LOCATION: 600 Bayberry Drive, Cape May Court House New Jersey 08210. Approx. 8.5 -8.9 mile marker off Garden State Parkway in Cape May County.
1983 Pre-Development, image of the Natural Heritage Priority Site area, (NHPS) showing fields and forested area along outer coastal plain, in Cape May Court House, Middle Township, (east side of the The Garden State Parkway.) Also known as "The Mayville Site".
NJDEP states this NHPS is, "...one of the few remaining patches of forest cover along the Atlantic mainland/salt marsh interface, so may be significant for migrating birds." "contains an occurrence of a State endangered plant species".
"some of the best remaining habitat for rare species and rare ecological communities in the state". -NJDEP
Same Location: First phases of Development of Deed Restricted housing and Golf Course within the Natural Heritage Priority Site. (2007)
In 2016 High Density Housing Developments, outside of the Town Center were added within the center of the Natural Heritage Priority Site (NHPS) (not shown above).
The new Langford Lane, with large lots, is where some of the multiple NJDEP violations for clearing/destruction of vegetation on restricted conservation wetlands took place.
Co-Owner, Cape May County Freeholder Will Morey claimed "no wrong doing" and alleged, "... efforts to preserve this NHPS are "disingenuous".
The numerous genuine Violations showing "Wrong doing" are listed below in Section,
Same Location: The NJ Geo Web showing the Natural Heritage Priority Site (NHPS) in pink overlay.
According to the NJ Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP)represents;
"These areas should be considered to be top priorities for the preservation of biological diversity in New Jersey." "If these sites become degraded or destroyed, we may lose some of the unique components of our natural heritage."
Evidence proves this site is being systematically "degraded and destroyed for personal enrichment".
Cape May County Freeholder Will Morey, "categorically denies any wrong doing by the developer" on these lands co-owned with developer Fred Langford.
The documented enforcement actions by the NJDEP for these lands since 2005, seem to have been denied by Freeholder Morey.
Regarding this NHPS, The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection states, "State Endangered plant habitat...potential habitat for the rare plant ...may be concentration areas for migrating birds" .
Areas many conservationists feel NJ has a significant responsibility to protect. The forested area south of the High School, Lot 5.01, was de-watered and repeatedly brush hogged since 2002-2005.
The 2007 Impact Study admits Threatened & Endangered Species (T&E) live in this NHPS.
Rare Plant Species include: Marsh Rattlesnake-master, Clustered-bluets, Coarse Grass-like Beaked-rush, Little Ladies'-tresses, Rare -flower beaked rush.
Endangered Birds include: the black skimmer, black-crowned and yellow crowned night herons, and least tern.
This Survey shows the NJDEP CERTIFIED 1999 FRESHWATER WETLAND BOUNDARIES and soil boring on Lot 3, (now Lot 5.01.) on the north/west upland portion of the site.
The Survey documents the existence of only one historic ditch on the N/W upland portion of the Lot in 1999, but now this upland area contains many ditches.
Middle Township New Jersey, 6/12/ 2007 Resolution states the area to the north, Lot #3. (now Lot 5.01) "will be left open and natural" .
Lomax Environmental Consulting 1997 WETLANDS DELINEATION REPORT (for developer's proposed sanitary sewer system for adjacent developments) bi- passing wetlands states, "The upland forest dominates the study site (out to 150 feet). with two distinct wetlands areas occurring within the study site..."
In 2002-2005 a system of new Ditches (shown above) begins to appear on the northern most Lot 5.01 "to be left open and natural". It appears designed to de-water Upland Freshwater Wetlands within the CERTIFIED 1999 NJDEP BOUNDARIES and the NHPS without permits. Please overlay the shape of the ditches onto the shape of the Wetland Boundaries on Survey.
This forested area is denigrated as a "gravel pit" by the developers. Even though it was a temporary gravel storage area for the Parkway construction over 60 years ago, it has naturally become a heavily forested Lot.
The 1997 WETLANDS DELINEATION REPORT states," A wetlands pocket associated with a culvert/flowing ditch occurs east of Colonial Ave". Note: ditch is "singular". There are now at least two ditches (out to 150 feet) There is no mention of any preexisting system of ditches nor the one dug to reach the "isolated wetlands pocket exists north of this area".
