Young Caymanian activists protest for managed retreat
(CNS): A group of young Caymanian activists held the first of what is expected to be a series of protests on Sunday, launching a campaign calling for a managed retreat along Seven Mile Beach to save the rapidly disappearing famous stretch of coastline. Ahead of a meeting with government officials and stakeholders, including property owners, scheduled for this week, the young people took to the street to raise awareness about the extent of the damage to the beach and the need to act to save it.
The protest was staged at the entrance to the tunnel on West Bay Road by the derelict Royal Palms site, which is at the heart of the erosion problem that is rapidly accelerating northwards along the famous beach. Judging by the amount of support the small group of protesters received from passing motorists, the erosion problem is beginning to raise concerns well beyond the environmental activist community.
Rory McDonough, a long-time Caymanian environmental advocate and one of the protest’s organisers, told CNS that this was the start of a campaign to save Seven Mile Beach. He said it was “an expression of discontent” over how it has been allowed to be developed and the outcome of its mismanagement.
“We see the beach disappearing completely, with buildings falling in and being allowed to pollute the waters with no real action plan in place,” he said. He noted that some buildings had been allowed to crumble into the ocean “for years now”, but there has been no discussion about that. The authorities have failed to engage the private stakeholders over the reality and the need for managed retreat, “which is the next step for our country”, he said.
McDonough said he was concerned that the government doesn’t see the long-term reality, which will not be helped by seawalls that will make things worse in the future. He was also critical of the proposal to import sand from elsewhere.
“We talk about buying sand from somewhere else. Taking sand from someone else’s beach, I think, is indicative of the attitude that has got us into this situation in the first place and also indicative of how little we understand the problems we face and what the necessary long-term solutions are,” McDonough added.
He encouraged people to get involved and express themselves and urged young Caymanians to come out and join the protests. Given what was at stake, he said they would be focused on keeping this campaign rolling and circulating information as widely as possible.
The serious erosion of Seven Mile Beach began several years ago in the area around the Marriott Resort. Since then, properties to the north of the Marriot, as well as The Sovereign and adjacent condo complexes, have been impacted by more development on the dynamic beach, sea-level rise, increasing king tides and changing weather patterns that lead to more erratic and unseasonal storms, sea swells and heavy rain.
Even the beach at Lacovia, where the concrete structures have all been demolished with the start of a redevelopment project at the site, lost a significant amount of sand from its beach in the wake of the relatively benign weather systems that went on to become Hurricanes Helene and Milton.
Mile after mile of Seven Mile Beach is being lost and many seawalls and other structures built on the dynamic beach are crumbling into the ocean. The Department of Environment has long advocated that a managed retreat is the only solution and that the owners of properties in this area need to rethink building more seawalls because even the most well-engineered will continue this domino impact.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: development, Local News, Science & Nature
Google or search YouTube for beach re-nourishment and educate yourself.
All we need is one big hurricane with winds out of the northwest and it’ll all be back.
Let us pray.
Does anybody know how much Lacovia is selling condos for? Starting price was 10-18 million before they knocked the building down. The new condo by harbour heights just sold a condo for 60 million.
In my honest opinion no one is moving any condominium off of West Bay Beach. That is what it was called for over 300 plus years. Its name got changed by mistake by staff on the cruise ship thinking they were in Jamaica’s 7 mile beach. It isn’t 7 miles either.
Just a thought ,Beach Bay has the same sea structure as TI . They have a lovely beach. Maybe with engineers they could build the same structure parallel to shore? It could act as a barrier reef that could solve the problem forever.
Placing beach sand which is limestone that can be found all over these islands at different states of being in the sea or out like iron shore (drying at a longer time). I believe if we use rendering sand as a base and put the sand from the sea it would have something to grab onto. Acting as friction and cause it to stay in place better. I will believe that until a marine engineer declares that it can’t work.
