Study on Geotubes in Texas

[Smiling JOe]

John R, I am not sure where the stairs ended up, but I did see a few sets of them pass by me at the public access at Blue Mtn Bch. I have a photo or two. My best guess is that the steps ended up piled up on 30A at Dune Allen, or farther west in Landlocked's favorite lake, Stallworth.

 

[Miss Kitty]

Read this quick...it will need to be deleted.

This Texas gal is bring only one tube to the beach...TOOTHPASTE!
Sorry ....I will leave now.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

ok, i'm in. i went to dep's site, and i think i found what you're leading question is leading up to.

... While some of this erosion is due to natural forces and imprudent coastal development, a significant amount of coastal erosion in Florida is directly attributable to the construction and maintenance of navigation inlets. Florida has over 60 inlets around the state, many have been artificially deepened to accommodate commercial and recreational vessels and employ jetties to prevent sand from filling in the channels. A by-product of this practice is that the jetties and the inlet channels have interrupted the natural flow of sand along the beach causing an accumulation of sand in the inlet channel and at the jetty on one side of the inlet, and a loss of sand to the beaches on the other side of the inlet.


is this what you were looking for? crazy that it paralells my statement above regarding cape may. if this is indeed what you're referring to, are you implying that the panama city and destin inlets are responsible for our erosion?

i too saw dennis' and katrina's work first hand, and had the tupelo crossover torn out from under me while running back toward land. awesome power, it was like a parade of steps. every 20-30 seconds anothe set of stairs would pass by. i wonder where they all ended up?

during dennis, giving up some of my secret identity bmbv

after dennis

John R,

OK !!! already! I take back back the "simple simon" thing that I said several days ago in more heated moments.

Honestly, congratulations for being the ONLY one to actually take the time to determine what DEP considers the major cause of beach erosion in Florida. I'm not implying that DEP's statement is the sole source for all our woes.

It's just that it's one more piece of information that everyone here should take into account before painting such a broad stroke regarding "all the negative impacts" of retaining walls. Things aren't always as black and white as some would lead you to believe.

BTW, I guess you know where all the sand is coming from for this phase of beach nourishment going on, don't you?

Truthfully, I'm not familiar with Cape May. Maybe I should reciprocate and take a look at their situation to see how it compares to ours.

Regarding the Panama City inlet... It sure would appear based on the DEP report and the fact that the "drift" is east to west, that we could be starved somewhat for sand.


IN SUMMARY:
We all need to be a little more tolerant regarding this difficult situation. The DEP reference, I would assume, probably catches a lot of people by surprise (including me when I first read it). Maybe, just maybe, it's not all the fault of gulf front property owners regarding erosion.

Thank you, John R, for giving me this spring board to make my point.

P.S. I still won't take any bull-h-t from anybody!!

Regards,
BMBV

 

[thumper]

...The DEP reference, I would assume, probably catches a lot of people by surprise (including me when I first read it). Maybe, just maybe, it's not all the fault of gulf front property owners regarding erosion.
Thank you, John R, for giving me this spring board to make my point...

However, the issue at hand is not what the DEP considers to be the current major cause of erosion. The issue is what the proliference of these new walls will do going forward to our beaches. Research points to the answer. Hell, a beach chair left at surf line overnight points to the answer.

This is why I said earlier that this question was off topic. More accurately, it's what they call a "red herring." (It's akin to saying, in 1910, not to blame those new automobiles for air pollution, since coal, after all, is the major cause of pollution.) We have to think forward. Do we take a painful (necessary) financial hit now to set up a system that research shows preserves and protects our shorelines for posterity, or do we use that money now to put out temporary solutions that, if we're lucky, might only benefit one or two generations?

BMBV, I sincerely hope you will address this question. (Sans vitriol or sarcasm.) This is a genuine concern. Thank you.

 

[Smiling JOe]

So what is your point, BMBV? Did I miss it? Is it that to date, seawalls have not been the biggest cause of erosion? If you would state your case, rather than running around in circles trying to make us guess it... oh, never mind -- that would make too much sense.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

So what is your point, BMBV? Did I miss it? Is it that to date, seawalls have not been the biggest cause of erosion? If you would state your case, rather than running around in circles trying to make us guess it... oh, never mind -- that would make too much sense.

Here's the way I see it.

A few weeks ago, everyone was arguing how ALL retaining walls and and the actions of ALL gulf front property owners were the sure death to the beach as we know it. I took major offense to this (as if all of you out there couldn't tell ). Looks like I was practically the only one on this thread to take a stand in defense of gulf front owners (in general). My sense is that most of them are a lot smarter than me and value their time much more than I do to enter into this debate when, as one poster said, "it's already in"....talking about the walls.