These 01/16/2005 Time-Stamped-Photos show Lot 5.01 ditches within the 1999 NJDEP Freshwater Wetland Boundaries- alleged to have been "historic" and dug prior to the 1988 Wetlands Rules, alleged to show "Hand Maintenance".(This ditch should not be confused with the uncontested "Slab Creek" "Historic ditch" or "northern ditch" which are all the same ditch, confusingly called by different names.)
This ditch circumnavigates a group of young trees. The top soils show cut roots and tool marks. Soil and gravel is piled on the side banks. Sphagnum Moss is on the tree base at right but not on the ditch. ( This is not the uncontested "Slab Creek" "Historic" or "northern ditch" but rather a new ditch dug in 2005 as per the NJDEP Registered Complaint.)
Many cut roots, and top soil. Note: gravel from a temporary gravel pit in 1950's. Gravel removed from bottom of ditches is now on banks. There is no ditch bank erosion, no decomposed roots, or existence of Sphagnum Moss as would be expected if these ditches were over 17 years old as alleged. These photos and aerial images show how thickly rooted and forested this area had become since the 1950's.
This is what a ditch dug on Lot 5.01 in 2005 looks like 13 years later in 2018. But the 1/16/2005 photos, shown above, are alleged to be at least 17 years old. The 2018 ditch, shows the effects of time with rounded over banks, and is covered with moss. Cut roots have decomposed, and the surrounding hydro-static pressure fills the ditch. No soil or gravel on banks. This is not so with the 2005 ditch photos.
Mosquito Control Wetlands Specialist denied the system of ditches shown on the Ditch Map was excavated by Mosquito Control; providing this report wherein he circled in red the only area excavated by Mosquito Control with the proper maintenance permits 2005-2007. The contrived ditch system, not dug by the Mosquito Control, is through-out the thickly forested upland habitat area to the N/W (left on photo).
NJ GEO WEB Lot 5.01 shows two fingers of Fresh Water Wetlands wherein system of ditches to de-water were dug from 2002-2005, after the 1988 Wetland Rules prohibiting such digging. Please overlay the Ditch Diagram and the correlating 1999 NJDEP Certified Freshwater Wetland Boundaries. 80% of Lot 5.01 is said to be Wetlands, and documented to contain Threatened and Endangered Species (T&E).
Investor/developer Mr. Will Morey requested a meeting June 8, 2018 with three residents wherein he said, "There is no money in golf anymore", then provided these two options for High Density Housing on Lot 5.01 and 5.03 of the Natural Heritage Priority Site.
Lot #3 (now 5.01) was to "be left open and natural" according to the developer Fred Langford in the 2007 Middle Township Resolution- but it now appears plans have changed.
The 18 hole Golf Course promised to the community is said to be down sized to maybe a 9 hole, if it remains at all according to the developer's plans and presentation. The string of purple High Density Units at the center has already been constructed.
The developer changed a 16 single CAFRA application to a 45 high density housing development using a "minor modification" permit wherein no public notice is required if the "intensity" remains the same or less. A "major modification" would have required public notice.
The Developer's drawing provided to residents of a full build out plan over the entire Freshwater Wetlands complex. It shows every area of the Natural Heritage Priority Site eliminated by High Density Housing Developments and no Golf Course. Environmentally Sensitive Land purchased for pennies on the dollar now worth a fortune.
Has the "intensity" changed incrementally?
Should the community be notified?
( See the State Property Report below.)
Conservation Blueprint. "Rank 1-4 State Endangered" to north Lot 5.01 (now containing 2005 ditches), East Lot 5.03 and south Lot 5.03 where clearing/destruction of vegetation occurred. The forested wetland to the northeast has a rank of 1.
It is important to preserve the remaining Natural Endangered Habitat that remains, and restore that which the developer has destroyed.
Hlyla versicolor - a State Endangered Species was located inside the bilge of a stored boat along the Northwest property corner Block 335.01, Lot 5.01 in 2018. One of the few surviving amphibians in an area recently alive with the loud vocalizations of thousands of tree frogs prior to the Spring of 2017 NJDEP LOI Application for Presence /Absence of Freshwater Wetlands and their value.
