Stop Dumping Waste on Matunuck-Petition!
Please take a moment to sign this petition. Go to the link listed below. The dredging project/dumping is approx. 1/2 completed. Lets try to minimize the damage.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

WE oppose the dumping of commercial and recreational waste off Roy Carpenters Beach in Matunuck Rhode Island. This waste is a direct result the dredging of the navigational channels in Salt Pond and the disposal of the dredged materials on the sand bar 600 yards off Roy Carpenters Beach. WE believe that this is disastrously affecting the marine and shore environment at, South Kingstown Beach, Green Hill Beach, Moonstone Beach, East Matunuck Beach, Deep Hole Fishing / Surfing area and the Trustom Pond Wildlife Refuge.

WE urge the CRMC and the Army Corps. of Engineers to stop dumping waste mixed with sediment NOW until an appropriate solution can be found.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/matunuck/

I will probably sign this but I would like to see some more discussion on this first. I'm sure a lot of people do not know what happened (and I don't think I know the whole story yet either).

Short version: A dredging project from Gallilee / PJ HOR to make the harbor more navigable (a good thing) was to have it's sediment (decalred non-toxic - yeh right) and deposited off several matunuck beaches for beach replenishment. Problem is, while the contractor says the sand is "clean" IIRC, it is loaded full of debri that has ben dumped primarily off of commercial fishing boats and some of public use for 30 years... The Projo article said that the contractor would be "cleaning" this.

I wonder if our on the scene expert rocktologist has anything he could add :hee: ? Either professionally or simply gut feeling..

Sounds "fishy" to me!:hs:

Exactly what does "clean" mean??

....sounds like another hose job to me.

There was also a petition created by the residents of Roy Carpenters beach practically begging to have the dredging materials deposited there. They are fighting serious beach erosion - the snack bar/beach house and significant parts of the beachfront road all fell into the ocean last winter. The first row of cottages is seriously at risk this year with any major noreasters. This project is intended to help save this community.

Your talking about dredging materials from inside a harbor that has no manufacturing or industrial waste and supports a vibrant ecosystem full of fish. Not exactly Hudson River PCB's.

I think this petition might have good intentions, but in this instance their efforts are misplaced.

BTW -- if a new bar does form in front of the cottages - thats going to be nice structure with parking access.

Stop Dumping Waste on Matunuck-Petition!
Please take a moment to sign this petition. Go to the link listed below. The dredging project/dumping is approx. 1/2 completed. Lets try to minimize the damage.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

WE oppose the dumping of commercial and recreational waste off Roy Carpenters Beach in Matunuck Rhode Island. This waste is a direct result the dredging of the navigational channels in Salt Pond and the disposal of the dredged materials on the sand bar 600 yards off Roy Carpenters Beach. WE believe that this is disastrously affecting the marine and shore environment at, South Kingstown Beach, Green Hill Beach, Moonstone Beach, East Matunuck Beach, Deep Hole Fishing / Surfing area and the Trustom Pond Wildlife Refuge.

WE urge the CRMC and the Army Corps. of Engineers to stop dumping waste mixed with sediment NOW until an appropriate solution can be found.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/matunuck/



Who is "we" in the petition ? And who are you ?

Again - let's discusssssss this like men and not go down the old pi$$in contest route.... ;)

Thanks!

John

all those beer cans are making great little homes for choggies. Stripers love choggies. :btu:

i live in matunick year round and have been watching the beach erode with every winter. if we do not get another storm this winter, we have already lost another 2 feet. i do not know what the complaining is about. we need the sand, otherwise i will have waterfront land, and i cannot afford it. we need the sand.

I agree with slow eddie. matunuck needs that sand. Furthermore, just because a radiator hose and an old oil filter washes up on shore does not mean all of the spoils are contaminated and it certianly does not mean its hazordous. Rather than compalin about it, why not send a petition to organize a beach cleanup.

First off; caps does not = yelling; I just want to make a few points stick out.
Any of the below is just my gut feeling and my personnel take on the situation.


Flotee, what is your affiliation?
Any petition that doesn't specify the who what where when and why needs some help, or they dont want people to know.
Surfrider? Trustom? USFW? Just concerned?

Out of 90,000 cu yd dredged from a harbor, some sh-t will wash up.
Big jay was on the right track.
The sediment is NOT TOXIC, maybe littered but not toxic. The same crap washes off boats all summer and ends up on the beach.
Littered does not = toxic. What they test for doesn't show % of tin cans. The remove anything major (engine blocks etc) but cant screen it all or it would never get done. Pumping instead of dumping might have alleviated some of this but the cost was too high

This sediment is sand that was transported along the shoreline (the whole shoreline) and ended up inside the pond. It is primarily sand-sized material, which does not tend to absorb/trap PCBs, PAH's, metals and all the other unsavory crap.

The stuff washing up (cans etc) ALSO gets to the beach FASTER than sand (due to surface area and sticking up further in the flow) While it is only speculation, if the debris is washing up, some of the sand is as well.

Whatever the ultimate fate of the sand dumped is (i.e. how much makes it to the shoreline) this is still a band-aid on a bullet wound as fas as the overall erosion problem. The Roy Carp's crowd did a lot of work petitioning this. Eventually something will happen to the area around the Mist, as mentioned in the paper, what that is I don't know but it probably means big rocks which means ultimately means no beach.
Remember, if you leave the shoreline alone, there WILL ALWAYS be a beach. It just isn't where people want it to be.

I WONT sign the petition, especially not with know the who, what where when and why.. ANY ONE WHO WRITES OR SIGNS THE PETITION SHOULD THINK LONG AND HARD ABOUT BOTH SIDES. I can tell you from experience, short of a court order, they aren't going to stop the dredging and dumping.

That amount of material WILL NOT be used for upland disposal, so either you would have to pay the $$ th put it in the CAD cells in providence, OR put it offshore, which means it is still in the marine environment. At least what washes up can be cleaned up FAIRLY EASILY FROM THE BEACH.
The same isn't true if the material is put into 130ft of water.

Lastly: IF YOU STOP THE DREDGING NOW THEY WILL NOT MAKE THE DREDGE WINDOW. THE WINDOW IS SET-UP TO MINIMIZE EFFECTS ON FLOUNDER AND OTHER SPAWNING THAT GOES ON IN THE POND. The negative effects of the dredging on those guys probably out weighs any gain from not dumping the material.

You cant please all the people all of the time.
MAYBE THE PLOVERS WILL USE THE BEER CANS AND BUILD THEM SELVES SOME SHELTER :D
(OK THAT was a joke)

I know that they are talking about building a break wall out off the Mist and the Joyce's pub to protect the road there, which will probably make erosion at the SK town beach and carpenter's even worse. The sand is clean, everyone eats the clams that come out of the Great salt pond and that is where most of theis sand came from, getting washed down into the channels of the harbor of refuge. I don't see that it's anything but good for the people who live there. If they don't want it I'm sure east Matunuk state beach will take it.

there. If they don't want it I'm sure east Matunuk state beach will take it.

Mike:
don't go there.
That site was not chosen for reasons.
:D

I am a lifelong local resident, and have been to the beaches today. I will say this -- the amount of debris and junk that has washed up on the beaches is appalling.

I know full well how badly the beaches need replenishment, and this may be a necessary consequence of the dredging. BUT IT NEEDS TO BE CLEANED UP. This effort MAY come from the contractor, but also needs volunteer efforts from the public. We cant sit around and wait for them to respond. The debris is scattered, but very concentrated in some areas and will require many,many dumpsters.

This material did come from the salt pond, but the areas in front of the commercial docks are not exaclty "clean" either. There are large areas of shoaled sand bars away from the harbor docks and in the HOR that will be much cleaner. Personally, I am surprised at the amount of trash that has come from it, and I bet the permitting agencies are as well. We see the stuff that floats, I wonder what is still on the bottom.

These photos are from the townn beach, not to alarming at first glance

Did I say we DO NEED the SAND?

The area to the east of the beaches, and across the bars has a LOT of trash mixed in the seaweed. This area is a pristine coastal environment. The junk can be picked, and hopefully there isnt much more coming

Erosion and the destruction of waterfront property represent a second chance for equitable access....

Yup.
Thats what I saw Bill.
Bad to look at. yes.
Easily cleaned up? yes.
Better here than in 130ft of water? Thats a judgment call.
But they do need sand.

Its going to take a LONG time to get all the lobster bands and small pieces of plastic etc out of the seaweed line

Yeah.
Walk the beach after a good storm and a lot of crap washes up too.
Unfortunate, but it is what it is now.

They say the contractor is supposed to clean it up. I can just picture them saying "hey, I just scooped it up and dumped it like my contract says, I'm not paying for weeks of mantime to pick a mile of shore"

Dont cut your feet at the shore this summer...

It may be in the contract? I don't know specifics like that. Just a geologist :D
My guess is surfrider and/or STB or similar will be out there doing cleanups.

Regarding the Petition, I will not sign it without knowing who authored it and more about their plans. But we do need to put the heat on the people in charge to committ resources to cleaning this mess up

It may be in their contact, but I bet they say this is a bigger problem then was planned, and will therefore be the obligaotry "Extra". :faga:

Bryan, lots of interesting gelogy in action here. I just hope some of the sand washes ashore to offset the impacts

I'll agree with that last statement.
I think any delay or alternate plan is worse. If this came from right in front of the dock (and judging by the beer cans alot of this stuff was buried fairly near the bottom) then the worst is probably over.

As I understand it, after 31 Jan they will be mostly dredging outside the harbor/channel so they stuff should have orders of magnitude less debris.

RiSSA, Narragansett surfcasters and other organization hold beach cleanups in the spring. Someone might ask them to target that particular stretch of beach. I have been on some of these clean ups and they pick up a ton of crap! Enough so a DEM truck has to make several runs to get rid of it.

It always amazes me how much stuff gets thrown on the beach by the surf. I know Cuttyhunks beaches have tons of junk and I'm pretty sure little of it came from the island.

I agree with slow eddie. matunuck needs that sand. Furthermore, just because a radiator hose and an old oil filter washes up on shore does not mean all of the spoils are contaminated and it certianly does not mean its hazordous. Rather than compalin about it, why not send a petition to organize a beach cleanup.:btu:

those pictures tell a sad story....

i would think though ...that they are the "before" pictures

after we get a severe storm then we'll see huge amounts of junk.

Be carefull supporting these petitions. Not sure who is sponsoring this one. Just a week or so ago a surfing group here in Newport was squaking about the artificial reef being built off of Eastons Beach. The reef is clean refuse from the tear down of the old Jamestown Bridge. The surf group was "worried" that the wave break on Eastons Beach would be affected by the artificial reef - they were ready to fight the reef project that we worked years to get approved. An engineer said the reef was to far offshore to affect the waves - things are quiet for now.
Watch out who you support.

DZ

Watch out who you support.
DZ

EXACTLY!
Read both sides
Know what is going on first

so far only 42 people have signed the petition.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/matunuck/signatures.html

I signed the petition on behalf of the residents to allow it to be dumped here, but I maintain that it is worse than was expected.

I know some of the signatures on the current petition, looks like it was probably initiated by the surfing community. They share the same resources we do, event though we sometimes conflict.

I dont believe stopping the dumping of the dredge spoils entirely is the way to ge. We just need a proactive solution to dealing with the mess. The stuff that is there is accessible and can be removed. There is a lot, so it is not going to be "easy", but it still needs to be done.

toonoc if you dont believe that stopping the dredging is the way to go then why did you sign the petition??

The focus of this should be about the trash. beach cleanups, etc. IMO

how about a signup list for volunteers??

I rather pick up junk than to have oil,pcb's,acid or other kinds of chemicals there. it's not pretty but we can clean it up if we all put our minds to it for shure.:bgi: :bgi: :bgi:

I rather pick up junk than to have oil,pcp's,acid or other kinds of chemicals there. it's not pretty but we can clean it up if we all put our minds to it for shure.:bgi: :bgi: :bgi:


PCP?? :smokin:

The sand is needed. Instead of camplaining about the dumping, wew need to go back to the root cause...LAZYNESS!!

People throwing things in the water because once they leave the surface they don't exist any more and they don't need to get hauled off a boat and disposed of properly.

Is it a shame the junk is washing up?? Yes it is, but if we plan to continue defying nature by building on the ever changing shoreline, we need to put the sand back..

Eben, I signed the petition a year or more ago to get the dredge project approved, as the replenshment is needed, NOT the one to stop it. I'll stick by that. Doesnt mean this still isnt a %$%$%$%$ed up situation that needs to be addressed.

Why does the goverment always spend money to save ocean front homes when their time is destine to run out. I do not know the hole story here but the sand might not be a bad idea. The beach is rather thin here.

JKSwim:
W/o knowing the story why comment?

The sand was put here at the behest of residents. They begged and pleaded and the Corps listened. The cheapest alternative would have been offshore, open water disposal. The cheapest 'beneficial' use was to put the sand nearshore and hope natural wave orbital motion would bring the sand to the beach. So that answers the why. They were going to do it anyways, this is a little more expensive. The BEST option was to pump it onto the beach directly but the $$ was way to high.

On June 26,1989, the tanker lsquoWorld Prodigyrsquo ran aground just outside the mouth of the West Passage of Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island, USA. About 922 metric tons of No. 2 fuel oil were released into the water and drifted over a total area of about 120 sq miles. Three days after the spill only a small fraction of the oil remained.
The effects on macrobenthic crustaceans within the first five weeks after the spill were studied at five stations with a varying degree of oil exposure, including one control site never reached by oil from the spill. Significant differencies between these stations were noted for total amphipod abundance, the amphipod genus Ampelisca and ostracods (retained on a 0.3 mm mesh), but not for amphipods of the genus Corophium. At the most heavily impacted station (23 µg oil g–1 sediment dry weight), the total amphipod abundance, dominated by Ampelisca verrilli, decreased by 86% within the first two weeks after the spill. Decreases in total amphipod abundance significantly larger than at the control site were noted also at two other stations, one of which with only trace amounts of oil detected in the sediment. The amphipod populations at these sites were dominated by juvenile specimens.
These findings confirm the extreme sensitivity to oil pollution of amphipods and ostracods, noted in earlier field and experimental studies

On January 19, 1996 the tugboat Scandia and barge North Cape grounded and caught fire off a Rhode Island beach, resulting in the largest oil spill in Rhode Island’s history and devastating losses of marine life and migratory birds in the Rhode Island and Block Island Sounds. A lobsterman who traps lobster approximately seventeen miles north of the spill filed suit in 2002 against those responsible for what is called the North Cape oil spill. The lobsterman’s catch in 2000 was less than half of his catch in 1996. The district court dismissed the claims on summary judgment because it found no actual and proximate cause between the oil spill in 1996 and the lobsterman’s depleted catch.

The North Cape Oil Spill
The weather forecast on January 18, 1996 predicted severe winter storms and high winds over Rhode Island on the day of the North Cape oil spill. Despite the storm warnings, the captain and crew of the Scandia set out for Rhode Island from New Jersey with four million gallons of home heating oil in tow. Failing to heed weather conditions, however, was not the Scandia’s only mistake. The North Cape was being towed without its anchor windlass, which was essential for raising and lowering the barge’s 6,000-pound anchor. Because the windlass was broken, the crew left it behind and depended on a wire and rope rigging to hold the anchor. The crew was instructed to use the makeshift replacement only in an emergency because its use was very difficult.

Emergency ensued as the Scandia ventured into the North Atlantic winter storm and the crew was unable to lower the North Cape’s 6,000-pound anchor because of the storm’s severity. The Scandia’s voyage ended when it and the barge grounded off a Rhode Island beach and caught fire, releasing 828,000 gallons of oil into the water and covering nine miles of Rhode Island shoreline. The vast area of affected waters was closed to fishing for several months. The spill had devastating effects on both marine life and migratory birds in the affected areas: authorities reported removing almost three million dead lobsters from Rhode Island beaches. The oil spill killed approximately nine million lobsters in Rhode Island and Block Island Sounds. A joint task force of federal and state agencies implemented a restoration plan for the oil spill in September of 1996 leading to the placement of 1.5 million lobsters in 2000 as part of the restoration p



