Army corps of engineers heading to NJ

Discussion in 'Mid Atlantic' started by juliaep, Apr 7, 2013.

  1. juliaep

    juliaep Well-Known Member

    Aug 18, 2011
  2. Dawn_Patrol

    Dawn_Patrol Well-Known Member

    Jan 26, 2007

  3. hcsurf15

    hcsurf15 Well-Known Member

    Jan 1, 2013
    sucks. first ruggles, now nj. looks like im moving to cali
  4. LBCrew

    LBCrew Well-Known Member

    Aug 12, 2009
    " ...modifications are not in the cards. Policy requires the Corps 'to select the optimal plan, and by that I mean the plan that will reduce the most storm damage for the cost.'"

    And THAT'S what's wrong with the whole process... the whole, "business as usual" mindset and approach, who's foundation is built on what's quick, cheap, and and provides the best short term solution. But the problem is not short term, and the solution is not quick or cheap.

    I actually get angry when I read bullsh!t like this.
  5. shark-hunter

    shark-hunter Well-Known Member

    Apr 29, 2012
    At this rate there will be no surf spots left eventually in NJ. Completely absurd and easily avoidable. Also, what beach goer wants to take 2 steps into the water and be over their head?(steep beaches caused by destroying sand bars)
  6. shark-hunter

    shark-hunter Well-Known Member

    Apr 29, 2012
    You'd be suprised how much could be done to modify the army corps behavior if special interest groups(in this case the surfing community) protest and speak out against this. This is how democracy works. You have to protest/join surf chapters ect.
    It's so easy to NOT destroy and surf break and still replenish the beach.
  7. cpuravida

    cpuravida New Member

    Apr 7, 2013
    dear shark-hunter, i don't wanna be snarky... but i gotta say i'm surprised that you think we'd be surprised how much can be done to modify the army corps of engineers' behavior. imho, there is absolutely nothing we can do. they, and every other government agency, will do exactly what they want to do, based on rules that rarely have anything to do with surfer stakeholders. the only thing that could theoretically help was engaging an empathetic lawmaker. but when they're not kissing babies, they're snatching their lollipops from them. i can't think of one nj lawmaker that gives a darn about surfers. they do pay a lot of attention to wealthy homeowners and their desire to a) preserve their expensive beachfront properties and b) keep folks like us off their beachfronts. ergo, the army corps of engineers will do exactly the opposite of what we surfers want, and will do what the wealthy homeowners want, which has nothing to do with swimming, but a lot to do with vain snapshots of their handful of midsummer dinner parties with their rich friends. sorry, but this is nj, not orange county rohrabacher country. we're SOL (**** outta luck here in NJ).
  8. staystoked

    staystoked Well-Known Member

    Dec 27, 2009
    Artificial reefs are more efficient, less expensive, and create better waves and cleaner water...has anyone ever heard a good rebuttal for this idea? because i haven't.
  9. Loggerhead

    Loggerhead Active Member

    Oct 29, 2011
    surfriders is a joke. i was at a conference here on Long Island not more than a month ago. Major players from the organization were here, and for the most part they are resigned to the fact that the ACOE is going to do what they want. I guess it starts with the local chapter but thats an even bigger problem here. They have to many interests that lay outside the interests of whats good, natural and right. This is a big deal
  10. shark-hunter

    shark-hunter Well-Known Member

    Apr 29, 2012
    I love sand breaks. Their so much fun. Not that I'm against reefs or anything(actually enjoy them too!), but sand breaks have a special quality to them. They'll turn an 8 second period swell into a hollow wave. Reefs won't unless their dangerously shallow. Sand breaks with a good sandbar can create awesome waves. And sand is always more fun to crash into then reef/rocks haha Create one or two surf reefs a block or two long, along the jersey coastline and then stop destroying the good sang breaks and replenish the beach without dregding and destroying a sand bar and use the right type of sand grain. That's a good solution right there.
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2013
  11. njsurfer42

    njsurfer42 Well-Known Member

    Nov 9, 2009
    & how, exactly, would you propose that be done? nevermind that ANY kind of beach replenishment is destructive to the already existing intertidal ecosystem on the beach in question.
  12. shark-hunter

    shark-hunter Well-Known Member

    Apr 29, 2012
    I've heard they've done it in the past by not dredging the sandbar obviously and not making it flat when the refill it as well as using the right type of sand.

