Rising ocean levels is a straw man in your argument. Tying rising ocean levels to a natural occurrence like the ebb and flow of barrier islands is, plain and simple, dirty pool. The type of thing politicians do. Are you running for office?
Yeah, oceanfront land is always changing and always has. Some of it is nature and some of it is man. If you look at Folly Beach here, you will see a mix of nature and man. The island is constantly moving, as it is a barrier island. However, the harbor jetties also redirect the currents in a way that accelerates beach erosion just south. It has really hit Morris Island, and will continue to eat away at the beachfront.
I do agree that houses/buildings should not be built so close to the ocean, but you will never convince people to follow this rule. Houses on the beach bring in big money, so they will continue to be built.
Sea walls in every town? So basically you don't want to surf anymore right? How bout getting rid of all beaches and putting up big walls that will cost billions and look horrible and totally unnatural. I couldn't think of a worse thing to do to a beautiful shoreline.
How about just rezoning building areas near oceanfront and deal with the fact that there will be some flooding during storms in some towns which has been going on for a century. Doesn't that make a little more sense than building a 100 mile long wall? Let's be reasonable. Storms happen.
The picture I displayed was simply to show how far back we should be building. Not as proof of rising sea levels. And the ocean is rising in areas without barrier islands as well. I just quickly google mapped an image. I'm talking about areas withOUT barrier islands as well.
See hot many buildings there are. THe beach should be backed in at least 3 blocks. That should be the start of the beach
some flooding? MOST OF THE TOWNS WERE COMPLETELY FLOODED! The sea walls would prevent the storm surge. who is more reasonable, let's see...convince towns of people to move most of their homes to where? Inland? because most of these islands are no more than a mile wide if that in some places. Almost all of the islands are completely full of houses which would lead to moving the houses absolutely no where but on the mainland. Who cares if the wall looks unatural if it prevents entire towns from flooding and having everyone lose everything from fire departments, schools, businesses and their homes. PAINT THEM TAN! go ahead and tell njsurfer42 to move his house somewhere else. people live on the island for a reason. My idea is not unreasonable, your idea is implausable. or maybe you can drop some miracle grow on the island and watch is strech the beach 3 mysterious blocks. We aren't at the beginning of building new towns, they are already built, and full to the brim.
Risk vs. Reward, living on a barrier island or beachfront is a beautiful and rewarding thing, but with that comes the risk of getting your home destroyed by mother nature. It comes with the territory, and anybody who has chosen to live there should have been ready for this day to come. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. You don't put up a major seawall for these areas, you either move somewhere safer, or roll the dice once again, it's that simple.
i hate to be that guy but to justify building again by saying "storms happen" is quite silly. Why rebuild in a place you know will get destroyed again. i love the beach as much as the next guy and would love to live next to it but have some common knowledge of what is going to happen and just live inland. save yourself money stress and fear and let the barrier island be and let them go about their natural processes without any structural interruptions. we will all be a little safer and avoid further catastrophe.
There is a whole lot to this debate. Here are a few topics to be discussed:
Human development is impeding on the natural coastal marsh land and other natural barriers. The easiest example to point out is New Orleans... They diverted the Mississippi which prevented the the natural deposition offshore to protect the area. The land sinks below sea level and all geologists were aware of the pending disaster waiting to happen.
Similarly, any meteorologist is/was aware of doom's day scenarios with hurricane's coming onshore in the metropolitan northeast. High population, lots of coastal development... Disaster waiting to happen.
Outside of preventing coastal development -
It seems to make sense that the people building residential development on the coast should take the financial burden when destruction comes. But, when everyone Else's tax dollars goes to supporting the inevitable destruction, then there are some obvious and legitimate arguments to be made.
Last edited by Swellinfo; Nov 5, 2012 at 08:36 PM.
Another reason why the federal governments FEMA bailouts of property owners should be reviewed. I agree that individuals should have the right to build wherever. But if a storm comes don't ask for federal insurance compensation or any other type of government assistance/subsidization. Ironically this article was in the times this morning: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/05/ny...?smid=tw-share
Well, right now there are thousands of people living in NJ/NY that don't have a pot to piss in right now. Why don't you head over to Point Pleasant and discuss climate change? OR you can come down with some blankets, winter hats, gloves, boots, water, batteries, dog/cat food for the animal shelters that are overrun, and some gas. I'm lucky enough to work in PA and get online. In case you haven't noticed, most NJ guys are still offline. You can debate climate change with us when we have gas/power/clean water again. Thanks
Correct me if I am wrong... But, isn't there a "seawall" that runs down Ocean Ave. in Monmouth County, NJ? I'm pretty sure Monmouth Beach got worked by Sandy and the "seawall" didn't do a damn thing...