We use this material to put in foundations like roads, and in building foundation or just swampland. Even on beaches to build 10 story buildings
Oh bore off
Is there a vast irony here that those property owners and cohorts up in arms about managed retreat are very likely a sizeable percentage of the high net worth who have earned their fortune through large commercialisation and heavy industries that have contributed to the change in climate and now want the smaller people to help foot the bill for the damage they have indirectly contributed to ? – say it ain’t so…
They’d have better luck protesting stiff breeze.
At least they are trying…what you doing?
Managed retreat? Great sentiments but totally hopeless now. We’re always going backwards!!
Please research Sir John Cumber’s vision for the managed and paced development of SMB in the mid-1960s, at a time when there were only 3 resort properties on SMB (Beach Club Colony, Galleon Beach, West Indian Club), and only a few private residences (Lear Grimmer’s, Mitch Miller’s, John Senior’s, Arden Shaw’s).
The development plans which were formulated under Sir John’s oversight included a set-back SMB/West Bay Road, which would allow for deeper beachside properties. Check Grace Bay Beach on Provo. SMB was a similar idea.
But….real estate scammer Jim Bodden became a Government MLA and voila!…..all development plans were torn-up and the beach was sold off like hot cakes. Remember the For Sale signs more prevalent than cocoplum bush? J.M. Bodden & Son Realty!!
NOT MY National Hero!!
Where can we find Sir John Cumber’s vision and plans?
17@11.51am – Coincidentally, some were published in Friday’s Compass, under their 50 year recollections. But most were destroyed when those development plans were scrapped.
Archives maybe? Hansards for sure.
I am convinced that the major cause of this is from the boulders they put in front of Sunset Cove.
All this beach erosion started after Sunset Cove put uo there artificial cove and now is obvious that the beach isn’t able to migrate through that area as the boulders prevent this.
100% agree 8:14. Back in the day (if I remember correctly) Treasure island never had a beach and the first artificial cove was put in place with truck loads of sand to create a beach. Back then you could walk along a very small beach in front of the Northern TIsland condos (against a sea wall) before opening up to Plantation Village. Even back then the small northern TI beach begin to and disappeared and then the erosion continued further up, Plantstion Villiage and The Radisson. Every sea wall since has exasperated the problem.
ABSOLUTY! South of what is now Crescent Pointe was and still should be “Ironshore”!! These boulders can be removed and as they happen to be “on the King’s Bottom” the Government can act and do it.
All coastlines are dynamic in nature. These property owners have no guarantee of the extent or condition of the coastline that fronts their properties. The owners are (1) at fault for building their “follies” in an area that has always suffered from erosion and thus exacerbating the extent of the erosion and (2) liable for the damage they have caused to the island’s primary natural attraction.
Whatever you do to the south end of the beach will have an effect on the north end of the beach and Barkers and South Sound. Real experts should have been employed years ago. Instead the politicians put their head in the sand. Well they cannot do that forever as sand is a fast disappearing commodity.
Oh I forgot can the politicians keep away from the sand on my property at Red Spot Beach.
Sorry to inform you, but sand beach and foreshore are for us – the public use.
I been using that beach from the time I know myself and will continue to use it until death, it is my life.
We can use it anytime and all the time, it is for our free from harassment or limited in any way by you use or your political friends or anyone else.
Neither you nor anyone else will “keep us away”.
The beach is ours!
Chris John is ‘us’. He is a Caymanian. Our beaches are for EVERYONE to enjoy.
Weirdly if Kenny gets his cruise ports they would actually protect smb from the storms passing south of us. No need for managed retreat and Kenny get re-elected – win win.
it would be the final nail in tbe coffin for the flow of sand to the beach, and would kill off all the sand producing corals and life on the south west side due to distirbed silt in the water from contruction. wake up you backwards dolt
It would only be the construction that may cause problems and that can be managed. Once the new piers are built they would help stop sand going south.
No need in insult people.