    No replinishment = no sand beach. It will be eroded. The ocean is rising

    If you don't replenish the beaches around there then you have to let nature take its course, which means because of a rising ocean on the eastern seaboard that you'll have to get rid of any structures/roads that are near the ocean and let the beach "back up" naturally. Eventually that will happen anyway no matter what we do. You can't stop a rising ocean(over say next 50 to 100 years). A non stop 300 mile long artificial reef is not realistic and would destroy all the fun sand breaks. A reef setup for a few blocks would be really cool though.

    That's basically your two options.
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2013
  13. wet dreams

    wet dreams Active Member

    Oct 1, 2010
    Sand sand sand... It's the biggest variable IMHO. Wrong sand equals zero sandbars. Seems like common sense to me. This grainy sand they keep pumping is pretty much useless.. Is there no banks with fine sand left??
  14. Mattyb

    Mattyb Well-Known Member

    Apr 2, 2013
    Im a combat vet marine and the corps has always had a rivalry with the Army. This only adds to my opinion.
  15. sadtaco

    sadtaco New Member

    Apr 8, 2013
    I'm a member off and on of Surfrider, and while it does serve a purpose, I can tell you that even as an eco-wackjob, I think Surfrider needs to reconsider its mission statement. It seems no matter how much we complain and want something changed, Surfrider chapters are never happy. Concessions are made but there is always something to complain about it seems. I quit the whole thing because of that. Surfrider chapters here were getting far too extended in other interests, like Snowrider, land based interests like railroad coal terminals; they are losing their focus. No wonder the ACOE and lawmakers have no desire to work with them
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2013
  16. LBCrew

    LBCrew Well-Known Member

    Aug 12, 2009
    There's a common misconception when talking about artificial reefs in the context of beach stabilization, and surfing. The misconception is that the reef itself will serve as a surfing resource. While that may be true in some cases, the main purpose of artificial reefs along our coastline would be to direct and control the movement of sand. Artificial reefs alone are not a magic bullet. There is no magic bullet. It is, at best, PART of the answer. What hard structures like reefs can do is create sand bars... engineer an artificial reef system and the sandbars will take care of themselves. This, along with strategic sand pumping, gives us the best shot at beach stabilization, property protection, and resource conservation.
  17. goofy footer

    goofy footer Well-Known Member

    Sep 23, 2010

    The best way to challenge the science based Army Corp. is to use their "own science" as an alternative as well as economic benefits of surf able beaches in the eyes of local politicians and business community. In the short term play close attention to the size of sand at study sites by the Army Corp., sand is measured in millimeters. So for maintaining ideal surf able sand bars as smaller grain sand packs better is 3mm-5mm while courser sand from 5mm-8mm shifts with long shore currents creating deep drop offs/shore breaks
  18. Thee Fartmeister

    Thee Fartmeister Member

    Oct 10, 2012
    You guys gotta try to fight this. It's happening everywhere, unfortunately you got it first and the worst, now you get stuck with the burden of creating a model and precedence for the rest of the coast dwellers and surf community. From what I gather, they have pretty much given up on Plum Island in MA, so beating these proposals down is not out of the question.
  19. bassplayer

    bassplayer Well-Known Member

    Oct 2, 2012
    I'm confused why Island Beach State Park needs these dunes. There's nothing there to protect- which is why I love surfing there.

    EDIT: Nothing man made to protect, I mean. Except the governor's mansion and a couple restrooms and lifeguard stations.
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2013
  20. shark-hunter

    shark-hunter Well-Known Member

    Apr 29, 2012
    There should be miles and miles of protected coastline just the way we have national parks. Rather than destroying nature so a small percentage of millionaires can have a vacation home. The coastline is a natural treasure that should be preserved for everyone. We shouldn't be spending tax dollars to subsidize their insurance and reshaping the coastline for property protection