Seawalls

beachvagrant, what started out as you defending your position quite clearly, has digressed to meanspirited, petty, rhetoric. like your detractors, you are now just spewing the same stuff, repeatedly. and, it seems, throwing in attacks whenever you can. the high horse seems to be getting taller. maybe time to back away from the keyboard for a while?

A voice on my shoulder tells me that I should not continue with my reply. I know I know, everyone is whincing....well.......

Bite ME!!!! Get it??? :rofl:

There's another "attack" I threw in when I could !! :funn:

You used my response to Katie Blue to jump in with your post above.

So here's KatieBlu's post for everyone to see since you didn't include it...
Originally Posted by katie blue:
"<edited out because I just need to bite my lip instead...>"

Just a little humor. At least it's funny to me. I can sometimes be self serving.

My "high horse" wants to know....
What's your problem? I thought we were starting to have a decent dialogue here as people got to know me. If you can't contribute anything constructive to this thread, stay the hell off!!

Now it's time for a sprinkle of "mean-spirited" facts...
I won't kiss anybody's rear end who spouts bull**** (sorry, no other word comes to mind) such as you have done above. You deserve this response.

Top it with a "petty" observation...
It's people like you that obligated me to come to the defense of me and my neghbor's character and actions in the first place.

You, my friend, could have simply left it alone and the creme would have risen. But you seem to be threatened that perhaps, just perhaps, logical discussion might prevail here. So you take another REALLY CHEAP shot.

"psssst..." (voice from my shoulder)
"What now?" I say.
"Ok I'll tell John R." I say.

I was told that you took SEVERAL CHEAP SHOTS, not just one REALLY CHEAP SHOT and that you missed by a country mile with all of them.

Oh yea.....
I'm not really that mean of person as to say the following to my "detractors"....
"like your detractors, you are now just spewing the same stuff, repeatedly. and, it seems, throwing in attacks whenever you can. the high horse seems to be getting taller."...you're obviously talking about yourself, "The Master Detractor". Kind of rhymes doesn't it? I try to give all detractors a chance to base their post on reason, not emotion.

I am guilty of at least one major flaw....
I won't take any bull**** from simple simons like you. You didn't just step in the "crossfire", you went out there and waved a red flag and started screaming, "shoot me, shoot me!"

Just for the record, John R, was there ANYTHING constructive in your well thought out post that I might have missed?

By the way, change that under-aged little girl beer drinker icon link, PLEASE. That's what truly is getting old more so than the content of your post.

I'm going to feel real real bad if I find out from somebody that I just slammed a cute 16 year old kid.

My appologies to everyone else.

Night night.

Please - no personal attacks. There is no need for name calling.

Thanks ;-)

I heard the state is going to come down hard on beachfront homeowners and the county because of the seawalls. Like, make them remove them. Anyone hear the same?

Study on affects of Seawalls

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...art=5&prev=/images?q=seawalls&svnum=10&hl=en%

Impacts of Seawalls

Impacts of Seawalls

copied from Surfrider site



1) Passive erosion -"Wherever a hard structure is built along a shoreline undergoing long-term net erosion, the shoreline will eventually migrate landward beyond the structure. The effect of this migration will be the gradual loss of beach in front of the seawall or revetment as the water deepens and the shoreface moves landward.... While private structures may be temporarily saved, the public beach is lost. This process of passive erosion appears to be a generally agreed upon result of fixing the position of the shoreline on an otherwise eroding stretch of coast, and is independent of the type of seawall constructed." It is evident that passive erosion will eventually destroy the recreational beach area unless this area is continually replenished. Excessive passive erosion may impact the beach profile such that shallow areas required to create breaking waves for surfing are lost (Seaside Reef).

2) Placement loss - Seawalls are placed on the beach. In many cases, construction of seawalls is on public property (beach). In Solana Beach for example most land for seawalls is leased free of charge to the property owners. This is a taking of extremely valuable public property.

3) Active Erosion - Refers to the interrelationship between wall and beach whereby due to wave reflection, storm surf zone narrowing and a thousand other processes the wall may actually increase the rate of loss of beach. This is site specific and dependent on sand input. There are varying opinions on if this effect actually exists. However, as watchdogs of the coast, until there is overwhelming evidence that this effect is not significant, many of us have opposed seawalls on this basis.