I used to own a condo at Tamarind Bay.My unit was right at the front.
There was a 100 foot of sloping beach in front of the condos and no sea wall.
It was NOT built too close to the sea.
The same is true of Laguna de Mar, Royal Palms and the others.
The issue is that the sea washed away from in front of these buildings.
The sea walls only came later to protect the buildings from destruction.
I’m sure these young protesters are well meaning but have they thought through the result of telling the owners of these million dollar properties to just demolish them, too bad?
Demolish the Marriott hotel too?
It would be the end of our tourist industry.
We absolutely must replenish the beach; at the joint expense of these property owners as it is their investment that is being saved.
John
Was Marriott Pool Deck built with an appropriate setback?
Was MT’s house and wall built with an appropriate setback?
You understand that if the sea digs a hole in the sand due to an ill placed structure, sand from all around will fall away into it? i.e. a wall in one place will effect the neighbors.
Love the Marriott Breakfast, but of destroying that hotel would truly be the end of our tourism product, we are already sunk.
Replenishment is the only way. Managed retreat is a nothing statement – would take years to come to fruition even if it was remotely possible.
Better start soon then.
There is no single hotel on this island that carries the tourism industry, save for the Ritz Carlton.
Ritz Carlton?
Not ‘tourism’, just overpriced ‘elitist’LMAO
Good to hear you are enjoying your employment.
Isn’t the setback supposed to be at least 130ft? So you’re saying that Tamrind Bay (100ft) was built too close.
“Currently, Development and Planning Regulations require that buildings and seawalls should be minimum of 130 feet from the high water mark in a hotel/tourism zone; however, exceptions have historically been granted in various cases and there are challenges over how the boundary line is measured.” – Cayman Compass, today, 17 Oct 2024
That’s a new setback numbnuts. That was not the required setback when Tamarind Bay and others were built. The developers of those properties didn’t write or enact the laws, the people you elected did.
Back when the Marriott was called the Radisson, their swimming pool was in the central court yard. I operated the dive shop located on a beautiful beach on the North of their property. When the hotel owner Bill Yung told me they were going to build a seawall and relocate the swimming pool and create a deck, I asked “what for”? People come here to swim in the ocean and lay on the beach. He and others ignored my comment and I have watched with great sadness this end of “seven mile” beach disappear. When I arrived here in 1964 my brother and I walked the seven miles on several occasions.
Close, it was never seven miles though.
Yikes. That’s not even remotely true.
and this kids, is why decisions such as this should not be in the hands of random CNS comments.
They already did the simulations last time this was proposed, its doesn’t protect from storms or beach erosion, it makes the erosion worse.
One solution is to deny any sea wall permits. Either to build new ones or repair existing ones. Then, sit back and let Mother Nature take its course. We all will be surprised at how quickly she takes over.
How about “Bucket of Dirt/Sand Day” Protest by committing to dropping a bucket 🪣 of dirt/sand where the south Seven Mile Beach erosion is. Government should charge a 5% surcharge to those hotels and condos to pay for boulders and fresh sand to be dropped at their beach. Call it a stupid idea? Well how’s the sand at Sunset Cove doing… it still has beach with their boulders blocking the excretion of sand when a westward tropical storm 🌀 hits.
The clown show was last week, buddy.
Clown show … ok pee wee Herman keep drawing your grade 3 signs with crayon and hold it high in front of traffic that’s really making a difference! Maybe write a fruitcake song about it as well. Dork!
Tropical Storm Delta years ago created this erosion in 3 hours and the sand never came back. That’s a FACT. Before that storm it was a full beach
You’re just making things up, clown shoes.
Tropical storm delta 😂 more like tropical storm doughball!
And don’t call me a dork, ya Dolt!
From October 5th-12th, 2020, Tropical Storm Delta moved to the south west of Grand Cayman where it turned into a category 2 hurricane.
