Urgent: Jetty Country Groin Notching

[ralphrox]

Consider voicing your opinion to any of these folks (postal addresses, email, website) with rational comments and/or environmental/scientific/historically-based concerns regarding the proposed notching of the follow groins:

Phillips Ave
Roseld Ave
Whitehall Ave
South of Deal Esplanade
Cedar Ave (Allenhurst)
the groin in front of Deal Casino

We have until March. 26th.



Army Corps announces availability of Draft Environmental Assessment for proposed Elberon to Loch Arbour reach of the Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet Beach Erosion Control Project
Public comment period open until March 26, 2014

NEW YORK – The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District announces the availability of the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) and Draft Statement of Conformity (DSOC) for the Elberon to Loch Arbour reach of the Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet Beach Erosion Control Project, Section I – Sea Bright to Ocean Township and the opening of the window for the public to submit written comments regarding those documents.

With the passage of the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013, the Army Corps has been given the authority and funding to complete ongoing coastal storm damage risk management projects and studies in the Northeast, including the Elberon to Loch Arbour project, which was previously authorized as part of the larger Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet project but was not constructed. As part of the planning and implementation process for the authorized Elberon to Loch Arbour project, the New York District has updated prior engineering and design efforts, physical surveys, and environmental compliance in putting together the recently completed Draft Hurricane Sandy Limited Re-evaluation Report (HSLRR).

The DEA and DSOC, as well as the Draft HSLRR for the Elberon to Loch Arbour project and associated documents, are available on New York District’s web site at www.nan.usace.army.mil.

Public comments on DEA and DSOC regarding this proposed work should be submitted to:
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District Planning Division-Environmental Branch (ATTN: Mr. Howard Ruben) 26 Federal Plaza, New York, New York 10278-0090

Public comments can also be submitted by e-mail to Project Biologist Howard.Ruben@usace.army.mil and Project Manager Jenifer.E.Thalhauser@usace.army.mil.

Further instructions for submitting comments can be found in the Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment document on the District’s site. Comments received by March 26th regarding the DEA will assist in the agency’s evaluation of the project changes and will be reflected in the project record.

The Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet project is a partnership between the Army Corps and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
The proposed Elberon to Loch Arbour project calls for the placement of roughly 4.5 million cubic yards
-- more --
NEWS RELEASE
BUILDING STRONG®
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
For Immediate Release:
February 24, 2014
Contact:
Chris Gardner, 917-790-8007
Christopher.P.Gardner@usace.army.mil

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS – NEW YORK DISTRICT
26 FEDERAL PLAZA
NEW YORK, NY 10278
WWW.NAN.USACE.ARMY.MIL
of sand to create a 100-foot-wide beach berm 12 feet above mean low water. The project also calls for the modification of six groins to allow for the movement of sediment and modifications to 16 outfalls to ensure their continued operation after the beach berm is created and to prevent their operation from negatively impacting the newly constructed beach berm.
Pending the Environmental Assessment, required reviews of the Elberon to Loch Arbour Reach Draft Hurricane Sandy Limited Re-evaluation Report and the signing of a Project Partnership Agreement with the DEP, the Corps expects to award the construction contract for the Elberon to Loch Arbour project in summer or fall of 2014.

We need all the help we can get, this is our last chance!!! Even if you don't fish this area please send email and write. think about the negative impact this will have on the habitat and ho dangerous the rips created by notched jetties are.

[Hotrod]

 

[Bucktail]

Ralph,

First of all let me say this "Country Groin Notching" sounds like it could be a show on The Nashville Network.  And it sounds like it might be painful too!

 

All kidding aside, can you educate me (and possibly others on the site) that may not be so familiar with this?  I would like to learn more.

Why should we be against this?  How exactly would this create dangerous rips?  Why do you feel the negatives of this venture outweigh the positive? And what other negative effects would this project cause?

Thanks for your time.
-Bob

[Pfishingruven]

 

I have a little bit of knowledge on this topic, but not enough to make an informed decision on pros vs cons.

 

[IrishAyes]

If this is 'beach replenishment' or some form of that (covering jetties), I believe the main grief is the taking of valuable productive fishing spots for the surf bound fishermen. Taking away the limited structure they have to fish will be another nail in the fisherman's coffin.

[ralphrox]

Irish ayes is correct, but notching the jetties and the beach replenishment progects by the army corps are also huge wastes of money since they will only be providing temporary protection.
Other concerns are also about the habitat destroyed, rips created by the notching and destruction of prime surfing and fishing grounds. Much more information can be found here http://www.stripersonline.com/t/930477/jetty-country-groin-notching

[IrishAyes]

Irish ayes is correct, but notching the jetties and the beach replenishment progects by the army corps are also huge wastes of money since they will only be providing temporary protection.
Other concerns are also about the habitat destroyed, rips created by the notching and destruction of prime surfing and fishing grounds. Much more information can be found here http://www.stripersonline.com/t/930477/jetty-country-groin-notching

Not to mention that the first good Nor'easter we get will wash away all the sand pumped up to the beach. 

