Residents, Tribes and Scientists Urge Moratorium on Southeastern Massachusetts Sand Mining

A broad coalition of residents, Indigenous leaders, public-health professionals and environmental scientists told the Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources that sand and gravel mining in Plymouth and nearby towns has reached a scale that demands state action.

"This is mining. No matter what they call it," said Sandra Fosgate of Plymouth, who showed committee members photographs of large pits and scrubbed hills. "You can see the crater. It looks like a desert." Linda Coombs, a Mashpee Wampanoag elder, told the committee the work has harmed unmarked burial sites and damaged lands her community has stewarded for generations.

Researchers from Olin College presented lab data and air samples that showed respirable crystalline silica downwind from an active pit, evidence climate and forest scientists said supports a pause while the state examines long-range impacts. "From our testing there's clear evidence of respirable silica dust at the active mine we tested," said Ben Eisenbraun, who presented scanning electron microscopy images and particle analysis.

Medical witnesses called silica a serious health hazard. "Silica is the new asbestos," Representative Gaskins said in closing remarks summarizing testimony; several public-health experts who spoke at the hearing noted that inhaled respirable silica can cause silicosis and increases lung cancer risk. Nurses and physicians described residents' complaints about respiratory illness and worries about long‑term impacts.

Speakers also raised concerns about the Plymouth‑Carver sole‑source aquifer, a federally designated drinking‑water resource for more than 150,000 people. Environmental professionals warned that removal of forest and surface sand lowers the natural filtration that protects groundwater and can change streamflows and wetland connectivity. "Removing the top layers that filter contaminants increases the aquifer’s susceptibility to pollution," said hydrogeologist Peter Schwartzman.

Supporters asked the committee to act on two bills: H.918, which would create an advisory task force to study sand‑mining impacts and make regulatory recommendations; and H.948, which would establish a temporary moratorium on new or expanded industrial sand‑mining operations in Southeastern Massachusetts while the study is completed. Advocates said a moratorium is needed to stop additional landscape-scale damage while the state evaluates cumulative impacts and develops protective rules.

Industry spokespeople did not dominate the hearing record before the committee; several witnesses pressed for stronger enforcement of existing local bylaws and state air and water standards. Local elected officials and conservation groups said municipal governments are overwhelmed by complex, multi‑site projects and lack the technical staff to evaluate cumulative aquifer or air-quality impacts.

The committee received detailed sworn testimony about contaminated wells, heavy truck traffic, noise, and persistent dust in adjacent neighborhoods. Witnesses urged a focused, time-limited pause and an advisory process that includes indigenous representatives, public-health experts and hydrogeologists to craft statutory and regulatory safeguards.