Quote Originally Posted by DrBill View Post
Bottom line- regular renourishment is NOT a sustainable coastal management strategy. It is intended to protect property, very expensive property I might add. I dare say most folks cannot afford to buy in Monmouth Beach.
Ironically there are still many NO Trespassing signs on stairways over the seawall. What is the benefit for the
99% I wonder? Retreat is also a reasonable coastal management tool. Seema that in NJ we never even consider that one.
Retreat? Do you really think that is reasonable or even remotely possible in New Jersey? Where do you suggest they all go? We are too densely populated for this to even be feasible. Unfortunately, poor decisions were made with the placement of developments and infrastructure in the early and mid 1900's but there was no foresight and very little regulations back then and we have to live with these decisions, esp since many bear the source of revenue for municipalities in the form of taxes and profit from businesses, etc for private owners which results in tax revenue as well. Remove the few towns that get the fed funding and 'restrict' access from the equation for a moment and look at towns like AC, Ocean City, Avalon, Stone Harbor, Cape May to name a few, and the money spent to place sand to provide a buffer that protects the boardwalks and businesses on and adjacent to the boards and to provide blanket space and it is easily justified. Access is promoted and available, and parking is abundant (for the most part) justifying the dollars spent a little more. I completely understand that the lack unrestricted 365 day a year public access in certain areas is frustrating; very frustrating. I can't and won't defend that one; I have no way to. But there are plenty of municipalities that comply with or exceed the requirements; by a lot in many cases. And I will tell you, IMO, that if we are going to continue to allow shore protection, placement of sand is the most natural and sustainable way to do it. Erosion is a result of the disruption or elimination of sediment in the littoral system. Yes, this disruption is caused in many cases by the hardened structures (seawalls, jetties, groins, homes, other buildings, etc) that were intended to protect development, but replacing or recycling (as in the case of Cape May backpassing) the sediment in the system is the most natural way to do it. Could it be done where there are less impacts on recreational value...sure, but as I stated in my earlier post thinking outside the box is becoming more and more common and attempts are being made. Thanks for your thoughts..