Eastern Red Cedars. Cut tree pictures taken on May 15, 2018 from Eastern Terminus of Langford Blvd. looking east towards coastal marsh/Jenkins Sound. State Endangered Species and Plant life areas. An area once naturally alive with Eagles, Ospreys, Owls, Woodpeckers Whippoorwills and many migratory birds. (Many more photos available)
Members of the Wetland Preservation Alliance, James Quirk, B. Michael Zuckerman and Lisa Andreula, explain to Middle Township Committee issues addressed herein. The article states, Cape May Co. Freeholder Will Morey, " categorically denied any wrong doing on the part of the developer." "Its arguably disingenuous that the neighbors who now vociferously protest further development within the NHPS themselves own, live and conduct business on properties within the very same (natural) heritage priority site." Morey wrote.
Evidently Mr. Morey provided a script to the reporter, indicating he had the time to think, research and investigate before writing remarks to a reporter, unfairly denigrating sincere residents who reported genuine concerns, thereby necessitating this defense.
Contrary to Mr. Morey's statement of "no wrong doing", NJDEP Documents, received via OPRA Request, show the developer's numerous violations for unlawful activities, including de- watering and the destruction of conservation areas. All within the Natural Heritage Priority Site. (NHPS)
In addition, it seems Mr. Morey's statement regarding other houses in the NHPS is misleading. He seems to imply if any house is in a NHPS, he must have the right to build High Density Units throughout the NHPS.
What Mr. Morey does not tell the public is the preexisting houses are only on the very outside edge of the NHPS as shown in the above aerials.
These pre-existing structures have defined the historic perimeter of the NHPS for at least a half a century. In contrast, Mr. Morey's new High Density Developments are "within" the Natural Heritage Preservation Site. (A big difference)
(See NHPS pink overlay in section 3 above.)
Extensive List of NJDEP VIOLATIONS Contrary to Freeholder Morey's statement of "No Wrong Doing".
7/19/17 NJAC 7:7A-2.6(a) The performance of unauthorized regulated activities within a freshwater wetland transition area without prior authorization from the Dept. Div. of Land Use Regulation. More specifically, the regulated activities involve the clearing of approx.. 23,740 sf of vegetation within a regulated freshwater wetland transition area for the purpose of expanding a golf course. – Out of compliance
7/19/17 NJAC 7:7A-2.2(a) Performance of unauthorized regulated activities within a regulated freshwater wetland without prior authorization from the Dept. Div. Land Use Regulation. More specifically, the regulated activities involve the clearing of approx.. 18,351 sf of vegetation within a freshwater wetlands area for the purpose of expanding a golf course. – Out of compliance
4/30/18 Site inspection conducted CLUE inspectors met with environmental consultant Peter Lomax. Violations were found on site and an Enforcement Document was issued.
211/212 Colonial Avenue
1/10/2005 - Incident Complaint Made to NJDEP Hotline - “two people digging with pick and shovel to create thousands of feet of drainage ditches thru wetlands as part of residential subdivision".
1/11/2005 - Inspector Ron Falla (NJDEP) called twp zoning office they advised that subdivision was pending and thought wetland permits had been issued, would pull file for review.
1/19/2005 Inspector Harry Nicol (NJDEP) performed office investigation, reviewed maps, etc, reviewed CAFRA regs and gathered information, at present site is in violation of CAFRA
Incident was closed with Violation for site preparation without a CAFRA Permit.
The following violations were received by property owners who purchased from the developer within the NHPS.
ID 0506-02-0029.2 NOV Langford, 19 Langford Blvd (P)
9/19/18 NJAC 7:7A-2.2(a) Performance of unauthorized regulated activities within a conservation restricted freshwater wetland area without prior authorization from the Dept. Div. Land Use Regulation. More specifically, the regulated activities involve the clearing/destruction of vegetation from approx.. 15,657 sf of conservation restricted freshwater wetlands
9/19/18 NJAC 7:7A-2.6(a) The performance of unauthorized regulated activities within a conservation restricted freshwater wetland transition area without prior authorization from the Dept. Div. of Land Use Regulation. More specifically, the regulated activities involve the clearing/destruction of vegetation from approx.. 18,605 sf of a conservation restricted freshwater wetlands transition area.
9/19/18 NJAC 7:7-2.1 The performance of unauthorized regulated activities within the coastal zone. More specifically, the activities involve the clearing of vegetation within approx.. 74,201 of coastal zone/CAFRA, for the purpose of preparing the site for residential development without CAFRA permit approval.
Inspection was conducted by NJDEP 9/19/18 – it was confirmed that portions of the conservation restricted freshwater wetlands and transition areas had been cleared of vegetation and that the area had been cleared for CAFRA site prep. Mr. Langford was advised to not continue work on the property within the regulated areas until the violation was resolved. NOTE - violations are still pending as of 9/7/2019
NOTE :The developer " Mr. Langford was advised to not continue work...."
ID 1264 W NOV Langford Bayberry Drive – Holly Tree Acres – Black Lagoon (S)
8/15/06 NJAC 7:19-1.10 failure to obtain a Water Allocation Permit or a Temporary Dewatering Permit prior to diverting water either from a single diversion source or from combined diversion sources at a rate in excess of 100,000 gallons of water per day.
Issued field Notice of Violation for diverting water without permits
8/9/07 NJAC 7:19-2 Failure to keep a copy of registration at the work site and/or exhibit it upon request.
8/9/07 NJAC 7-19-2 Failure to obtain a modification of the registration prior to the addition of a new diversion source.
8/9/07 NJAC 7-19-2.18(c ) Failure to provide a totalizing flow meter for all diversion sources.
6/2/07 NJAC 7:19-2.18 (c ) Failure to Submit Water Use Registration Metering Form by 1/30/07
ID 11264 W NOV Laguna Oaks Golf Course (P)
6/23/16 NJAC 7:19-2.14(a) 4 Failure to calibrate each meter at least once every 5 years. Flow meter was replaced in 2010. The meter must be recalibrated again immediately since flow meters must be recalibrated at a min. of every 5 years. This was due 2015. The meter is schedule to be recalibrated oct. 2016.
Violations Continued Below
ID 0506-02-0029.6 NOV 7 Langford Blvd (pending)
12/14/18 NJAC 7:7A-2.6(a) performance of unauthorized regulated activities within a freshwater wetland transition area. More specifically, the regulated activities involve clearing of understory vegetation within approx.. 3,192 sf of deed restricted freshwater wetlands transition area.
ID 0506-02-0029.4 NOV 12 Langford Blvd (Satisfied)
12/14/18 NJAC 7:7-2.2 the performance of unauthorized regulated activities within the coastal zone. More specifically, the activities involve the clearing of vegetation and the construction of a single family home within approx. 44,596 sf of coastal zone/CAFRA, without CAFRA permit approval.
ID 0506-02-0029.5 NOV 8 Langford Blvd. (Satisfied)
12/14/18 NJAC 7:7-2.2 The performance of unauthorized regulated activities within the coastal zone. More specifically, the activities involve the clearing of vegetation within approx.. 49,199 of coastal zone/CAFRA, for the purpose of preparing the site for residential development without CAFRA permit approval.
To Fred Langford, "ALL UNAUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES MUST CEASE IMMEDIATELY"-NJDEP
"ID 0506-02-0029.3 NOV 21 Langford Blvd. (Pending)
9/19/18 NJAC 7:7A-2.2(a) ) Performance of unauthorized regulated activities within a conservation restricted freshwater wetland area without prior authorization from the Dept. Div. Land Use Regulation. More specifically, the regulated activities involve the clearing of approx.. 8,784.5 sf of conservation restricted freshwater wetlands.
9/19/18 NJAC 7:7A2.6(a) The performance of unauthorized regulated activities within a conservation restricted freshwater wetland transition area without prior authorization from the Dept. Div. of Land Use Regulation. More specifically, the regulated activities involve the clearing/destruction of approx.. 19,067 sf of vegetation from within a conservation restricted freshwater wetlands transition area.
9/19/18 NJAC 7:7-2.1 The performance of unauthorized regulated activities within the coastal zone. More specifically, the activities involve the clearing/destruction of vegetation and the placement of stone and sub-base fill material for a construction entrance within approx.. 74,409 of coastal zone/CAFRA area, for the purpose of preparing the site for residential development without obtaining the required CAFRA individual permit.
These multiple Violations are representative only of the violations for which the developer was caught.
211 Colonial Ave. Middle Township, NJ also known as Block 335.01 Lot 5.01
(The de-watered Lot)
Property was purchased in 1994 for $27,500.
Assessment 2009 $36,000
Assessment 2010 $36,000
Assessment in 2011 $29,600
Assessment In 2012 $29,600
Assessment 2013 $581,600
This is a 1,864.86% increase in one year.
CAN YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION WHY?
Rural Conservation RC.
Mr. Morey is incorrect, NJDEP Violations are "Wrong Doing",the NJDEP has said "MUST CEASE IMMEDIATELY".
Cape May County Freeholder Will Morey submitted this three page letter to all the County Freeholders Sept. 3, 2019, and to Freelance News Reporter Bill Barlow Sept 1,2019. The Letter addresses some of the issues previously presented herein. Mr. Morey's words are in bold type.
Mr. Morey writes to the Freeholders, "Fact is, the design and creation of the Laguna Oaks golf course and homes has proceeded in harmony with regulated natural resources and in conformity with the specific direction and guidance of the NJDEP."
"Compliance with environmental regulatory and planning standards at Laguna Oaks dates back to 1994." "Mr. Langford designed the home site in a manner that respected and preserved open spaces of adjoining lands to the south. "
Note the repeated reference to "designed" and "created". No one questioned the "design" or intellectual process, but rather the violations and destruction of a NHPS in the North, South and East while implementing the design.
If the design refers to High Density Housing, it appears HDHD is not permitted by Zoning outside of Town Centers, especially within a NHPS.
Mr. Morey writes, "Respectfully, the unfounded belief that Mr. Langford is improperly "digging ditches" at Laguna Oaks, thereby systematically "de-watering" the property's surrounding wetlands, is entirely unfounded." With all due respect to the Freeholder, no one said the ditches for de-watering occurred at Laguna Oaks. The ditches for de-watering were dug on Lot 5.01 to the north that was to be "left open and natural". Therefore this is not "entirely unfounded" given the evidence and history of the developer as a repeat violator of NJDEP Regulations.
Mr. Morey writes,"... manipulated by certain adjoining neighbors with the unfair result of threatening to subvert Mr. Langford's basic property owner rights in favor of their own gain." Property owners have nothing personal to gain by spending years exposing the truth beginning in 2005 according to NJDEP Violations.
Mr. Langford has no "rights" to stack up clearing and destruction of regulated wetland conservation area violations, and eradicating its wildlife for his own personal enrichment.
Mr. Morey writes, "... no ditches are to be found in the central portion of the property (excess golf course land), on which the existing 45 Ryan Town homes and Golf Course are situated", But, no one claimed ditches could be found on the "central portion of the property" or on the (excess golf course land).
The "ditches are to be found" on the property to the North Lot 5.01 to be "left open and natural".
Another disjointed explanation states, "... referenced ditches are part of an existing system located in the Northern Parcel of the Sub-division. These gravel pits existed long before Mr. Langford's initial association with the project in 1994." Notice how the preexisting gravel pit is referenced in context with the ditches, but it does not say "the ditches" existed long before Langford's possession.
He states, the "ditches" referenced here "are part of an existing system", but excludes the dates, which is 2002-2005, after Langford took possession of the land in 1994, and after the 1988 Freshwater Wetland Rules.
Then states, "These gravel pits existed long before..." inferring ditches referenced in the preceding sentence must have existed as well "long before Mr. Langford's association..." This appears misleading.
Mr. Morey seemingly conjures the image of a lifeless gravel pit. But it only existed temporarily in the 1950's, and has since become a heavily rooted and forested area with T&E Species the past 60 years.
Mr. Morey says, "the NJDEP itself has concluded that maintaining the features of the pre-existing disturbed land-forms is both legal and has no discernible effect on the integrity of wetlands within portions of the property, by de-watering them or otherwise". Is the NJDEP aware that these generalized "land-forms" assumed to be the "ditches", do not appear on the 1999 NJDEP Certified Wetlands Boundary as does the one uncontested historic ditch? Why not just have said "ditches?"
Mr. Morey refers to "historic ditches" separately. No one disagrees that there was historic ditches, but only as the 1999 Survey and other evidences clearly show.
Mr. Morey states, "in fact, the NJDEP could not have proceeded with its' current Letter of Interpretation if the ditches were found to be a recent site improvement". No one has claimed the ditches dug in 2002-2005 were a "recent site improvement" as the evidence demonstrates.
The NJDEP proceeded because they did not have the proper information provided by the developer or anyone else at the time.
There is a reference to the Mosquito Commission maintaining the ... ditch system, however the Mosquito Commission has denied "digging the system of ditches" referred to.
He then refers to "gravel pits" and mosquito ditches in the tidal marsh which were constructed in the 20th century. These issues are uncontested and irrelevant.
Again, the words "design" and "creation" are used stating "... the design and creation of the Laguna Oaks Golf Course and Community has included specific efforts to create wildlife habitat, establish aquatic resources where none previously existed, and dedicate preserved open space". Mr. Morey is apparently referring to the ponds Mr. Langford excavated for his personal and commercial enrichment on the golf course.
But building a pond in one area does not justify the decimation of the surrounding natural wetlands and wildlife habitat in another area, as his statement implies. Nor has anyone the right to unilaterally presume such a land swap.
In regards to Mr. Morey's comment about "open space", we believe he may be talking about the area around the retention ponds that are required for any development and associated stormwater management. If he is referring to the entirety of Lot 5.01 and remaining Lot 5.02 , this requires clarification.
The word "disturbed" is used in Mr. Lomax's and Mr. Morey's documents to describe the area. Does the 1983 Aerial show a disturbed area? The answer is "No". The developer was the only one who disturbed this NHPS. Since 1994 a car battery was in the Slab Creek and fuel tanks, pipes, and construction debris on Lot 5.01. Trees were removed, vegetation destroyed etc... in an area that was to remain "Open and Natural".
Lomax consulting claimed in 2007 the areas were "...disturbed continuously by agriculture and the construction of the golf course for more than 30 years." The aerials do not support this claim.
Mr. Morey claims efforts at bringing the truth to the community are "disingenuous" simply because the residents live here. This is an Ad hominem fallacy. If residents did not live here, there would be no witness of"wrong doing".
Eye-witnesses spent years documenting the issues herein. Further wrong doing is extensive, and demonstrated on numerous documents that contain incorrect Lot and Block numbers and misleading information, making inquiries difficult. Videos and more.
Because the digging stopped after the NJDEP Complaint in 2005 of, "...digging w/pick & shovel to create thousands of feet of drainage ditches thru wetlands ...", residents erroneous believed the de-watering destruction was over. But in fact, it seems developers were waiting for de-watering levels favorable for a new NJDEP Freshwater Presence / Absence in 2017, while intermittently clearing the new ditches and brush hogging vegetation.
Mr. Morey's "conclusion" claims they, " pursued sensitive design in harmony with the wetlands, where actually present and natural resources, as well as adjoining pre-existing development."
Yet there was reportedly a rainbow slick on the surface of the water throughout the entire ditch system just prior to the 2017 LOI for Presence/Absence. That was the first year the loud rhythmic vocalizations of thousands of tree frogs was dead silent according to residents.
The evidence speaks for itself. There is a grievous amount of "Wrong Doing" ,demonstrating a blatant disregard for NJDEP regulations, conservation areas and wildlife.
Therefore Mr. Morey's statements appear misleading, and the residents statements true.
Note: Due to space restraints the photo section above narratives may vary.
Egrets along the Coastal tree line on Lot 5.01.
It appears evident that Freeholder Morey has made misleading statements to both the public and the County Board of Chosen Freeholders. The Wetlands Preservation Alliance has never objected to a Golf Course that is environmentally sensitive, nor the single- family deed restricted homes built on the outside perimeter of the Natural Heritage Priority Site, preserving essential habitat.
The Press and Gazette news articles incorrectly state the group opposes the golf course. The article then goes on to dedicate a good portion of the narrative to the golf course rather than the issues of "wrong doing" on a Natural Heritage Priority Site, including the destruction of Certified Wetlands.
It appears Freeholder Morey presented this information to the Newspapers who trusted his representations.
The Natural Heritage Priority Site in 1983.
Prior to the purchase by the developer for pennies on the dollar.
It appears that an 18 hole golf course was promised, but instead a high density development is being delivered, because as Mr. Morey says,
"There is no money in Golf anymore".
Therefore, contrary to Mr. Morey's denigration of residents, it is the developer and investor that have been "disingenuous," not the residents represented by the Wetland Preservation Alliance.
NJDEP states this Natural Heritage Priority Site is, "...one of the few remaining patches of forest cover along the Atlantic mainland/salt marsh interface, so may be significant for migrating birds".
"contains an occurrence of a State endangered plant species".
"some of the best remaining habitat for rare species and rare ecological communities in the state".
"Contains Threatened and Endangered Species"
Is documented to contain Freshwater Wetlands into the Upland Portions of Lot 5.01.
Therefore, the remaining Natural Heritage Priority Site, especially forested and/or endangered areas, not yet completely destroyed, such as Lot 5.01 and other areas, must be preserved and protected from further destruction.