HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved-Compiled narrative 635 west yarm rd
0 250 500 1”=500’Orthophoto of the Locus Site
Bayberry Hills Golf Course
Yarmouth, MA 02673
42.669142, -70.216601
Parcel ID: 86-10Date: 08/20/2025
Ponds for Treatment
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The three irrigation ss are located at Bayberry Hills Golf Course addressed as 635 West Yarmouth Street in Yarmouth.
The site is located between Route 6 to the north, single-family houses on West Yarmouth Road to the east, single-
family houses on Higgins Crowell Road to the west, and conservation land to the south. The site is comprised of an
eighteen-hole golf course. Two of the irrigation ponds are located in the south-central portion of the site. The largest
of the three ponds is located in the northeastern corner of the site. The ponds are private waterbodies used as irrigation
ponds for the golf club and passive wildlife viewing.
The ponds are 0.75 (32,670sf) (south), 1.15 (50,094sf) (southeast) and 1.5 (65,340sf) (northeast) acres. The ponds
have an average depth of 4-feet and a maximum depth of 9-feet. The estimated volume of three ponds is 4.9 million
gallons. There are no known inlets or outlets of the ponds.
2.1 OVERVIEW
The three ponds and vegetation assemblage have been surveyed starting in 2025 by a SOLitude biologist. Nuisance
curly-leaf pond weed, and filamentous algae blooms were found throughout the entirety of the three ponds.
Invasive Phragmites exist on the entirety of the banks of the pond. The speed and extent of the spread throughout
the ponds have prompted a need for immediate control, as conditions are expected to worsen without treatment.
Aquatic vegetation in ponds is an important aspect of the local ecology. Vegetation provides food, structural habitat,
and cover for fish and invertebrates. Other animals such as mammals and waterfowl also benefit from pond vegetation
as an ample food source. Diverse pond vegetation, including a mix of vegetated aquatic communities and open water
species can further provide to the surrounding ecosystem and have significant value to wildlife. Though crucial to
pond environments, problematic venation can become dense to the point of creating low diversity coverage and
degrading the qualities of the pond by disrupting the natural environment. Some of the negative impacts resulting
from dense, monotypic vegetation coverage include fish kills resulting from oxygen depletion, hyper-eutrophication
from organic infilling due to seasonal die back, and habitat degradation resulting in obstructed fish movements.
The current condition of the ponds requires active management in order to maintain the water and habitat quality to
more natural conditions. Dense amounts of vegetation within the extent of the ponds have degraded the aquatic
environment. There is an overabundance of nuisance vegetation, currently at levels that risk starving the pond of
oxygen and limiting biodiversity. Through this Ecological Restoration project, we propose to use several herbicides,
historically approved by the Commission, and applied to the ponds to restore them to their original state. No
management of the ponds would result in the continued takeover of problematic vegetation, leading to further
degradation of the aquatic environment. The goal is to leave no greater than 25% aquatic vegetation cover within the
ponds, while fully removing and controlling the nuisance species present.
2.2 RESOURCE AREAS ON-SITE
2.2.1 LAND UNDER WATER BODIES AND WATERWAYS
Under the Wetlands Protection Act, Land under Water Bodies and Waterways is defined as “the bottom of, or
land under, the surface of the ocean or any estuary, creek, river, stream, pond, or lake.” These areas are also
protected under the Town of Yarmouth’s wetland bylaw. No significant changes or alterations to this resource
area will happen as a result of the treatment. This resource area is expected to be enhanced through the removal
of excessive nuisance species, and subsequent improvement of water quality and habitat, as well as lessening
eutrophic conditions.
2.2.2 BANK
Under the Wetlands Protection Act, Bank is defined as “the portion of the land surface which normally abuts and
confines a water body. It occurs between a water body and a vegetated bordering wetland and adjacent flood
plain, or, in the absence of these, it occurs between a water body and an upland.
2.2.3 HABITAT AREA
The ponds are not located within an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) Outstanding Resource
Water (ORW) area. The ponds are not mapped within estimated or priority habitat of rare species on the most
recent habitat map of State-listed Rare Wildlife published by Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program.
