Island Plan
Regional planning and policy context.
Evidence and Sources
FVF supports decisions grounded in current evidence, clear public information, meaningful participation, and long-term accountability.
This page brings together original sources, scientific research, agency records, planning documents, clearly labeled FVF perspective, and limitations.
Every entry should make it possible to distinguish source facts from interpretation.
Relationship to FVF’s Approach
The Island Plan was developed through a broad Martha’s Vineyard planning process that culminated around 2009–2010. It considered interconnected Island-wide subjects including housing, transportation, water resources, economic vitality, conservation, land use, and environmental stewardship.
The Plan sits within a broader regional-planning context led by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, including its review of developments with regional impacts. That context does not mean that the Island Plan created the review process or that every Plan recommendation is implemented through it.
FVF draws particularly from the Plan’s treatment of forest conservation, groundwater protection, and Vineyard character. FVF’s proposed framework and advocacy positions remain FVF’s own.
The Plan provides regional context; it does not automatically make FVF’s proposed framework binding law or establish that the Plan’s authors endorse every FVF position.
Original Sources and Supporting Material
Massachusetts General Laws — Community Preservation Act, Section 13
State law governing the use of Community Preservation Act funds, including eligible spending for open space, recreation, historic resources, and community housing.
EPA, “Soak Up the Rain: Trees Help Reduce Runoff”
Official federal guidance on how trees can help reduce runoff.
Martha’s Vineyard Commission — Groundwater and Drinking Water
Local planning information explaining Martha’s Vineyard’s reliance on groundwater and the Island’s sole-source aquifer designation.
USDA Forest Service — Multi-Decadal Carbon Cycle Measurements at Howland Forest
Long-term Forest Service research examining carbon storage and cycling in a mature New England evergreen forest. This is regional New England research, not a Martha’s Vineyard-specific carbon estimate.
U.S. EPA — Benefits of Trees and Vegetation
Federal research and guidance on the cooling, shade, air-quality, and other environmental benefits provided by trees and vegetation.
Harvard Forest — The Importance of Land-Use Legacies to Ecology and Conservation
Research examining how historical land use can continue shaping forest soils, understory vegetation, and ecosystem conditions over long periods.
USDA Forest Service: Eastern White Pine
Official federal species reference.
Harvard Forest Review of Manuel F. Correllus State Forest
Institutional technical review of the proposed management plan and historical ecology evidence at Correllus.
Nature Sustainability: Regional Forest-History Study
Peer-reviewed regional research on long-term forest history in southern New England; it is not specific to the Correllus parcel.
Massachusetts DCR: Southeast Forest Management Projects
Official Massachusetts agency information about southeast forest-management projects.
Manuel F. Correllus State Forest — Massachusetts DCR
Official Massachusetts information about Manuel F. Correllus State Forest, including its location in the center of Martha’s Vineyard and its more than 5,300-acre size.
Manuel F. Correllus State Forest Project Fact Sheet & FAQ — Massachusetts DCR
Official DCR project information describing the forest’s habitat and ecological context, including pitch pine–scrub oak barrens, grassland habitat, biodiversity, and state-listed rare species.
White Pine Friendly / MVWhitePines advocacy and research archive
Advocacy archives can help readers understand arguments and public history, but they must be distinguished from peer-reviewed research and official records.
Limitations and Context
The Island Plan is a planning framework whose exact current role must be described accurately. Older plans, data, studies, and agency records may remain useful context, but they should not be presented as current without a review date.
General ecological research does not establish the effect of a particular proposal on a particular site. Project-specific conclusions require applicable information about soils, drainage, topography, species, condition, habitat, design, scale, maintenance, and other relevant conditions.
Advocacy archives can help readers understand arguments and public history, but they must be distinguished from peer-reviewed research and official records.