The Future Is Wet

Montauk was closest to mind at last week’s Express Sessions event focusing on beach nourishment: The results of a recent federal effort to bolster the sandy beaches and protect the hamlet’s business district were visible through the windows of oceanfront Gurney’s, which is safely up on the bluff. But the content of the discussion was of great importance to the entire South Fork: Beach nourishment is either part of the past, present or future for the length of the oceanfront, and even parts of the bay side.

Beach nourishment is expensive, but it’s also largely effective both as a way to maintain a recreational feature that’s essential to the local economy, and to protect landward development and at least temporarily counter the effects of constant erosion. The coastal zone is a dynamic place, and dumping sand is a perfectly human solution for nature’s refusal to accommodate houses and businesses too close to the beach.

There was ample discussion, though, about what comes after beach nourishment: The temporary measures are less effective if we don’t use the time we’ve bought to make more difficult choices, including relocating farther inland. Rising and warming waters, and more extreme weather, all fueled by a rapidly changing climate, make those hard choices more urgent, and they have higher stakes.

Though there were some minor disagreements, it was reassuring to see a panel ranging from coastal geologists to oceanfront property owners to environmental activists and elected officials all agreeing, largely, on the value of beach nourishment. Aram Terchunian, who has spent his career studying the topic, noted that the South Fork benefits from a healthy offshore supply of sand perfect for replenishing the beaches. It can be dredged and deposited — not cheaply but relatively simply.

But there are limits to the protective qualities of a sandy beach. Terchunian noted that a powerful hurricane would overtop even newly rebuilt beaches — and with an active hurricane season predicted this year, and possible any year as volatility ramps up, he mentioned that seawalls farther inland at the most vulnerable points might be prudent. These hard structures are anathema right along the waterfront, because they hasten erosion — but as a last resort, rather than a first, they might be worth considering in some spots. And beach nourishment alone won’t save some land from going underwater — including much of what lies between Montauk and East Hampton.

Bob DeLuca of the Group for the East End noted that the region’s towns and villages have to decide now: If a storm comes along and destroys a house, or a business, along the waterfront, what can be done at that point? May the structure be rebuilt at the same spot? Nobody feels comfortable with the job of requiring “retreat” now — but what about when the ocean inevitably moves into that space? Now is the time to make those difficult decisions and enshrine them in code.

The future, then, definitely includes beach nourishment, and who pays for it over the long term is a necessary question to answer. But that is only one point to ponder: The future is wet, and if there are solutions to be found, we’re all going to have to wade into the troubled waters now.