3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT
3.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW
The applicant proposes to treat the three golf course irrigation ponds with a variety of herbicides to control the
problematic vegetation. This application is requesting approval for use of herbicides including diquat (Tribune),
flumioxazin (Flumigard SC), glyphosate (AquaPro), and algaecides (Captain). The proposed herbicides and
algaecides specifically affect the target species to be controlled and have a negligible effect on the non-target species
and wildlife when applied in accordance with the label directions. All chemicals will be applied at or below
suggested doses according to the product label. All doses are based on plant types and densities, so that a minimum
amount of the chemicals is introduced into the waterbody. The herbicides will be applied within the limit of work
and below the mean annual low water line of the ponds. These treatments are proposed for the purpose of
ecological restoration to restore the aquatic habitat and water quality of the ponds.
Management and treatment of the vegetation will be paired with pre- and post- treatment surveys to access and
confirm appropriate management conditions, physical and chemical properties of the lake, treatment areas, and
timing, as well as determine the effectiveness of treatment. The information and summaries from these pre- and post-
treatment surveys will be supplied to the Yarmouth Conservation Commission, paired with treatment area maps and
information on the used herbicide.
3.2 POND MANAGEMENT
Once an Order of Conditions has been issued by the Yarmouth Conservation Commission, the licensed applicator
will complete the filing for a State Pesticide Use Permit (WM04) with the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection (MA-DEP).
Future Management
Due to the nature of managing invasive and nuisance species, long term management is required for the continued
control of these species and subsequent restoration of the ponds. Some regrowth in subsequent years is expected,
along with the potential for algae to become a problem.
Annual surveys will be undertaken in the following years around Spring and early-Summer. With these surveys,
recommendations will be provided to the Yarmouth Conservation Commission on the best approach to continued
management. If there is regrowth of the target species, it will be handled with the appropriate management practice.
3.3 ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION PROJECT
This project has been filed as an Ecological Restoration Project in accordance with 310 CMR 10.53(4). As per 310
CMR 10.04, “Ecological Restoration Limited Project means an Ecological Restoration Project that meets the eligibility
criteria set forth in 310 CMR 10.24(8) or 10.53(4).” 310 CMR 10.53(4)(e)(5) states that, “An Ecological Restoration
Project that is not listed in 310 CMR 10.54(4)(e)2. Through 4., that will improve the natural capacity of a Resource
Area(s) to protect the interests identified in M.G.L. c. 131, § 40, may be permitted as an Ecological Restoration Limited
Project provided that the project meets the eligibility criteria set forth in 310 CMR 10.54(4)(a) through (d). Such
projects include, but are not limited to, the restoration, enhancement, or management of Rare Species habitat, the
restoration of hydrologic and habitat connectivity, the removal of aquatic nuisance vegetation to retard pond and lake
eutrophication, the thinning or planting of vegetation to improve habitat value, riparian corridor re-naturalization,
river floodplain reconnection, in-stream habitat enhancement, fill removal and regarding, flow restoration, and the
installation of fish passage structures.”
3.4 RARE SPECIES HABITAT & FEMA FLOOD DESIGNATIONS
According to the Mass GIS data layers for NHESP, this site is not located within Estimated and/or Priority Habitat
of Rare Wildlife. The site is not located in an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) or a regulated FEMA
flood zone. The site is not located in an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) or within a regulated FEMA
flood zone.
3.4.1 HERBICIDE DESCRIPTIONS & POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS
Diquat (Tribune - EPA # 100-1390 or equivalent)
Tribune (diquat) is an effective herbicide for partial-pond treatments due to its rapid mode of action and
short herbicide concentration-exposure-time requirements. Even though diquat is considered to be a contact-
herbicide, longer term control may be seen as plants’ root crowns will not be allowed to develop.
The USEPA/MA registered herbicide diquat dibromide (Tribune) will be applied to the area at or below the
permissible label dose. Tribune is applied to more than 500 lakes and ponds annually, throughout the northeast, to
control nuisance submersed aquatic plants. Diquat would be applied to control milfoil, naiad, and other nuisance
submersed plants at the application rate of 1.0-2.0 gal/acre, if necessary. Temporary water use restrictions for diquat
are now: 1) No drinking or cooking for 3 days. 2)No irrigation of turf for 3 days and of food crops for 5 days, and
3) No livestock watering for 1 day. There are no restrictions on swimming, boating, or fishing, but prudent
herbicide/algaecide management, suggest that we close the pond on the day of treatment. The shoreline of the
ponds will be posted with signs warning of these temporary water use restrictions, prior to treatment.
