To the Editor:
As a 40-year resident in Belmont I take exception to the tone of the article in the latest issue of the Belmont Citizens Forum concerning the treatment of the shore of Clay Pit Pond (“Clay Pit Pond Deforestation Damages Wetland,” Belmont Citizens Forum Newsletter, May/June 2021), which attempts to blame the residents who perpetrated an “ecologically damaging assault” on the area.
Rather, it seems to me, that these “miscreants” have called attention to the town’s lack of attention and mismanagement of one of our town’s greatest assets: an attractive body of water in the middle of our town that could be a focus of our attention rather than hidden from our view. For years the existing plantings of flowering trees and care of the water’s edge have been ignored and residents forced to push through tangles of invasive vines and bushes to experience the actual pond and its special attributes.
I can only hope that the town will undertake a new direction with “a path forward”, as the writer suggests, to correct the treatment of this long neglected town asset and give the pond the attention that it deserves.
Bob Livermore
To the Editor:
Thank you for reporting on this. Since the pandemic, I have been doing a lot of walking around the town and remember seeing the damage at the pond. I couldn’t believe that someone did this! I assumed it was the town.
This is clearly wanton vandalism and those responsible should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and should be held financially responsible for the work to be done because of their damage. What kind of people think they have the right to do this? Probably the same kind of people who drive 40-50 MPH down my side street and other roads in town.
Michael Tymm
To the Editor:
I appreciate and welcome most concerns raised by BCF in your newsletters, but I take issue with your concerns raised in the last May/June 2021 newsletter. BCF front page headline and a lengthy article claim an “unlawful deforestation and an ecologically damaging assault” was committed by Belmont residents at Clay Pit Pond in Sept. 2020, that caused shoreline damage. This story appears to be “blown out of the water” a bit.
I believe most Belmont residents appreciate that volunteers spent much time performing community service to enable us to view the scenic pond and walk to the waters edge without encountering scrub brush and weed trees. Clay Pit Pond never has a constant shoreline because it fills and empties from a feed and exit pipe. What appears to be shoreline erosion or damage is simply equivalent to a low tide when rain has been scarce.
Rather than allowing scene-blocking regrowth again, simply planting grass seed is the cure all. Golf courses and many surrounding communities have beautiful ponds that are kept clear of unsightly and view-blocking unnecessary growth. This is not a major concern requiring the wasting of taxpayer money.
BCF’s suggestion that the clock on the privately owned Unitarian Church, located across from the Belmont Center Bridge, be repaired with Belmont taxpayer money is wrong for two reasons. Belmont is broke right now facing many spending cuts and even possible employee layoffs. The request of Belmont to pay the necessary $30,000 for repairs especially to a private owner is out of the question.
This project should be looking for charitable donations from people willing and able to fund this non-priority endeavor. Another major concern is that a working clock on a tower overlooking the busiest and most accident prone intersection in Belmont would distract drivers inquisitive of the time for whatever reason, from needed attention to traffic and pedestrians. Very unfortunately, repairing the clock would surely increase crashes and injuries.
Sincerely,
David Benoit
Judy Singler responds:
Regarding Mr. Benoit’s comments about the removal of vegetation at Claypit Pond: The removal was indeed illegal. These “volunteers” could have spoken with the Conservation Commission about their desire to assist the town and appropriate guidelines could have been provided for how best to remove shrubs and vines, and which trees should be removed and which simply trimmed. These volunteers would have learned about plans for work at the pond which would include removal of invasives and installation of native plants.
Instead, mature trees were cut down and the town had to pay to have the large stumps removed. Now, dozens of small stumps still remain, posing tripping hazards to those who might “walk to the water’s edge”, and regrowth of invasives and other plants will now occur, because they were simply cut, and not properly removed. Some erosion is seen in the new exposure of roots of trees lining the shore and siltation is noted in runoff from the exposed soils which has created a few small beaches where there were formerly clear banks.
In short, taxpayer dollars have already been spent to address the damage, and more resources, time and funds, will be required to mitigate the damage, whether or not a clear view of the pond is maintained.
Mike Flamang responds:
Mr. Benoit is concerned about drawing funds from the town’s operating budget to pay for the clock repair. If we were to request funding assistance from the town, it would be from the Community Preservation Committee. The CPC oversees distribution of the Community Preservation Fund which has been created specifically for projects that preserve the environmental, cultural and historic resources of municipalities. No operating funds are involved.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.