New Jersey enviros oppose re-development of shore after Sandy

A 100-year storm is used by enviros as an excuse for a land grab.

Newsworks.org reports:

Doug O’Malley is Interim Director of Environment New Jersey, a statewide, citizen-based environmental advocacy organization. O’Malley says we must prepare for rising sea levels and reduce the causes of global warming. His organization views Superstorm Sandy as an opportunity to adopt new policies that will lead to clean up and protect the Shore for generations.

Read more…

4 thoughts on “New Jersey enviros oppose re-development of shore after Sandy”

  1. It’s possible — in fact it’s probable — that some of the Northeast’s lower shoreline areas should be left alone because storm damage will be so expensive when the next rare-but-certain event occurs. That should be the criteria, though, not the granola-crunchy-tree-huggy nonsense this group is using.

  2. Another example of “never let the facts ruin a good story.” Sea levels have risen somewhere in the neighborhood of zilch in the last 100 years. Subsidence is quite another story–in some places.

    Of course, there will always be hurricanes hitting the east coast. And for those who can afford to choose to live there, one of the few thinking writers at NJ.com offers a great suggestion. Hint: sand dunes don’t cut it.

    http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2013/07/the_evidence_is_in_sea_walls_r.html

  3. They are welcome to put their houses in harm’s way, as long as they stay out of my pockets. Don’t expect federal or state subsidized insurance. When disaster strikes, they’re on their own. I don’t mind if the Coast Guard pulls them out of the surf. Don’t expect FEMA to help rebuild houses and roads in stupid locations.

  4. You are correct, and I agree, as does Mr. Mulshine. “If I had my druthers, state law would be written to put the burden on homeowners. They’d be required to erect sea walls to prevent erosion just as bayfront residents are required to have bulkheading.”

Comments are closed.