Diquat is translocated to some extent within the plant. Its rapid action tends to disrupt the leaf cuticle of
plants and acts by interfering with photosynthesis. Upon contact with the soil, it is adsorbed immediately
and thereby biologically inactivated. Residual levels of diquat in treated water decline rapidly and their
reduction is due to the uptake by the targeted vegetation and adsorption to suspended soil particles in the
water or on the bottom mud. Photochemical degradation accounts for some loss under conditions of high
sunlight and clear waters.
Glyphosate (AquaPro - EPA # 62719-324-67690, Rodeo – EPA # 62719-324 or equivalent):
Glyphosate is a broad spectrum, systemic herbicide. It works by preventing plants from synthesizing protein and
producing new tissue. Its aquatic formulation is effective against most emergent and floating plant species, and at
recommended doses it is relatively non-toxic to aquatic fauna. Invertebrates do not appear to suffer any direct
impacts from Glyphosate treatments. Glyphosate quickly degrades into non-toxic components in aquatic
environments. Direct contact with the plant’s leaves can kill the entire plant, and it only requires a few hours of
contact. Glyphosate does have potential to kill non-target species if it comes into direct contact with their leaves.
Copper Algaecide (Captain – EPA # 67690-9)
Copper based algaecides are requested to be used as dictated by monitoring and sampling. These algaecides are
commonly used across the state, even in drinking water reservoirs. There are no water-use restrictions associated with
copper-based algaecides. The liquid algaecides are first diluted with pond water, then distributed across the rest of the
area.
Copper based algaecides (i.e. CuSO4, Captain, SeClear) are widely used and are applied to lakes and ponds
throughout North America to control nuisance filamentous and microscopic algae. There are no water use
restrictions associated with copper-based algaecides and SŌLitude treats several direct, potable (drinking) water
reservoirs and a number of recreation waterbodies in the Commonwealth with these algaecides, on a yearly basis.
The concentrated liquid algaecides are first diluted with pond water and are then sprayed throughout the pond area.
The application rate is generally 0.2 ppm or less for algae control. If applied, treatment will not exceed 50% of the
pond volume.
Flumioxazin (Flumidard SC – EPA # 81927-78)
The herbicide flumioxazin (marketed as Clipper), which is registered with both the USEPA and the Massachusetts
Department of Agricultural Resources, is currently the only contact herbicide approved in Massachusetts for
effectively controlling duckweed, watermeal, and filamentous algae. Although recently approved in the state,
flumioxazin use is subject to several restrictions that currently limit its application. Until it sees broader use and
more supporting data is collected within Massachusetts, these restrictions are unlikely to be lifted. As such, its
application is best suited for targeted spot treatments within a pond.
Clipper works by inhibiting the enzyme protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO), leading to cell membrane disruption
and resulting in rapid, effective control of a broad range of susceptible aquatic plants. As a true contact herbicide,
Clipper does not demonstrate systemic activity, yet multi-year control has been observed in some New England
projects where it has been applied. Due to its fast-acting nature and short half-life, flumioxazin is ideal for localized,
site-specific treatments.
3.4.2 RISKS – MONITORING & PREVENTION
All potential treatments have some degree of temporary risk to water quality and fish safety. Risks associated with
herbicide application within the ponds include oxygen depletion, water quality degradation, noxious odors, fish kills,
and potentially impacting non-targeted species. However, when treatment is done properly by a qualified herbicide
applicator, risks are significantly minimalized. In addition, regular monitoring of the site will be conducted through
evaluating the following characteristics of the pond to prevent the following problems from occurring.
3.4.3 HERBICIDE IMPACTS TO RESOURCE AREAS
LUWW Impacts (Temporary) Bank Impact
148,104 SF of Total Pond Surface Area 0
Impacts to the resource areas on & around the ponds include LUWW & Bank. Impacts to the LUWW will be
temporary, and there are not expected to be any impacts to Bank. Impacts to LUWW will include the target of and
removal of the problematic species within the ponds.
4.0 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE WITH WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT
Work within resource areas protected by the Wetlands Protection Act is being proposed. The project has been
designed to meet the Wetlands Protection Act’s general performance standards for work within resource areas and to
minimize impacts to the extent practicable. Table 1 below outlines impacts to the resource area on site. Explanation
on how the project meets the performance standards of each resource follows.
4.1 LAND UNDER WATER BODIES AND WATERWAYS
§ 10.56
Land Under Water Bodies and Waterways
Performance Standards Compliance
10.56
(4)(a)(1)
Any proposed work within Land under Water Bodies
and Waterways shall not impair the following:
The water carrying capacity within the defined channel,
which is provided by said land in conjunction with the
banks.
Treatment involved will not affect the carrying
capacity of the ponds.
10.56
(4)(a)(2)
Ground and surface water quality.
Ground water quality is not expected to be
impacted from work. Surface water quality has the
potential to be adversely impacted during
treatment, but by following the procedures listed
above in the Potential Adverse Effects water
quality will not be impaired.
10.56
(4)(a)(3)
The capacity of said land to provide breeding habitat,
escape cover and food for fisheries.
Vegetation management through treatment is
expected to improve the habitat and cover quality
of the pond, as the current dense coverages are at
nuisance levels that obstruct fish movement.
Biodiversity will also be improved.
10.56
(4)(a)(4)
The capacity of said land to provide important wildlife
habitat functions. A project or projects on a single lot,
for which Notice(s) of intent is filed on or after
November 1, 1987, that (cumulatively) alter(s) up to
10% or 5,000 square feet (whichever is less) of land in
this resource area found to be significant to the protection
of wildlife habitat, shall not be deemed to impair its
As listed above, treatment is expected to improve
the quality of the pond’s wildlife habitat functions
by improving biodiversity, removing nuisance
weeds that can obstruct dissolved oxygen levels,
and clear up the pond so fish have improved
visibility and less obstructions.
capacity to provide important wildlife habitat functions.
Additional alterations beyond the above threshold may
be permitted if they will have no adverse effects on wildlife
habitat, as determined by procedures established under
310 CMR 10.60.
5.0 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
5.1 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
Since some work is proposed within the Wetlands Protection Zone, the applicant has provided the following analysis
of alternatives for pond treatment. Alternatives were analyzed for potential viability and practicality given the site’s
environmental constraints.
5.1.1 ALTERNATIVE A: NO MANAGEMENT
Performing zero management to the pond was considered as an alternative to the application of herbicides across
the pond. Due to the dense growth of native vegetation in the pond, no management is not recommended, as the
continued lack of management limits biodiversity of the ponds and can deplete dissolved oxygen.
5.1.2 ALTERNATIVE B: SEDIMENT EXCAVATION/DREDGING
Dredging nutrient rich sediment along the pond bottom is sometimes used as a method to control excessive weed
growth. Conventional and hydraulic dredging requires an extensive and expensive project compared to herbicide
treatment. Access and staging areas can also be a limiting factor to this management, combined with severe
negative impacts to aquatic organisms with no guarantees of complete nuisance species removal.
5.1.3 ALTERNATIVE C: HAND REMOVAL/MECHANICAL REMOVAL
Hand or Mechanical Removal is not ideal as well, due to the expensive costs with a possibility of control of the
vegetation only being short-lived and will require multiple volunteers over several days. Another option
considered for milfoil removal is DASH, or Diver Assisted Suction Harvesting, the process of a diver hand
removing and delivering the removed plant through a suction hose for bulk removal. This, however, is difficult
and time consuming. This method is also much more expensive compared to herbicide application.
5.1.4 ALTERNATIVE D: BOTTOM WEED BARRIERS
Physical controls, such as the use of bottom weed barriers can be effective for small dense patches of nuisance
vegetation but are not cost effective or feasible for large areas. Weed barriers are expensive to install and
maintain at ~$1.75/ft2 (material & installation). Semi-annual maintenance to retrieve, clean and re-deploy the
barriers would be expensive and time consuming. Additionally, covering expansive areas of the pond bottom
may also have detrimental impacts on invertebrates or other types of wildlife
5.1.5 ALTERNATIVE E: BIOLOGICAL
There are no proven biological controls available or approved by the State for the control of the invasive aquatic
plant species present on the three irrigation ponds.
6.0 CONCLUSION
In summary, Goddard Consulting and SŌLitude believe that the proposed treatment will not have any adverse
impacts on the interests identified in the Wetlands Protection Act in the long term. In fact, the proposed management
regime will result in an improvement of the irrigation ponds’ capacity to act in the interests of the Wetlands Protection
Act by rehabilitating the vegetation assemblage. The proposed project meets all regulatory compliance standards under
the Wetlands Protection Act; therefore, Goddard Consultincog respectfully requests that the Yarmouth Conservation
Commission issue an Order of Conditions approving the proposed project.
Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions about this Notice of Intent submission.
Sincerely,
Goddard Consulting, LLC & SŌLitude Lake Management
Tom Schutz, WPIT, WSA
Wetland Scientist
NOI Supplemental – Response to Agent Comment
635 West Yarmouth Road Yarmouth, MA
Page | 1
September 11, 2025
Yarmouth Conservation Commission
Yarmouth Town Hall
1146 Route 28
South Yarmouth, MA 02664
Re: NOI Supplemental – Response to Agent Comment
635 West Yarmouth Road – Bayberry Hills Golf Course (Parcel ID: 86-10)
Yarmouth, MA 02664
Dear Yarmouth Conservation Commission,
Goddard Consulting, LLC, (Goddard) is pleased to submit this Notice of Intent (NOI) Supplement – Response to
Agent Comment on behalf of the Applicant, Bayberry Hills Golf Course, filed for the property addressed as 635
West Yarmouth Road in Yarmouth, MA.
Response to Agent Comments
Agent Comment Goddard Consulting/ SLitude Lake
Management Response
1. Provide the treatment protocol for both
phragmites management and in-water work,
including time of year, type of herbicide
application and mechanical strategy, and
differences by year.
The project proposes to manage invasive phragmites in
both on the bank of the ponds and within the water, as
well as nuisance aquatic vegetation and algae.
Phragmites Treatment
For treatment of the phragmites on the banks of the
ponds, glyphosate will be used. The herbicide will be
applied using a low-pressure backpack sprayer. The
low-pressure sprayer will minimize any overspray of
herbicide by delivering a controlled, steady stream. This
stream will reduce overspray and waste. This allows for
precision that increases the effectiveness of the
treatment and limits exposure to surrounding non-
target vegetation and sensitive areas. Following the
herbicide application, the dead stalks will be handcut.
This method will significantly reduce growth after the
first year of treatment. Regrowth and additional
application may be needed but will follow the same
protocol. Herbicide application to treat Phragmites will
take place in August-September. Herbicide will be
sprayed by a licensed herbicide applicator in
accordance with the product label.
For treatment of the phragmites within the pond, a
small boat with a tank of herbicide or a low-pressure
backpack sprayer will be used. As stated above, using
the low-pressure backpack will allow for precise
NOI Supplemental – Response to Agent Comment
635 West Yarmouth Road Yarmouth, MA
Page | 2
application to the target species. Glyphosate was
specifically chosen as the herbicide to use in this
scenario and is considered safe to use in aquatic
environments. When applied in accordance with the
product label., Glyphosate was designed to breakdown
in water, preventing herbicide accumulation in aquatic
plants, animals or the sediments of the ponds. This
method will significantly reduce growth after the first
year of treatment. Regrowth and additional application
may be needed but will follow the same protocol. As
stated above Phragmites in the pond will be treated in
August – September.
Aquatic Nuisance Vegetation Treatment
Submerged vegetated, including curly-leaf pond weed
will be treated using the herbicide diquat and/or
flumioxazin. The amount and type of herbicide will be
determined based on the extent of the aquatic plant
growth, acreage, and depth of the pond. Herbicide will
be diluted with pond water in a backpack or small tank
onboard a Jon Boat and will be applied using the
backpack or small 1" pump
subsurface. Management/treatment will be as needed
in April – September based on monthly monitoring
reports.
Aquatic Algae Treatment
Algae, which includes filamentous algae, will be treated
using copper-based algaecides. The product amount
would be determined based on the acreage and average
depth of the pond area being treated. Product will be
diluted with pond water in a backpack or small tank
onboard a Jon Boat and would be applied using the
backpack or small 1" pump as a surface spray (if
floating mats are present) or subsurface to control the
algae. Management/treatment will be as needed in
April – September based on monthly monitoring
reports.
2. Provide a general list of nuisance and target
species, to be refined with monthly reports
Below is a list of known nuisance and target species.
Additional species may be present and will be noted
within the monitoring reports submitted to the
Conservation Commission.
Species List
Phragmites/Phragmites sp.