Regardless of what was said in these threads, (AGAIN just like "class warefare", "religion" and "abortion"), I felt that REGARDLESS of my argument and substance to back it up, that I felt that I was NOT opening the eyes of very many mis-guided people who were all too quick to slam ALL gulf front owners and their logical actions to TRY to protect their property.

Smiling JOe, I perceive you to be a person of decent reasoning and moderation. I do understand why you probably are pissed at me for my "underhanded" little game regarding "class warfare" that, BY THE WAY and FOR THE RECORD was not brought up by me, but clearly and intentionally brought up in the Pensacola News Journal. AGAIN, I apologize for the method but not for the results (at least as I and a few others see it).

Hell, at least I called you an intelligent dolphin swimming in a school of tuna. That, believe it or not, was a compliment.

I'm not hung up on "class warfare" at all. Some people, for some reason, feel comfortable in directing blame for many "problems" using that game.

I pointed out the infamous paragraph the way that I did (and hooked a lot more people than I imagined it would) because .....

If I had first brought it up that the Pensacola article said "extravagent homes... rich... well connected", I'm sure eveyone would have countered with some argument defending the article since part of the article supported "their cause". Again, as I've said before, rightly or wrongly, it would be logical to question the remainder of the article. It's called credibility. And in my mind, they lost it with that statement (and other reasons that will come to light soon enough).

But since I intentionally set everyone up the way I did, you have to admit, I believe I made my point.

And that point is that there are people who defend the turtles, sometimes more for their "own ulterior sense of satisfaction of blindly slamming gulf front property owners" than for the turtles' genuine interests.


SO with that said.....

So what is your point, BMBV? Did I miss it?

Smiling JOe, my point is that the sometimes there are more things involved in making up the total picture than a few here on these threads would have you believe.

Is it that to date, seawalls have not been the biggest cause of erosion?

I think that statement (question) is TRUE at its very core. There were very few retaining walls installed (relatively speaking) before Hurricane Dennis. Yet erosion of our bluffs continued. PERIOD.

If you would state your case, rather than running around in circles trying to make us guess it... oh, never mind -- that would make too much sense.

I apologize again and again and again.... I'm still blue in the face for apologizing previously for the method of my point making. You know if the situation was reversed, I think I would have acknowledged "You got me on that one... I do see some prejudicial overtones with the Pensacola New Journal article."


Smiling JOe, let me ask this question....
Why don't you summarize your opinions on the information exchanged on all the threads. You are a very verbose kind of person (again based on the plethora of posts everywhere on this website). Put it out there. Give it your best shot. I know I certainly have.

Best Regards,
BMBV

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

... Research points to the answer. Hell, a beach chair left at surf line overnight points to the answer.

That's what I like about you thumper... your command of the undisputable facts that take in the TOTAL climate of our predicament (ok a little dose of sarcasm here). ;-)

This is why I said earlier that this question was off topic. More accurately, it's what they call a "red herring." (It's akin to saying, in 1910, not to blame those new automobiles for air pollution, since coal, after all, is the major cause of pollution.)

The question you refer to is one I previously asked a couple of times regarding "What is the major cause of erosion in Florida's beaches?".

I believe you're just insulted that John R actually took the time to do some research (when the question was originally directed to you) and see for himself that there are possibly more things to consider in the TOTAL PICTURE when it comes to ersosion and retaining walls.

I don't really understand how you can think what DEP considers "the major cause of erosion on Florida's beaches" is "off topic". EROSION is the root cause of all these threads that are discussing retaining walls and geotubes and the like. DEP has their idea.

Sometimes these threads do evolve by somewhat drifting from topic.

We have to think forward. Do we take a painful (necessary) financial hit now to set up a system that research shows preserves and protects our shorelines for posterity, or do we use that money now to put out temporary solutions that, if we're lucky, might only benefit one or two generations?

By this, would it be logical to assume that you own gulf front property and that you are willing to "take a painful (necessary) financial hit"

OR

Would it be logical to assume that you and everyone else are willing to pay ALL gulf front property owners fair market value for our property?

Somehow, I sense the first part is not true but the second is more of what I think you had in mind. If you can swing this, I'll step up and be one of the first to sell.

There's your mission... Good Luck ! No sarcasm here. Go out there and "JUST DO IT"!

BMBV, I sincerely hope you will address this question. (Sans vitriol or sarcasm.) This is a genuine concern. Thank you.