4) Public access impacts - these can be a result of passive erosion, placement loss or active erosion. Seawalls built on eroding beaches, will lead to the loss of access. Solana Beach and North County beaches are eroding.

5) Visual/aesthetic impacts - Seawalls are ugly and detract from simple pleasures as a walk on the beach.

6) Economic issues - local, state or federal subsidies or construction to protect private property, or insurance coverage. Construction is performed on State or Municipal land. The public has never been compensated for this loss of valuable property.

7) Loss of sand supplied by eroding bluffs that are armored. A minimal fee for this sand is collected from property owners for the sand that would provide beach material. Additionally, the eroded area would create a beach. We do not feel the public is sufficiently mitigated for the loss of sand and beach.

8) The most important thing to remember is that a seawall is never built to protect the beach. Rather, it is built to protect property, structures or a cliff from erosion.

Re: Study on affects of Seawalls

Thanks Dave for these pics and your other threads with the seawall and geotube info. Interesting stuff! Very interesting.

Re: Study on affects of Seawalls

Dave, the article is shocking ! I just don't understand how our county and state can allow the building of seawalls when there are so many studies and so much evidence of the harm they do to the beach.

Thanks again for the great info.

Re: Study on affects of Seawalls

Dave, the article is shocking ! I just don't understand how our county and state can allow the building of seawalls when there are so many studies and so much evidence of the harm they do to the beach.

Thanks again for the great info.

Not to be too nosy BR (well OK a little) but don't you own gulf front? I've thought about you several times wondering whether you are far back enough and what kind of issues you have. It seems to me that all GF owners aren't in the same boat, and I'm wondering about your particular neck of the woods. Your house is newer right, so was it built far back? What about your neighbors?

Re: Impacts of Seawalls

This is just my opinion, but I believe that seawalls will eventually be leveled by nature. In the case of the beach, coast or water front of this nature, natural forces (ie...winds, waves, storms and hurricanes) will batter the areas. No manmade structure can truly defend against nature. It will last as long as nature allows it to. I agree with George Carlin..one day the earth is going to sluff off mankind like a bad parasite...seawalls a necessary to the existence of mankind, not of nature.
I also enjoyed aquaticbiologys post in the other Seawall thread, regarding seawalls and the effects of people in general on the coast. It is a fact that humanity is going to flock to the beach, but what I find offensive is the complete lack of respect to the beach and their fellow man these people have!

A voice on my shoulder tells me that I should not continue with my reply. I know I know, everyone is whincing....well.......

Bite ME!!!! Get it??? :rofl:

There's another "attack" I threw in when I could !! :funn:

You used my response to Katie Blue to jump in with your post above.

So here's KatieBlu's post for everyone to see since you didn't include it...
Originally Posted by katie blue:
"<edited out because I just need to bite my lip instead...>"

Just a little humor. At least it's funny to me. I can sometimes be self serving.

sometimes? most of your posts of late seem to be self serving. your view is clear, you did your reasearch, you spent more money than we all make, the rest of us are simple...

My "high horse" wants to know....
What's your problem? I thought we were starting to have a decent dialogue here as people got to know me. If you can't contribute anything constructive to this thread, stay the hell off!!

my problem must be my emotions, which you pointed out early in this thread. there was decent dialog back then. sorry, are you the one making the rules around here? i seem to recall you admonishing shelly regarding 'the rules'

Now it's time for a sprinkle of "mean-spirited" facts...
I won't kiss anybody's rear end who spouts bull**** (sorry, no other word comes to mind) such as you have done above. You deserve this response.

i'm sure in your mind all my posts are BS, so i'm not sure if you're referring to the sign or not. can't take a little humor?

Top it with a "petty" observation...
It's people like you that obligated me to come to the defense of me and my neghbor's character and actions in the first place.

You, my friend, could have simply left it alone and the creme would have risen. But you seem to be threatened that perhaps, just perhaps, logical discussion might prevail here. So you take another REALLY CHEAP shot.

People like me? so, this is a discussion between the haves and the have nots? look around. in an earlier post i asked you to respond about your experiences, not those of all gulf front property owners, you must have missed that. Hot air also rises, do you live on the top floor? i do appreciate logical discussion and have enjoyed reading your and others fact based, educated posts, it's when you digress to attacks that gets to me.