Such a waste. 

[ralphrox]

there are now petition at gilgos, fishermans supply and the tacklebox. Please sign them!!!
I have also created an online petition
https://www.change.org/petitions/u-s-army-corps-of-engineers-new-york-district-and-frank-pallone-stop-elberon-loch-arbour-beach-replenishment#share
Please notice that physically signing the petition shows much more concern to the people in charge

[ralphrox]

Notes from yesterdays meeting with the ACOE
Tried like hell but we really didn't get anywhere.

The most important thing to come out of the meeting was an eye opener and came out after the meeting in a conversation in the parking lot. It can be a game changer
According to the representative from the Army Corps, sand replenishment has nothing to do with protecting homes and property. The directive of the sand replenishment project is to impede the loss of land mass.
How many taxpayers, and this is federal money, not just NJ, would back a 30 year 150 million dollar project that wasn't designed to protect towns and homes and is being done in an area that has never lost any more then minor land mass due to the fact that it sits on a 20+ foot high bluff (Elberon / Deal) ??

The general public needs to know this.

Meeting Frank Pallone’s office
Monday June 23, 2014

Re: Sand replenishment and jetty notching

Attending:
Littoral Society
Surfrider
Beach Buggy Association
Shark River Surf Anglers
Asbury Park Fishing Club
StripersOnLine.Com
RFA
JCAA
Allenhurst Town engineer
Deal Lake Committee
State Representative
Army Corps Representatives
Frank Pallone and staff

Items discussed:

Jetty notching
Sand replenishment
Dunes
Removal of the breakwaters (T’s)
Deal Lake Flume
Beach Access

Jetty notching:
The Army Corps concept is that the six longer jetties, that will still protrude past the new pumped sand, would cause the ocean current (which runs south to north) to catch the sand on the south side and scour the sand from the north side causing scalloped uneven beaches and less protection on the north side. Because of this the six long jetties need to be notched to allow the sand to travel up the littoral current unabated keeping the beaches level. This, however, will require new sand being pumped in every few years - forever. The original studies were done and the concept was devised in the 1990’s pre-Sandy.

The Army Corps will not be notching Allenhurst, Roseld, and Whitehall, but are planning on going through with the notching of Marine, Darlington, and Phillips

Our concept is that the sand needs to be held in place and protected by longer jetties and breakwaters in the same way that the Army Corps is currently doing in the Coney Island NY area. The Army Corps claims that Coney Island is different although they never explained why. (I still see no difference).

We claimed that the original science was proven untrue by Sandy who destroyed towns that received replenishment, and had no dunes. Come back to this point after reading the following section on sand replenishment

A few alternative ideas for notching were tossed about, such as pipes going through and walkways going over the notches that could allow access to the ends but the reality is that odds of any of those things happening are exceptionally slim. Pipes would be a danger to swimmers; walkways would be washed out by the first major storm.

Sand Replenishment:

This was extremely enlightening

The most important part of this discussion came in the parking lot after the meeting and this is the first time most of the people attending the meeting will hear this. It seems that we have been looking at the situation in the wrong way. According to the representative from the Army Corps, sand replenishment has nothing to do with protecting homes and property. The directive of the sand replenishment project is to impede the loss of land mass. It was claimed that towards this directive replenishment has worked even better than expected.

With that concept in mind, I can understand the concept having merit on the barrier islands, such as Long Beach island, where land has been lost, but what is the reasoning behind doing any replenishment at all in the areas of Deal and Elberon, both of which sit on top of a twenty foot high bluff and have never been in danger of losing land mass? Additionally the public needs to be educated about this as virtually every person in the state, including those of us at today’s meeting, believed that this project was directed primarily at protecting homes and property.

Dunes:
The Corps has not looked into dunes because of the above, the directive is not to protect homes, rather to retain land mass. Dunes are something to be dealt with between the local municipalities and the state.

Removal of the breakwaters (T’s) on the ends of the jetties:
They are to be removed to minimize danger to swimmers as sand washes away and exposes the rocks. I can understand this at the breakwater in front of Ocean beach Club, but to do this to the remaining breakwaters where swimming is illegal is an egregious waste of taxpayer dollars.

Deal Lake Flume:
There is a problem with sand clogging the flume and impeding the drainage of the lake and the migration of fish. Options were discussed as to how to deal with this. I need to leave these explanations to the people at the meeting who are more familiar with the situation and better equipped to discuss the details.

Access:
The Army Corps and the state are saying that access will be enhanced in the area with two more street ends being opened to provide additional entry ways to the beaches. Tim Dillingham of the Littoral Society brought up an important point asking for legislative guarantees that all access point will remain open forever. It is mainly a legal issue that needs to be explored. We also pressed the point that access is meaningless without parking.