I watched that tropical storm before it hit Cayman then 3 hours afterwards the SMB from Marriott to Royal Palms was gone. Prior to the storm that entire stretch was a full beach. LISTEN to me you freaking dork you’re a complete moron. People that lived on that southern part of SMB know this.
More fake news from Coco The Clown. What even is ‘a full beach’- Like busy, no space? How are you measuring it, Bozo? And of course, it took 7 days to pass… what other made-up nonsense you got for us tonight, empty head?
Hey! Is he a dork or a moron? And are you a clown 🤡 or a doughball?
You sir, are a stranger to the truth.
Ask anyone who lived at Regal Beach Club, Laguna Del Mar, Turkish billionaire. Cayman Reef Resort etc the beach was completely fine nice walk from Royal Palms to Marriott beach chairs everything then Tropical Storm Delta hit and within hours the beach was gone never recovered.
You’re a f***ing tool and don’t have a clue. 👎🏿
If Delta struck in 2020 are you sure it wasn’t Covid that did it?
‘Within hours the beach was gone’… what sensationalist nonsense. No one believes you, Clown shoes. Doubling down on your misinformation too – A tell tale signs of a pathological liar.
I lived at Cayman Reef Resort and confirm it’s true but it was November 7th Tropical Storm ETA as detailed in the Cayman Compass news report that really wiped out the southern beach of SMB within hours. I also have video proof on my cell phone the before and aftermath. https://www.caymancompass.com/2020/11/08/ts-eta-evacuees-return-to-their-homes-clean-up-continues/#:~:text=Strong%20waves%20and%20the%20high,beach%20at%20Seven%20Mile%20Beach.
Yes, we are calling it a stupid idea.
I am so proud to see CAYMANIANS trying to protect our environment. You have every right to stand up for you believe so don’t let the naysayers deter you! Seven Mile Beach is OUR NATIONAL TREASURE so we must fight to try to protect what is left of it!
While preserving your National treasure, clean up the Jamaican higgler garbage on the beach as well.
Had to take a double take to ensure you wrote “higgler”.
It’s just a shame it took a near hurtica e to take some of the beach before anyone decided to do anything and it’s a couple of kids at that. Shame Cayman. Dollars over everything right?
Huge respect for these young people, getting out there and telling the world their concerns.
That takes guts in a small place like Cayman.
Well done.
Lacovia didn’t lose any of its beach. When the westerly winds were blowing, water was lapping up higher, but when the westerly winds dissipated and went back to easterlies, the same beach depth was there.
I live next door and have over 10 years of pictures of that beachfront, and it looks no different today than it did previously.
So definitely hasnt affected this part of the beach yet.
you are straight up lying. go look at the exposed foundation of the cabanas on their beach side and tell me they lost no sand.
A managed retreat ain’t happening. Too many people have too many dollars invested in this. Some will be happy to squeeze every last drop out of their apartment rental, whereas others will be interested in demolition and rebuild further back. Try getting agreement there! Meanwhile, mother nature is doing her own little thing, and she’s more powerful than even the CIREBA cartel.
“Managed retreat” does mean demolition and rebuild.
Sooner or later it is an inevitability. Pay now, or pay more later.
Completely applaud and support these young people. Never let any naysayers detract you from your mission. Protest matters. You are protesting against a wealth machine, however if enough of the people exert their will alongside you, you will have made a difference. You are making a difference already. I will promote your view.
A managed retreat means returning to the standards that sentient people held decades ago — that building too close to the sea was dangerous for the structures, and injurious to the environment. This managed retreat can begin by not approving any planning approvals for new construction that is less than 100 meters (or whatever is decided) from the sea. NO seawalls.
Over time, as these structures that are much too close to the water begin to degrade, they should only be rebuilt — if at all – far away from the sea, much as our ancestors did. I just hope we have even a fragment of Seven Mile Beach left by then. As it is, I can’t see much more than Four miles, and those four miles of beach are MUCH closer to the structures.