"psssst..." (voice from my shoulder)
"What now?" I say.
"Ok I'll tell John R." I say.

I was told that you took SEVERAL CHEAP SHOTS, not just one REALLY CHEAP SHOT and that you missed by a country mile with all of them.

you were told? my 'emotional' post were making other gulf front owners tingle a little? and we got you as their emissary? were you the first or the last choice?

Oh yea.....
I'm not really that mean of person as to say the following to my "detractors"....
"like your detractors, you are now just spewing the same stuff, repeatedly. and, it seems, throwing in attacks whenever you can. the high horse seems to be getting taller."...you're obviously talking about yourself, "The Master Detractor". Kind of rhymes doesn't it? I try to give all detractors a chance to base their post on reason, not emotion.

that's me, full of emotion. i believe that you are mean. when the conversation isn't going your way, the schoolyard bully comes out and you resort to name calling, belittling, etc. just my observation, can't answer for any of your other detractors. flattering to be called the master though, i'm really not even trying.

I am guilty of at least one major flaw....
I won't take any bull**** from simple simons like you. You didn't just step in the "crossfire", you went out there and waved a red flag and started screaming, "shoot me, shoot me!"

Just for the record, John R, was there ANYTHING constructive in your well thought out post that I might have missed?

reading some of your drivel filled posts has indeed had me screaming, "shoot me, now" but, they're like a trainwreck, one can't not watch, just to see how bad things are. i think you attacked everything as i expected, thank you.

By the way, change that under-aged little girl beer drinker icon link, PLEASE. That's what truly is getting old more so than the content of your post.

you know, just yesterday i was thinking she had run her course, but now, knowing that you dislike her so much, i think she's going to hang for a while longer, or not. btw, that's my daughter in a stage play ;-)

I'm going to feel real real bad if I find out from somebody that I just slammed a cute 16 year old kid.

My appologies to everyone else.

Night night.

i grabbed this from your buddy ecopal, it really fits.

How one responds to criticism is a good test of character. It quickly unveiled yours.

your information is strong, your posts informative, but you fell victim to letting your very ugly emotions filter in. something you've been telling us all not to do. i truely hope you are not as angry as your screen persona has become.

good luck with your wall and house this season.

jr

NOTE to all as an FYI - John R knows how to quote and respond properly.

NOTE to all as an FYI - John R knows how to quote and respond properly.

I have thought about trying to give instruction as to the how-to properly quote using html, but no one would be able to read my instructions because the HTML would kick in and over-ride the actual text.

For the record, BMBV, not that it matters, but what I "edited out" was basically just a request to refrain from calling people names when challenged in this forum, as that's just not a level of discourse we tend to operate on around here. ("Antagonistic dummies" was the last straw, and I just felt a need to defend the good people of this forum.)

I actually decided to delete that post, because ultimately, I decided it's your right to speak, react and define yourself as you choose, and it was actually none of my business to tell you otherwise. Yet you assume I was going to "cross" you. Too much, dude. Peace.

BMBV,

I liked your banter much better when you were on Zoloft...please, for pete's sake...take a pill.

There is nothing more rewarding than listening to, adding to, and reading (in the case of this board) a lively, interesting and worthwhile discussion. Feeling passtionate about a subject is a quality that I find attractive in a person. Much of the dialogue contained in this thread has passion, but it lacks the tolerance, compassion and understanding that substantiates true conviction. Intensity without justification is simply meaningless rhetoric. Just my opinion.

This is a clear case of the "Have's" and the "Have Not's"

I "have" a home that is safe from collaspe
BMBV "has not"!

There is nothing more rewarding than listening to, adding to, and reading (in the case of this board) a lively, interesting and worthwhile discussion. Feeling passtionate about a subject is a quality that I find attractive in a person. Much of the dialogue contained in this thread has passion, but it lacks the tolerance, compassion and understanding that substantiates true conviction. Intensity without justification is simply meaningless rhetoric. Just my opinion.