I hope I did (a little sarcasm excluded in the first paragragh ). Did you notice that there was no mention of polluting cars or coal in my reply? ;-)

Regards,
BMBV

 

[thumper]

I don't really understand how you can think what DEP considers "the major cause of erosion on Florida's beaches" is "off topic".

Because I was under the impression the topic was how walls will (or will not) exacerbate our critically eroded areas. Yes, we have erosion already. It's my opinion that it's important to seriously explore the solutions that won't accelerate the situation.

I believe that our tax dollars should fund a study of possible solutions, with projections. IF historical and scientific data show that the best long term course to preserve beaches for future generations is a moratorium on rebuilding in certain areas, I would never support legislation that didn't compensate with fair market value for those homes.

As the long termers have seen, I like to chime in with an opinion every now and then, to put one man's thoughts on the record. With this post, I am back to lurking. Continue on, fellows.

 

[seagrover]

Sorry I have not read all 3 pages of posts - all I can say is, if in the area, come to the N Greenwood walkover here in Seagrove - which has not been re-opened for quite some time - and look at the black dirt they are filling these tubes with - I am appalled that they would allow anything like this on our beaches.

I did not buy beach front but my property values do have a relation to the color of the sand and this is dirt that they are filling the tuges with. I have been told they have to be through by May 1 - this will be interesting!!!

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Because I was under the impression the topic was how walls will (or will not) exacerbate our critically eroded areas. Yes, we have erosion already. It's my opinion that it's important to seriously explore the solutions that won't accelerate the situation.

Hi Thumper,

Not really meaning to split hairs here... but the title of this particular is geotubes not retaining walls ;-) . We've all gone off-topic here (some sooner and more drastically than others if you check towards the beginning of this thread). Just curious... do you or would you classify geotubes the same as retaining walls? I'm not sure what the answer is (either factually or just my opinion). In other words, how do you feel about the "negative" results of geotubes vs. retaining walls, such as increased erosion, negative effects on turtle nesting, etc.?

I actually did learn something here on SoWal regarding the very dark sand piled next to geotubes that someone posted a picture of recently. I, like some others, thought it was sub-standard trucked in sand (just from a casual observation). Now, from what I understand, it's all the dark subsurface soil that was dug up in order to "lay in" the geotubes. I assume they will use this dark sand to fill the tubes with.

For what it's worth, I too have a problem with that. Geotubes must be continually "cared for" in order that they be successful, long term. I'm not convinced that after the "panic" mode subsides, that those GF owners will "continually" shell out the money to keep the tubes covered with sand as is necessary to protect them for the long term each time a bad storm passes by. It's expensive enough the first go-round. That and many other reasons are why I decided to go with a normal retaining wall (maintenance free composite in our case).

Here's a question... maybe someone else can also "chime" in... that is, what percentage of the projects that are using geotubes are protecting CONFORMING vs NON-CONFORMING structures? In other words are some owners electing to go with geotubes who have a "newer" home because they feel that if the sh-t hits the fan regarding DEP permitting, that they might be dealt with less severly than if the owner put a retaining retaining wall like we did (qualified by the way)?

Just food for thought.

I believe that our tax dollars should fund a study of possible solutions, with projections. IF historical and scientific data show that the best long term course to preserve beaches for future generations is a moratorium on rebuilding in certain areas, I would never support legislation that didn't compensate with fair market value for those homes.

Fair enough !!!

In all likelyhood, our government, and rightly so, will probably just let the GF owners figure it out and foot the bill in the meantime via armoring and dune restoration in front of the wall (when theoretically allowed). History will ultimately determine the success or failure of armoring, dune restoration (and hopefully beach renourishment) in our, again, unique area of high bluffs. And it may very well turn out that in the long term, something like beach renoursihment is the only real affordable on-going solution. 20 years from now, maybe we'll all give up, govt will buy up all beach side properties within, let's say, 500 feet of the current CCCL and hope that the entire effort does not have to repeated in the next hundred years.

Again renourishment will probably win out in our area! OR if DEP is right about the "major cause of beach erosion", we'll just have to blow up the Panama City shipping inlet to let the sand continue its natural flow to us!!... then dredge it up at the Destin Pass and bring it back to us Oh yea, we're doing the second part (dredging Destin Pass) as we speak. ;-)

As the long termers have seen, I like to chime in with an opinion every now and then, to put one man's thoughts on the record. With this post, I am back to lurking. Continue on, fellows.

Thanks. I DO appreciate the chance to logically converse and share views. Chime away, my friend!

BMBV