More beach replenishment 3/2/20:

[crookedbucktail]

Question if tax payers that get slam with property taxes are paying for the sand replenishment and taxes being
used for protecting houses for wealthy beach homeowners which the majority of them make a ton of money renting this in the summertime investors don't we should have free access why pay beach entrance to those beaches. Why paying for beach badges then? Is being paid upfront.

[PortlyRedhead]

Originally Posted by crookedbucktail

Question if tax payers that get slam with property taxes are paying for the sand replenishment and taxes being
used for protecting houses for wealthy beach homeowners which the majority of them make a ton of money renting this in the summertime investors don't we should have free access why pay beach entrance to those beaches. Why paying for beach badges then? Is being paid upfront.

Beach Replenishment funds come from federal, state, and local sources.

Those beach replenishment funds also protect small businesses that pump millions of dollars of sales tax into state coffers each summer.

Rental inventory is down along the Jersey Shore as many homeowners do not need rental income to afford their second (or third or fourth) home. Ask local merchants about their midweek revenue in July 2019 vs July 2009 vs July 1999.

Beach badge revenue helps local municipalities to fund lifeguards and beach cleaning processes.

[dales529]

Originally Posted by Brewlugger

The replenishment program is also destroying the offshore areas where the sand is being removed. They turned the Harvey Ceadars lumps into a wasteland.

Exactly Brew and this is my major issue with the whole thing. They tap the larger grain sand from the lumps 2-7 miles off the beach as the "finer grain sand" near the beach isnt good enough. Manasquan ridge, Barnaget Ridge, Seaside lumps, Oles Lump, the Humpty Dumpty etc etc. Not to mention the process restricts boat access to areas that typically hold fish that wont during and after the process

[Capt Sal]

Pallone is a career politician that i have no use for. Spoke many times with him he is part of the swamp. Second if it is FEDERAL MONEY we should have access to the "private beaches''. The rich get what they need but you can't go on that beach???????

[Gumada]

You are allowed on those beaches, but only from the high water mark to the waters edge. So, how the towns in question keep you off is to eliminate parking on all streets and close by access to said beach. If they take any tax money, local, state or federal they should be required not only to allow beach access, but also provide reasonable requirements to facilitate that access.....

[Solemate]

Where is the EPA studies on these projects? What about the clams worms crabs etc that are impacted as well as the fish that feed off them?

[Mike K]

Thanks for sharing and I respect everyone's opinion on this matter.

Is there a negative environmental impact? Yes. How significant? Nobody knows for sure, but I can tell you that in Ocean City where I spend every summer we've had many replenishments. Might take a few months but the fish come back. Last summer we had the best run of Kingfish in years. Yes, there not Stripers but show me where in the Northeast they're still slamming the Stripers in the surf.

As for welfare for the rich, maybe, but you should first come to the Atlantic City, Ocean City or Wildwood beach in the summer and see all the "millionaires" (yes, even Wildwood has had beach replenishment). :-)

As for tax dollars - I'd rather spend them here than give them to the Ethanol industry. I'm just saying.

PS Some people forget that after Sandy, there was NO beach in many of our towns.

[retiredfireguy]

It is getting close to election time. Pallone has come out of his office to sprinkle some sand on the beaches so everyone will say what a good job he is doing and vote for him. He will then retreat to his office till the next election.

[Hookmanski]

Chiming in here - there was a replenishment on LBI around 4-5 years back. After sandy, waves were hitting the bulk head at the end of the blacktop and there was zero beach.

The beaches were definitely hurting after the replenishment in terms of sea life, but this summer we had more life on the beach at my grandmothers street than I've ever seen in 24 years of going down there. Dolphins, baitfish, game fish, birds, and everything in between. My dad fished on that beach every year for 10 years and at most caught a snapper blue or a small kingfish. I caught more fish off the beach last year than he did any year before the replenishment.

Not a scientist or anything, just my 2 cents, but while the beaches may be adversely affect to start they seem to rebound. At least in some cases.

[Fishguy1]

So why continue to subsidize a bad idea? Building on the oceanfront is just stupid. The beaches here ebbed and flowed for eons and then we come along and think we can stop it so some rich a**hole can walk out his back door and enjoy the view. Most of the beachfront houses in Deal are not year round residences. Think about that. A multi-million dollar beachfront house that is just another property to the wealthy then they have the nerve to ask for federal and state tax dollars (which make up the majority of the funds for the project) when the INEVITABLE happens. Then they have the unmitigated audacity to tell regular folks they can't access the beach we all paid for. It's absurd.I say there should be a buy out, which in the long term would be cheaper than the rinse-repeat cycle of rebuilding/replenishing. Bulldoze it all, let nature take it's course. If you choose to say you're on your own. No FEMA money. Get your own insurance. "But the insurance would be astronomical!" YES BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE! The insurance companies know how risky it is to live there and they RELY on the knowledge that US taxpayers will step in and mitigate all losses when the INEVITABLE happens again. This is the business model of our times, guys. This is welfare for the rich.