Nicely put, Allifunn.

thanks dave, for that excellent resource. it appears that the proof is in the pudding. it would be great if our county commissioners had had a chance to see those photos. eventually the taxpayers will be footing the bill for beach sand being brought in from some source.

jr

I don't think this seawall will work without the neighbors continuing it down the beach.

from the sierra club,

http://ventana.sierraclub.org/back_issues/0303/seawalls.shtml

The Trouble with Seawalls | by Owen Bailey


" For centuries we have treated the oceans? bounty as limitless and beyond our capacity to deplete. We have treated wetlands as wastelands, and rivers and streams as conduits for our pollution. The evidence of our neglect and mismanagement is before us. The question now is: What do we do about it?"

-Leon E. Panetta, Washington Post, May 21, 2003


Pleasure Point
Pleasure Point would receive ?full bluff armoring? if the Army Corps of Engineers and Santa Cruz County get their way.
The construction of seawalls is one of the most controversial and misunderstood environmental issues on the California coastline today. Our state is known world-wide for its graceful and majestic beaches. However, developers and property owners alike have continued to build far too close to the edge of shoreline bluffs, in spite of the Coastal Act. As the land under coastal homes, roads and businesses naturally erodes, one of the most often employed actions is the reinforcing of the cliff wall. Seawall construction is a major contributor to the disappearance of the very beaches we all treasure.

Oftentimes, public money is used to protect private structures.

Such steps to protect private property are often taken without consideration of the public land below. Seawalls and boulders not only diminish public access to beaches and obliterate pocket beaches, they disrupt the natural processes that replenish beach sand.

Beaches naturally refresh themselves in several ways. Silt from rivers gets deposited on the beach, and the crumbling of shoreline cliffs provides a source of new sand. Dammed and diverted rivers have greatly reduced the amount of sand flowing toward beaches. Armoring of the coast virtually eliminates the cliffs as a source of sand and also deprives cliff-nesting birds of essential habitat.

Seawalls multiply with time. As the wall or boulders deflect the waves, embankment erosion is simply directed to either side of the seawall increasing erosion on flanking cliffs, where neighboring property owners decide that they too, need seawalls. Thus the cycle expands.

The California Coastal Act permits the construction of seawalls for ?existing structures.? This wording has created a loophole that has been exploited to the detriment of our beaches. Coastal construction is currently allowed so long as the new building is set back sufficiently from the cliff so as to not require reinforcement for 75 years. However, once the building is erected, it then can be considered an existing structure and the property owner can then come back to the Coastal Commission the next year or even the next week and claim that the erosion situation requires a seawall.

The numbers are worrisome. In 1971, 25 miles of California coast were covered in shoreline armor. By 1990 (latest data) more than 130 miles of the coast were encased in seawalls. Thirty percent of the Santa Cruz County coastline is already hidden behind seawalls.

Oregon, Texas, North and South Carolina and New Jersey ban construction of new seawalls outright. In California, where 80% of our immense population lives less than 30 miles from the coast, our seawall policy is tipped toward armoring the coast. We need legislation to close the loophole in the Coastal Act to stop the rapid construction of structures that are detrimental to our beaches. The California Coastal Act intended seawalls to be built as a last resort. The use of seawalls as our default policy in a vain attempt to control geologic processes has proven disastrous. We must provide our Coastal Commission with the tools to save our beaches.

California beaches generate $19 billion/year from tourism and special events. These beaches must be protected.

BMBV, No I'm not from GaTech...some other school.

Regarding my not being a fan of seawalls: I work in the environmental sector and I'm not a fan of a lot of the things we humans do to the earth.

Regarding your offer of the video during Dennis: Thanks, I'd like to see it out of general interest, but those were the conditions during Dennis and probably don't reflect the conditions for which a seawall should be designed for. Others may like to see it as well...perhaps there is a place it could be hosted on-line?

Smiling Joe, you asked "How are the majority of people stuck in this mess of seawalls supposed to know what the heck you two are talking about?" What I've been trying to find out is what a lot of the posters here already surmised without the need of the technical jargon...that some portion of these walls will fail in a decent sized storm. I'm not speaking of BMBV's wall when I say this, but from what I'm hearing here it sounds like a lot of them weren't designed to meet the requirements for a permanent permit and by my understanding of the Florida statutes they should be removed. Actually, the law that allows the temporary structures also recognizes that they are for emergency conditions and requires them to be removed within 60 days of initially being constructed unless a permanent permit is applied for.