Barge in sand and rebuild the beach back to 1990 levels. All the erosion did not happen in one year and the new sand will not disappear in one year. Accept that some sand will have to be brought in every year or so to maintain it. Put a room tax on all DOT accommodation rooms on the SMB corridor to pay for it. Change the planning codes for new construction. A managed retreat will likely take decades.
You need both. Without that agreement then just let those buildings keep tumbling.
There already is a room tax, and Dart was allowed to keep it!
In exchange for critical infrastructure upgrades. There are no free lunches.
“In exchange for critical infrastructure upgrades”
Whose infrastructure? Camana Bay’s?
Nothing has been upgraded outside of their own projects.
So we take the center of Cayman Brac bluff land and turn it into usable fill for Grand Cayman.
How much we need to export over to you? A few hundred acres worth down about 50 feet over so?
Just a thought. And best yet – Government didn’t have to pay me for a consulting fee for this idea.
Sign me,
Export the Brac Bluff to Save SMB
You do know that Mervyn, Dervyn and Paul have essentially already done that, right?
Except that they can make crusher fines — fine gravel — but they cannot make sand, and it isn’t even close to the colour of natural sand. It’s a very bad idea.
You would get more traction to import parrotfish to create more sand in the way it was originally made.
Cancun did a huge beach restoration project about 14-15 years ago. Google for videos. The beach area still exists there today.
There is no endless supply of sand. We humans have already depleted it significantly.
Florida has plenty of sand as we speak. Milton and Helene have piled it high and wide along the west coast.
And it needs to stay there, not be shipped elsewhere.
Why should the tourists pay for it? We didn’t destroy it.
The CPA chairman is involved with the Lacovia project so lets see what he proposes to fix the beach erosion issues their.
He will demand Government fix the beach for free so they can sell the high priced condos, which they probably will use our tax dollars to do it.
Tax Dollars! There is none so blind.
Isn’t Managed Retreat a Ben afflict and Jlo movie ??? Moving the buildings across the road sadly doesn’t work. It starts with sand……just like everywhere else in the world that is beachfront. Florida has been doing it since 1965, rum point was created. Yes seawalls are bad but the idea that we can just move the Marriot across the road. Move Laguna which was built in the late 80’s to where exactly ? The beach will be dynamic and yes more and more sand will be needed over time but this problem has a very simple solution and it isn’t just knocking down buildings
well what is your solution?
Sand replenishment. One way or another. Either import or make the sand. It’s being done successfully in other parts of the world.
why should we the people have to use OUR money to recreate the beach YOU wealthy condo owners refuse us to even sit on?
You block our beach access, put up cones to prevent us parking and send security if we look too hard at your mansions, but now you want US to pay to put back more sand for you to chase us from.
The condo owners would pay for everything, just let them do it
Florida, is comparatively shallow even a mile offshore, whereas our sand is lighter, and pours off a cliff wall of submarine chutes to a plateau at 800-1000 feet. We can’t just scoop it up and redeposit it with ease. I don’t believe there are pumps strong enough to slurp it back up to the surface into a waiting barge for redeposition. That might be the simplest intervention if it were possible. Seven Mile Beach is a remnant of historic super-storms and/or tsunami(s). If you dig down a couple feet, you will hit the wood of mangroves that were entombed by those events.
I am 100% for protecting and saving the beach. However, this idea of a “managed retreat” is both poorly defined and, as I think most people understand it, absolutely ludicrous.
Are you saying that you WANT to demolish these buildings and rebuild them further away from the beach instead of replenishing the beach?
The current estimated cost to replenish the beach is $30m. To demolish and rebuild ONE of those developments will be $30m or more. And what the hell is the point of retreating another 200-300 ft if the beach is going to continue to erode another 50 ft per year.
People advocating for a “managed retreat” had better define exactly what that means because otherwise it’s just a stupid buzzword.
