Issues → September/October 2008 → Features →
Nantucket: A Disappearing Island
(page 4 of 8)
Still, the money comes. Since 2005, SBPF's newest target has been a $20 million beach-nourishment project that would dredge the equivalent of some 200,000 dumptruck loads of ocean sand and pump it onshore to build out 'Sconset Beach -- ultimately, its proponents contend, protecting the bluff and the houses. The idea behind it is this: By building back the land, in this case extending a roughly three-mile section of sand 150 feet out into the water, you hold back the ocean. Essentially, two beaches are created: a sacrificial one to feed the sea, and a permanent base behind it.
In effect, nourishment tries to tap into the complex system of give-and-take that defines any beach. Simply put, the ocean moves sand from one location to another -- the direction varies according to the currents -- through a process called littoral drift. Waves wash up onshore, deposit material, and then fill up again with material as they recede. But the harder the water rolls in, the more material it extracts and the less it leaves behind. And that's what's happening in 'Sconset, where a high traffic transport of sand -- the equivalent of about 20,000 dumptruck loads of the stuff -- moves through the water each year.
Creating nourished beds, however, involves six months of around-the-clock dredging and vacuuming sand from the ocean bottom, while the slurry is pumped through underÂwater pipes onto the beach and bulldozers move and shape the material. The life expectancy of the sacrificial portion of a nourished beach is just three to five years, which means that 'Sconset would be looking at a permanent cycle of renourishment and the costs that come with it.
But although the SBPF homeowners would absorb the financial hit, year-round islanders say, Not so fast. How will nourishment affect fishing and wildlife? How will it affect neighboring beaches? Where will all this sand go once the sea gets ahold of it?
"They like living there, but I don't think it's just about protecting their houses," says Dirk Roggeveen, administrator of the Conservation Commission. "I think Helmut and others putting up the money are really just interested in the challenge: Can you stop the process and can you do it in a way that's environmentally responsible? And if there's damage, can you mitigate it?"
Weymar dismisses any notion that hubris is behind the proposal. "We're not talking about rocket science," he says. "It's been done hundreds upon hundreds of times all over the globe." Still, Weymar has made one important precautionary move: A few years ago he bought an empty lot across the street. Just in case.
"The homes here are cohesive," he says. "People say, Move the houses. Yeah, right. One here, one there, scatter the place around versus [preserving] this integral, incredibly precious and valuable historic architectural resource that we've got now. If you do the 100-year projection of long-term erosion rates, it's going to go. The shorefront will be in the middle of 'Sconset Village." Weymar is still standing in his backyard. But now, instead of facing the bluff, he's wheeled around toward his home. "All these houses will be gone."
A prediction like that doesn't surprise Josh Eldridge. He's 34, with a mop of dark hair tucked under a weathered baseball cap. Eldridge is driving his tired-looking truck, with a sticker that says, "The Mate Works for Tips," slapped on the back bumper. Eldridge, a 'Sconset native who now lives in Nantucket Town, is headed back to his home turf for a visit.
Reader Comments
Comment from chet holmes on September 13, 2008
hello, read the article on the erosion problem in nantucket,im afraid there fighting a losing battle,and that mother nature will prevail, i for one would like to see a moratorium on any more building on the coast? other than state and federal parks so everyone can enjoy the coast,i remember when they ran the poor portugese fisherman out of new bedford and put in dockominiams, for the select few that could afford them,wazzup with that? gloucester and cape ann is starting the same thing, owell tyme will tell i imagine cheers chet ps i love your magazine
Comment from Steve Merrill on October 22, 2008
I will never understand the building of homes and the thought process of government leaders/elected officials that allow these actions to take place.the New England way of life is disappearing fast.As a recreational fisherman I can empathise with Mr.Eldridge and others who appreciate the wondrous beauty and the bounties that nature has to offer.Ecological destruction,let's be honest, that's really what it is, on the coastlines and inland in forests change this planet forever.I am amazed at the silence most times of environmental groups,some of which I am a member and/or contributor to.I wonder at times when I see mansions or developments built what contributions were made by these folks to environmental groups for there "silence".Pristine coasts and forests where access was available to all,shut out forever for the few to enjoy.People have a right to develop their land but that right stops with me when it becomes a detriment to others.But what do I know.I am not a bleeding heart liberal or right wing.I am just a working stiff who is amazed at the wonder and power of mother nature everytime I go to the sea and forests to fish or take a walk.i pray the stripers are there 100 yrs from now in 'sconset for all to fish and enjoy and the cobble not destroyed for the sake of a house.
Registered users can add comments.
Registration is free, and just takes a moment.
Login or Register.