery Commission, said the commission voted to accept funding to support weed-removal work on the river and related costs, with the money to be administered through outside billing rather than as a direct cash transfer to the commission.

The vote followed discussion of a recent offer from the Nature Conservancy, conveyed by Maria Gabriel, to underwrite a weed-removal effort similar in scale to last year’s project. Commission members stressed the offer is conditional: the donor’s funds reportedly must be spent by June, the work window typically available to contractors is a two-week period in August, and the commission will need amended orders of conditions and other approvals before work can occur.

Why this matters: the proposed work would fund an eco-harvester and related protections (turtle handling, contractor invoicing) intended to remove invasive aquatic vegetation in reaches that affect herring passage and habitat. Commissioners said timing and permitting constraints could make it impossible to use the money this season; several members preferred the Nature Conservancy bill the contractor directly rather than the commission taking possession of a check.

Commission discussion and conditions
Commission members discussed logistics and limits. They cited last year’s cost (about $35,000 for roughly five days of work), the need for new or amended orders of condition if the targeted river sections change, and access constraints that affect where an eco-harvester can be launched (Vaughn Street, Wareham Street, or near the MBTA railroad bridge were mentioned as options, each with access and sedimentation complications). Members also noted that county equipment or county-provided eco-harvesters require a local operator and transportation; town DPW staff have declined to operate such equipment because of insurance and equipment concerns.

Tom Brock said the commission is willing to accept funding in principle but emphasized multiple contingencies: the donor’s timeline, permitting, the availability of suitable contractor access points, and whether the Nature Conservancy will pay vendors directly. “I would rather see a bill direct to the Nature Conservancy and us stay away from it,” Brock said during the meeting.

Motion and outcome
The commission made a motion to accept funding for a potential weed-removal project in the amount communicated by the Nature Conservancy (the figure discussed was $35,000). The motion carried by a voice vote; the meeting record shows a unanimous voice approval but does not record a roll-call tally or named yes/no votes. The commission clarified that it is accepting funding for a project (to be paid for by the donor or billed directly) rather than taking unrestricted cash into its accounts.

Next steps and uncertainties
Commissioners agreed that staff (and Brock) will follow up with the Nature Conservancy and the anonymous donor to clarify whether funds can be held, whether direct billing is possible, and whether the donor will permit spending after June if permitting delays occur. Commissioners also asked staff to pursue amended orders of condition if the proposed removal would cover different reaches than last year. If the donor’s funds are not available in time, the commission said it will pursue alternate grant avenues in future seasons.

Votes at a glance
- Motion: Accept Nature Conservancy funding (discussed as $35,000) to support a weed-removal project and related contractor costs. Outcome: approved by voice vote; commission recorded unanimous “Aye” but no roll-call tally was recorded in the transcript. Notes: funding may be billed directly to the Nature Conservancy; spending is contingent on permitting, timing and donor conditions.

Ending
Commission members said they will notify the Nature Conservancy of the commission’s conditional acceptance and proceed with necessary permit amendments and logistical planning if the donor confirms funding and timing.","Middleborough-Lakeville Herring Fishery Commission voted to accept up to $35,000 in funding, offered through the Nature Conservancy, to cover a weed-removal project including eco-harvester work — subject to timing, permitting and invoicing arrangements.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission agrees to let graduate student explore automated herring-counting tools; official counts to remain controlled

Commission reviews Oliver Mill bridge replacement plans, stresses herring passage protections

Herring commission agrees to accept Nature Conservancy funding for weed removal, with conditions