The DOE has NOBODY on staff qualified to say that a managed retreat is the only option. Countless beaches ALL OVER THE WORLD use replenishment regularly to stay viable.
Absolute and utter stupidity, regurgitated by people who have no idea what they’re talking about.
Since you’re anonymous, how do we know that you are any more qualified than anyone else to opine in this? What’s your interest?
I think it’s clear they have some interest in SM Beach front property.
Who gives a crap who I am or what my qualifications are. I’m not driving our environmental policy and advocating for the demolition and reconstruction of billions of dollars of real estate.
I’m surprised I need to spell it out.
You gave some very firm views on what needs to be done, pretending an expertise, or at least some knowledge, on a subject of public interest. But since you did it anonymously, nobody was able to determine whether you were an expert or just another opinionated loudmouth.
They can do so now.
ok since we’re being loudmouths about it.
OTHER experts have said the cost to replenish the beach is in the order of $30m, yes? Agreed?
Look up for yourself the cost of demo and re-construction of a development (Lacovia would be a perfect example) its WAY above $30m, yes? Agreed?
So: why does anyone have to be an expert to point out that demo and rebuild of 1 property is more money than replenishing the entire beach?
NOT TO MENTION: a project like lacovia is only financially viable because they’re building MORE units than were there before. And each and every numpty arguing for a managed retreat are the same idiots protesting higher and bigger buildings on SMB.
Nobody needs to be an expert to know that this plan is half baked crap. Otherwise you could actually defend the argument with some figures instead of crying “managed retreat!”
So now that this post has aged so well have you read Marla’s report on SMB? The one that puts the ANNUAL contribution to our country at a value of $1BILLION USD? The one that values the total real estate on SMB at $6BILLION USD?
And the one that points out the cost of replenishment is a drop in the bucket compared to the annual value of the beach.
For all the idiots who aren’t proficient in math: a billion = 1000Million.
Cost to fix the beach is around $30m. So the annual value is 33x the one time cost to replenish.
Simple enough for you? Expert opinion enough for you?
What they need to be protesting is the gryone at TI. Why is it still there?
Why is TI still there, or the old Hyatt, or Royal Palms, or Cayman Islander…
Or the Glasshouse
Let the sea take it all back and the insurance companies pay them out. They should be fined $500 day for eroded wall laying in seven mile beach waters.
You mean the ones the DOE refuses to permit the removal of? Good luck.
With heavy equipment, quite rightly.
A “group”? Hardly.
No matter where you stand on this or any other topic, it is so good to see our young people getting involved and working to make a difference for our country’s future.
“piss poor” lmao – love it
spot on description of this shambolic administration. and local mla’s generally.
Why pays for it? What government is going to take on such a hot potato?
what is a managed retreat?
if, as suspected, the issue stems from climate change…how do we stop that?
yo, you dont understand what a managed retreat is? it speaks for itself if you ask me. Their walls are too close to the sea! therefore when we get the wave from the climate change the waves crash into their walls causing the back flow motion and eroding the beach. so managed retreat is pulling back all the walls and buildings away from the beach and allowing room for the waves and sand to NATUALLY settle and flow.
pull back buildings from the beach??…good luck with that.
what about rising sea levels?
Mash um all down.
How do you actually propose to do that? Moving a sea wall is one thing. How are you going to move a condo building?
You’re not. You’re going to knock it down and rebuild for tens of millions of dollars and who is going to pay for that.
And what will you do when the next 50 or 250 feet of beach is gone?
Retreat? Like cowards until the waves reach the north sound?
Just replenish the damn sand at least one time and see how long it lasts.
“Managed retreat” is just a buzz word for stupidity.
Note: Government did one replenishment there already. Government knows how long it stays on that beach.
Managed retreat is not a fallacy. It has been achieved in other locations- specifically on flood plains and subdivisions built along sloughing coulees and cliffs.
