Commission discusses Wareham Street riverfront work, eco-harvester report and seeks grant writer for weed-removal proposals

Commission members used Wednesday’s meeting to flag a Middleborough Conservation Commission hearing scheduled for Wareham Street, describe recent eco-harvester weed-removal work, and vote to explore grant funding through a town-identified grant writer.

At the start of the meeting a member read into the record a notice that the Middleborough Conservation Commission would hold a hearing under the Wetlands Protection Act for work at 48 Wareham Street. The listed scope includes raising a DPW building, restoring previously disturbed riverfront, invasive-plant management along the river, a paved parking roadway and a new skate park and walkways within 100 feet of a bordering vegetated wetland and within 200 feet of the river. Members said they intended to attend the hearing and consider supporting riverfront restoration proposals.

The commission also reviewed recent eco-harvester activity: members said MCAM posted footage and a summary showing how the machine removed aquatic weeds, how it launched and how it processed material. Discussion covered logistics — access for the harvester, where removed weed material would be placed, and the constraints imposed by pond and river levels. Members expressed that timing and site access complicate weed removal and that some areas may need to be deferred.

On a separate item, the commission unanimously approved a motion to contact a recommended grant writer to explore funding for aquatic-habitat restoration and possible dredging or weed-removal work. The motion noted that a town resident had recommended the grant writer and that using an experienced writer could help match local projects to available programs. Members discussed the possibility of piggybacking the work into a nearby William Street project if that proved feasible.

Members raised habitat questions during the weed-removal discussion — including concerns about muskrat, geese nesting in the reeds, and potential impacts on heron and turtles — but several commissioners said they did not see site-specific habitat problems that would be worsened by phragmites removal. The transcript records differing views and an expectation that conservation commission review and state permits would govern habitat protections.

Separately, commission members reviewed the recent one-day Herring Festival, describing lower attendance and vendor pullouts attributed to poor weather. Members called the festival team’s work substantial and said the event remained important to local tourism despite weather impacts.

The grant-writer motion was moved, seconded and approved by the members present. Members instructed that staff follow up with the proposed grant writer and report back at the next meeting.