Choices: Nature versus uncertain money in Milford
To the Editor:
The Milford Selectmen want to see if they can take nature at the Brox Property and turn it into dollars by selling the gravel that resides below the forests that are used by a diversity of wildlife species and enjoyed by the outdoor public. How much money this might make for the town is a big unknown. The Budget Advisory Committee does not support Article 21 in part because everything, including the financials, is very uncertain.
The Board of Selectmen has the idea that it would be worth trading the wildlife habitat of the Blanding’s turtles and eastern hognose snakes, two state-endangered species, and that of the wood frogs and spotted salamanders that are born in the vernal pools scattered throughout the Brox property for “a promissory note” of hoped-for economic profit in the future.
The voters have a choice with Article 21 either to support nature or else support the Selectmen’s plan to level the forested hills, five acres at a time that they promise will be reclaimed and left in good condition when all the trucks have moved on.
However, there is already a large, open sore that is the 22-plus acres of abandoned gravel pit that never did get reclaimed in the 14 years the town of Milford has had to reclaim it. The pit didn’t have topsoil spread over it along with seed to re-grow nature after the destruction by the gravel operation.
Why should we, the voters, believe this proposed gravel operation will make a lot of money or demonstrate better stewardship of Milford’s valuable natural resources than the past operation? It won’t, as nature will be altered forever, species will leave and Milford’s natural heritage will be greatly lessened by it. Please help defeat Article 21 by voting no on March 11. Thank you.
PAUL F. CUNNINGHAM