|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Issues >
Water
> Printer
Version $3
billion
Beach projects are the only projects that the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) builds knowing that they will fail because large storms and the ocean will eventually move the redeposited sand down- or offshore. Far from "renourishing" or "replenishing" beaches, this sand pumping actually works counter to natural beach functions that are critical for plants, wildlife and storm protection. Beach renourishment promotes further development on fragile, high-risk barrier islands, increasing both federal emergency payments for flood damages and impacts upon coastal wildlife. A Duke University analysis estimated $3 billion was spent in the 20th century to pump more than 650 million cubic yards of sand on to America's beaches, enough to fill up a 3 x 3-foot sand box from Miami Beach to the moon and halfway back. Taxpayers for Common Sense estimates that these costs will balloon to more than $10 billion over coming decades if the Corps completes all 103 beach projects currently under construction or consideration. Green
Scissors Proposal Current Status In
2001, President Bush sought to increase the local cost share
of beach projects to 65 percent, but was rebuffed by Congress.
In fiscal year 2003, the President proposed cutting Corps beach
funding by 56 percent. In March 2002, Senator Robert Smith (R-NH),
ranking member on the committee with jurisdiction over the Corps,
as well as Senators Russell Feingold (D-WI) and John McCain (R-AZ),
introduced major Corps reform legislation that, among other important
measures, would increase the local cost-sharing for beach projects
to 65 percent. While federal taxpayers subsidize the majority of costs, they do not all benefit from beach projects equally. The beneficiaries of beach renourishment projects are largely private homeowners, owners of rental properties, and resort guests. Despite rules requiring public access to federally subsidized beaches, some coastal areas discourage public beach use by imposing strict parking regulations, allowing padlocked gates and posting no trespassing signs near public beaches to discourage their use. Coastal areas should pay more for beach renourishment. Because recreational use of beaches generates significant economic benefits for coastal communities, those communities should invest more of their own money in maintaining their beaches, just as any other town in America does to encourage the local economy. Most coastal communities can afford to pay more. In fact, according to Worth magazine, 18 of America's 200 wealthiest towns are in the process of receiving federally subsidized sand for their beaches. Beach
renourishment projects encourage additional or more intensive
high-risk development along the shoreline that increases the
cost of taxpayer-subsidized flood insurance payments when floods
and hurricanes occur. Beach renourishment can adversely affect the habitat of endangered species. Threatened or endangered sea turtles, such as the loggerhead, leatherback and green turtles, nest in many areas where beach renourishment occurs. Beach renourishment also distorts the habitat of the piping plover, an endangered species that resides along the Northeast coastline. Beach renourishment can adversely affect surf zone environments. Beach renourishment can increase turbidity levels and change wave movement within the surf zone. High turbidity levels and suspended sediment can smother organisms, inhibit filter-feeding processes and decrease plant photosynthesis. Contacts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|