My biggest hope right now is that we get a several year reprieve from Mother Nature, this is truly a mess.

Kurt, SJ. I have read this thread with interest because of the fact that my beloved Seagrove Villa's and Motel installed a seawall. I know SJ, that you are NOT a fan of them. If what they say is true and they destroy the beaches, than I have to admit I am not a fan either. However, given the shape that the Villa's were in after last year's storms, in your opinion did they have any other choice but to install one? I am just curious as to what other options they had. They have been there a long, long time and perhaps it was the only way of saving the Villa's. I don't know, that is why I am asking. Also, you took pictures of the seawall that was installed. In your opinions was it installed to standards that have been discussed in this thread? Is the sand covering it acceptable as to the grade of sand used? I know these questions may be hard to answer, but I have just been worried since all of this discussion about seawalls, and I knew that the Villas had installed one. Thanks in advance!!!!!!!

Kurt, SJ. I have read this thread with interest because of the fact that my beloved Seagrove Villa's and Motel installed a seawall. I know SJ, that you are NOT a fan of them. If what they say is true and they destroy the beaches, than I have to admit I am not a fan either. However, given the shape that the Villa's were in after last year's storms, in your opinion did they have any other choice but to install one? I am just curious as to what other options they had. They have been there a long, long time and perhaps it was the only way of saving the Villa's. I don't know, that is why I am asking. Also, you took pictures of the seawall that was installed. In your opinions was it installed to standards that have been discussed in this thread? Is the sand covering it acceptable as to the grade of sand used? I know these questions may be hard to answer, but I have just been worried since all of this discussion about seawalls, and I knew that the Villas had installed one. Thanks in advance!!!!!!!

Everyone has only a few choices. Do nothing. Sell and pass the problem on. Bring in sand to rebuild dunes and planet vegetation. Build a seawall or install tubes. I'm guessing that a seawall seemed like the best option for SV.

Only time will tell if they, and others, made the right choice.

I didn't see all the sand they used but the top layer seemed to be up to standard. One of the photos I took had long bolts sticking out of the sand and the corners of their wall were exposed. I haven't seen it lately. They may have brought in more sand. Also, the corners may have been left exposed so that neighbors could tie in.

Everyone has only a few choices. Do nothing. Sell and pass the problem on. Bring in sand to rebuild dunes and planet vegetation. Build a seawall or install tubes. I'm guessing that a seawall seemed like the best option for SV.

Only time will tell if they, and others, made the right choice.

I didn't see all the sand they used but the top layer seemed to be up to standard. One of the photos I took had long bolts sticking out of the sand and the corners of their wall were exposed. I haven't seen it lately. They may have brought in more sand. Also, the corners may have been left exposed so that neighbors could tie in.

Thank you Kurt for your response. I guess you are right and only time will tell. We can only hope that Mother Nature will be kind to the area this year, to give it more time to heal.

Thanks again!

I watched the construction of the Seagrove Village wall. They built their seawall about 30 feet out in front of the bluff line after the county had encouraged all seawall builders to construct their walls as close to the dwellings as possible. A contractor friend of mine said they built it twice as far out onto the beach than they needed to.

As a result they may theoretically have more problem getting it permanently permitted from environmental agencies and maybe more prone to be fined for excessive ?take? of beach habitat.

By building it farther than they needed they have increased the chance that their wall could interfere with beach habitat, beach self replenishment, and increase the probability it will contribute to beach erosion. Also ironically they have increased the likely hood that it will be destroyed in the next big storm.

When they initially started back filling the seawall they were using dark red sand and the county made them remove it and put white sand in.
As a result their seawall is filled and covered with nice sand.

Unfortunately their neighbor down wind to the east (property on Montgomery Street) apparently successfully pressured the county to allow them to use dark sand and some of it has been contaminating the SGVilla?s white sand.

Also, that same property to your east is installing geotubes. They have dug a deep and wide trench into the subsurface of the beach and as a result may have destabilized the beach foundation and probably made it more prone to erosion. Also their massive digging has created quite a mess on the beach and in the water.

Below is a picture Seagrove Beach Villa's neighbor installing their geotubes-this is currently going on.
Click on picture to enlarge it: