A.D. Makepeace’s sand excavation site has become a pressure point in Carver, Massachusetts, where residents say the effects are not limited to construction noise. Larry Lewis, who moved to Cranberry Village, has said he hears trucks and excavators from a sand excavation operation owned by cranberry grower A.D. Makepeace and worries more about what he describes as sand particles drifting from the site into the neighborhood of manufactured homes. Lewis said younger people might be less affected, but he said it could be a bigger problem for older residents, describing the concern as an inability to avoid breathing the dust.
In nearby communities that are increasingly turning to beach nourishment to offset shoreline erosion, the sand problem looks different: it becomes a question of supply, cost and where material can be obtained. Reporting described how wealthy waterfront homeowners in places like Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket have used nourishment projects that can require thousands of tons of sand annually, including sand pulled from cranberry bogs in southeastern Massachusetts. For residents near excavation sites, that demand can mean more trucks, more dust and more scrutiny of how sand is sourced and regulated.
Massachusetts officials have not moved to block cranberry bog excavation at the state level, according to the reporting, but some local governments are trying to regulate it more tightly. The Environment and Natural Resources committee voted March 19 to advance a House bill that would place a moratorium on new cranberry bog excavation until its impacts are better understood. State coastal resilience planning, the reporting said, recommends homeowners eventually move inland rather than fill beaches with more sand, but it also noted the state’s appetite for sand is unlikely to subside.
The reporting focused on how sand extraction and beach restoration connect through shipping infrastructure, with New Bedford described as a central transfer point. It said sand from undisclosed origins is loaded onto barges in New Bedford and shipped to private anti-erosion projects on Cape and Islands. Activists have argued that as quarries close and sand resources in Massachusetts dwindle, cranberry bogs are being increasingly used as a sand source, which has drawn neighbor complaints and renewed calls for stronger oversight.
Nantucket’s ’Sconset Bluff illustrates the tension over sand projects that can be costly and environmentally controversial even among homeowners. In February 2024, a beach restoration project on Nantucket barged thousands of tons of sand—described in the reporting as 6.6 million pounds in total—from New Bedford to the glacial island. The reporting said the sand was intended for the shores of ’Sconset Bluff, where homeowners built a geotube—a tube-shaped sack of sand slurry—and that in March, 18 years after the geotube was built, the project was declared “almost a complete failure” by the chair of the Nantucket Conservation Commission after the tube split following severe winter storms.
The reporting said the project has consumed millions of tons of glacial sand, mostly barged by Robert B. Our Company, and that the company did not respond to a request for comment. It also said Nantucket residents will vote in May on whether to expand the geotube project after the ’Sconset Beach Preservation Fund failed to provide enough sand to maintain the tube’s integrity. The town’s Conservation Commission approved the expansion in March 2025, and the state Office of Coastal Zone Management issued a skeptical report in January, noting risks including that geotubes appeared to increase erosion at adjacent properties.
Behind the scene-by-scene permitting decisions, the reporting described how sand sourcing is shaped by physics, geology and the economics of transportation. Nantucket’s sustainability programs manager, Vincent Murphy, said the island has permitted fewer than 10 beach nourishment projects in the last five years and that most have been on the island’s north side, where wave impacts are lower. Murphy also said most homeowners choose to relocate inland as shoreline recedes, writing in an email that Nantucket has a “250-year history of moving homes back from erosion” and that local adaptation has been done this way.
Across Cape and the Islands, researchers and local conservation staff described beach nourishment as something that can “buy time,” but also as something that must be repeated and paid for. Jane Varkonda, a conservation agent in Edgartown for more than 40 years before retiring in 2025, said the increased frequency and severity of winter storms—linked to climate change—has made anti-erosion efforts more common and more expensive, and she said, “It’s worth more than gold these days.” Kara Shemeth, who took over as conservation agent after Varkonda’s retirement, said few completely new nourishment projects come across her desk and that older projects often seek permits to expand their work.
Coastal geologist Tara Marden said she has worked with increasing numbers of Cape and Island homeowners on nourishment projects over the past decade, and she contrasted softer approaches—sand, cobble and vegetation—against harder structures like geotubes. Marden said soft structures can be minimally harmful compared with hard structures, but she said they are temporary and need regular replenishment. She said homeowners sometimes replenish sand two or three times a year and described the annual cost as ranging from tens of thousands of dollars to higher amounts depending on the effort.
At the center of the debate is the question of how much sand should be pulled from land-based sources to sustain private anti-erosion efforts—and who bears the costs when that sand comes from excavation sites near homes. Activists such as Chris Powicki of the Massachusetts chapter of the Sierra Club said there is no guarantee that using scarce sand on the coastline is the best use of a limited resource, and he said, “There’s no doubt that more and more sand is being placed on the coastline across Massachusetts,” adding, “Is this the best way to use a scarce resource?” For people in Cranberry Village, the concerns are more immediate: Lewis said sand extraction does not warrant the scale of dust and disruption described by neighbors.
The reporting also described an enforcement and legal thread tied to wetland impacts. On Jan. 7, the Carver Conservation Commission issued a cease and desist order to The A.D. Makepeace Company to stop work on wetland areas after an environmental activist group argued the company had illegally altered 57 acres of wetlands. The reporting said Linda Jacobs, who has lived in Cranberry Village for 12 years, described noise from the site and said two neighbors moved out after developing COPD, a respiratory illness sometimes caused by silica particles found in sand. Jacobs said, “There’s nothing related to cranberries anywhere on that property.”
In response, Linda Burke, vice president of marketing and communications at A.D. Makepeace, said in a statement that the company’s operations were in compliance with applicable regulations. Burke also said the company has been focused on cranberry farming for over 170 years and said the business has diversified over time while keeping cranberry farming as what defines the company, and she confirmed that sand not used for cranberry cultivation is sold to Read Custom Soils, which operates a facility down the street from the excavation site.
Looking ahead, the reporting said Massachusetts spends millions of dollars each year to replenish weathered coastlines, and it described the state Resilient Coasts plan released last year as highlighting managed retreat as an alternative to piling more sand on erosion problems. Officials also pointed to the possibility of government buyouts for some properties, while suggesting many homeowners will have to cut their losses. At the same time, the reporting said offshore sand mining is currently not allowed in Massachusetts, even as activists and planners discuss it as a possible future option when shortages and deficits collide with rising erosion pressures.
On that offshore debate, Marden said offshore mining is “much more natural” in her view because sand is taken from the ocean floor and returned to where it came from, while Powicki acknowledged some dredging may be necessary to restore natural sand flows. The reporting said the federal government assessed potential impacts on fish species and habitat, and it noted activist opposition from groups like the Sierra Club. Companies like Makepeace, meanwhile, are also diversifying beyond cranberries, and the reporting said the company is building solar arrays on its Wareham properties, drawing resistance from residents concerned the projects contributed to deforestation.
For residents near excavation sites and for coastal homeowners weighing expensive restoration options, the story is ultimately about competing uses of a finite resource. Activists argued that without enforcement mechanisms, growers, builders and homeowners will not act with the planet’s best interest in mind, and Powicki said, “If it comes down to who can spend the money to keep their land, it’s gonna come down to the people with the deepest pockets,” adding, “People can buy sand forever.” The reporting described land trust efforts and broader conservation strategies as another path for struggling growers, but for people living next to excavation operations, the immediate question remains what oversight and safeguards should apply as sand demand continues to rise.