Instead of rebuilding on floodplains, the land has been reclaimed into public space and parks that can withstand flooding with minimal expense. Houses were not permitted to be rebuilt on the plains stopping the cycle of flood, devastation, high insurance payouts, and rebuild until the next flood.
Coming soon to an island near you.
Replenishing sand creates another economically unfeasible government liability similar to Cayman Airways, Turtle Centre, and other non viable business models that CIG prop up. Replenishing sand would be the next.
It’s not from climate change, it’s from building walls too close to the beach. The sea level rise is likely in the 12″-20″ range per 100 years (which is actually a bigger problem than it may sound). But, whilst a problem, that is a red herring in this context. The sad thing is planning permission was being given out for construction too close to the sea long after the problem was identified.
you can point to no sea wall constructed and any impact of beach erosion…. 90% of sea walls have been there for 30 years but yet somehow they have caused beach erosion in the last 5 years???
Yes, because it was gradual. If it’s climate change how come the climate change only affects the part of the beach where the sea walls are?
Funniest part is, you don’t even know where all the sea walls are.
Absolutely false. You’d know that if you’d been here more than 10 minutes.
The CPA only can approve according to the Jurassic law that is 27 years old and no longer fit for purpose. Until the law is changed and to incorporate the NCC and DOE in the decision process (have more teeth), nothing is going to change, Remember, this law was created before the NCC and the new Constitution was enacted, so it is of great emergency that the law is changed, like yesterday.
Mangroves.
Managed retreat is a fallacy. A myth perpetuated by the DOE. Until they move on and are willing to collaborate on real solutions, nothing will happen.
#soitgo
By banning plastic straws.
My understanding is it would be gradual demolition of buildings at risk of falling into the sea
So a non-starter then. Great “solution “.
But “The” solution nevertheless.
Not even close.
Managed Retreat – Pull the buildings back from the danger area (in this case where the water is coming closer to and now undercutting the buildings/walls/etc.). It is a recognition that, as you say, we can’t stop climate change so we have to adapt to it.
Pull the buildings back – a) no more permits to build that close to the threat (sea), and (b) as buildings become impacted they are not allowed to renovate but required to tear down and not rebuild on the old footprint but further back (managed retreat). Of course this may render some parcels unbuildable. But there are no easy cost-free solutions for climate change adaptation. (And without arguing over how much of this is climate change, ‘natural erosion’, & previous bad development decisions; none of which have easy solutions now.)
The idea started with clearer situations like houses atop crumbling cliffs where clearly ‘managed retreat’ was the only logical option. You couldn’t rebuild the cliff, or build in the air, no matter where your boundary line or the neighbor’s house/wall was built 40 years ago. Now it is asked of flood plains where every decade the river jumps its banks and floods the floodplain. If the flood defenses can’t hold (society can’t afford the money to build them so massive that they hold) then do you stop people building there?
Bringing us to beaches. Where the same socioeconomic calculus continues. And where (for us) the solution is possibly some combination of managed retreat, sand replacement, and small groins/structures to help hold the replaced sand in place longer (nothing is permanent on a beach; if this is not designed by an experienced coastal engineer its going to be another waste of money like all of Marriott’s other boondoggles on their coast). But if the buildings retreat say 100 yards and then 100 yards of sand is added on the sea side that 200 yard wide beach may buy you a beach that is stable over decades (lose/gain 50 yards every year depending on the storms). Or it may be too expensive. Someone (Government) simply has to crunch the numbers before they can make the decision. (Of where the money will come from what the social benefits are, etc.)
And if you think the decision in this area is complicated wait until you get to other parts of our coast where there is no clear social benefit to replacing the sand, and the insurance companies stop ensuring (none insures against a flood every 10 years, be it from a river or a hurricane) and so ‘managed retreat’ is forced by the economic decisions and not managed by the Government.
This is a thoughtful comment, but it’s such an easy solution to just put sand there. What the heck is wrong with people that they can’t allow the condo owners to do that