Curly-leaf Pond Weed/ Potamogeton crispus
NOI Supplemental – Response to Agent Comment
635 West Yarmouth Road Yarmouth, MA
Page | 3
Filamentous Algae
3. Provide the plans for monthly monitoring. Phragmites
Prior to the start of any treatment, the three ponds will
be surveyed. This initial pretreatment survey and report
will help evaluate the densities and location of the
Phragmites. This survey will help guide the application
strategy and is a good baseline for the effectiveness of
the treatment. The ponds will also be surveyed after to
measure the effectiveness of the application of the
herbicide and if additional treatment is needed.
Following the application, monthly monitoring visits
will be conducted in April – September to review the
effectiveness of the treatment. These reports will also
note the return and regrowth of native species in the
target areas.
Aquatic Vegetation and Aglae
For the in-pond work, monthly inspections will be
conducted April-September to observe the level of
weed and algae growth and determine if treatments are
necessary.
4. Provide a revegetation plan for the buffer to
replace the phragmites once the desired level of
control is reached. Please indicate the size of
the buffer from the pond edges
Often, after Phragmites has been treated and removed,
native species will quickly re-establish. This is due to
the competition for light, water and nutrients have
been reduced. The monthly monitoring reports can
note the regrowth of native species after the treatment
has been conducted.
If needed, a New England WetMix or a New England
Conservation/Wildlife Seedmix can be used to
revegetate the bank of the pond and replace the
Phragmites. New England WetMix includes native
wetland spcies including sedges, rushes, and wetland
flowers. This blend was designed to establish/
reestablish heavy wetland vegetation cover.
NOI Supplemental – Response to Agent Comment
635 West Yarmouth Road Yarmouth, MA
Page | 1
October 6, 2025
Yarmouth Conservation Commission
Yarmouth Town Hall
1146 Route 28
South Yarmouth, MA 02664
Re: NOI Supplemental – Response to Agent Comment #2
635 West Yarmouth Road – Bayberry Hills Golf Course (Parcel ID: 86-10)
Yarmouth, MA 02664
Dear Yarmouth Conservation Commission,
Goddard Consulting, LLC, (Goddard) is pleased to submit the second Notice of Intent (NOI) Supplement –
Response to Agent Comment on behalf of the Applicant, Bayberry Hills Golf Course, filed for the property
addressed as 635 West Yarmouth Road in Yarmouth, MA.
Response to Agent Comments
Agent Comment Goddard Consulting/ SLitude Lake
Management Response
1. Provide the methods and metrics for the survey Surveys will include a visual assessment of the banks of
the pond and the shallow water areas. A throw rake will
be utilized to sample vegetation within the deeper
water sections of the ponds. A throw rake consists of a
weighted head rake on a rope. It is thrown from the
boat or shore, and its teeth collect vegetation materials
as its dragged across the bottom. This allows scientist
to sample and identify plants that are in deeper
portions of the lake.
2. Provide the time between the cutting and
herbicide application
The time between the herbicide application and the
cutting of the vegetation is typically one month. This
will allow time for the chemical to fully move through
the plant and kill the root system. Cutting prematurely
can result in less effective control because the herbicide
may not have reached the roots.
3. Provide if mulching is proposed Mulching will occur at the same time as the cutting.
4. Provide a general list of nuisance and target
species, to be refined with monthly reports
Below is a list of known nuisance and target species.
Additional species may be present and will be noted
within the monitoring reports submitted to the
Conservation Commission.
Species List
Phragmites/Phragmites sp.
Curly-leaf Pond Weed/ Potamogeton crispus
Common Duck Weed/Lemna minor
Filamentous Algae
NOI Supplemental – Response to Agent Comment
635 West Yarmouth Road Yarmouth, MA
Page | 2
5. Add in the Requirements for the seedmix
application
New England WetMix or a New England
Conservation/Wildlife Seedmix will be used to
revegetate the bank of the pond and replace the
Phragmites.
The application rate for New England
Conservation/Wildlife Seed Mix is 1lb of seed per
1,750sf of area or 25lb per 1 acre.
The application rate for New England WetMix is 1lb of
seed per 2,500sf of area or 18lb per 1 acre.
Both specification sheets have been attached to this
memo.
10/8/25, 12:52 PM ConservationWildlife.jpg (813×
905)https://newp.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/ConservationWildlife.jpg 1/
10/8/25, 12:54 PM WetMix.jpg (812×
905)https://newp.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/WetMix.jpg 1/