I take the beer cans over this any dam time we can clean this crap up

The processes of the past are exactly what is happening now, that is, no matter how much sand you put out there, the longshore drift currents that form barrier beaches on the east coast travel from Maine to Florida. this is a stop gap measure that will not save anyone's precious beach properties that the rest of the taxpayers have to underwrite the Flood Insurance on. In the summer, calm weather (winds) act to accrete (build up) sand along the shore, while rough winter weather tends to take that sand away, deposit some of it offshore, but most of it enters the longshore drift process and ends up in CT, Long Island, Jersey, NC, etc., etc. Go to the beach in August, its all built up, go in March and look what has happened. This process has been going on since time memorial. If we are foolhardy enough to believe we can buck these historic processes with short term measures that waste resources so that a few homeowners benefit to while the rest of us foot the bill, well.... ANyway, look back to the catastroiphic weather events that have changed Narragansett Beach and other south shore beaches, i.e., Hurriucanes, the "Bob"" Storm, etc., you'll get a better understanding of these processes. talk to Jon Boothroyd, URI Geology to get some more info, Jon is a preeminent sedimentologist who has studied this phenom for decades and as his student I learned how to be a better fisherman by understanding that what's under the water, writes the story of "reading the water".

Chuck;
generally right,
BUT look at the beach in Charlestown etc. now.
IT is not a winter beach (erosional) summer beach (depositional)
That works on the west coast, here it is Storm beach (erosional) Fair-weather beach (depositional) whenever the storms happen.

The longshore current acts a bit more locally than that, and is generated by wave action and the angle of waves to the shoreline (i.e. sand from fire island doesn't end up on Misquamicut) The RI south Shore is basically a closed cell from watch hill to Pt J.

Jon is my adviser

PCP?? :smokin:
pcb !!:whackin:

I don't believe any pettitions should be allowed to be posted here unless all the details of the person or organization posting the pettition are disclosed.

I don't want to cloud the issue of disclosure by commenting on the issue at hand.

The person or organization who is asking for signatures should disclose who they are or get the petition off this site.

I also think that nobody with only 4 posts should be posting petitions.

I don't believe any pettitions should be allowed to be posted here unless all the details of the person or organization posting the pettition are disclosed.

I don't want to cloud the issue of disclosure by commenting on the issue at hand.

The person or organization who is asking for signatures should disclose who they are or get the petition off this site.

I also think that nobody with only 4 posts should be posting petitions.

you da man.... exactly my thoughts. (and then some) :btu:

They have been pumping sand on the beaches here in NJ for the last decade..
It is a stop gap measure that ruins the eccosystem for yrs.
Dredge sand is like putting ur finger in a dyke..

NIB:
Depends on the sand source.
They did it last year in Charlestown, taking sand from the pond and onto the beach. no ill effects.

It's no the source as much as the overall blanketing of the structure.
The structure that harbors the begining of life an food chain in the ocean..
Pumped sand will not stay put..The normal flow the the ocean will take it where u might not want it.there is a very nice bar right adjacent to that beach....A 1/2 inch of sand over it would basically ruin the life there...

NIB.
That aint gonna happen there.
Not enough sand being added. Trust the RIR on this one. Thats the work we did for the project.

We have rutgers here to do the leg work..
the army core of engineers is in charge of the work..
Seems they run like a buisness with only keepin the ball rollin as the only agenda..
Many key fishing spots like the great rip at sandy hook where destroyed from the byproduct of beach relenishment never mind all the jetty's directly affected by the dumping...
Of course in NJ our project was Huge in comparison..
My point is sand dumping is still a band aid on the real problem..
In 2 yrs the folks at Matunock will be back to the drawing board..
Alternatives need be explored for a real sollution..

I agree to that last part.
But the scale of this project is small on the grand scheme of things.

Look up in my posts I use the term band-aid on a bullet wound a lot

I guess you guys in NJ have "natural" jetties? :)

I am not as smart as u mako man.
Perhaps u can explain ur last comment to me.
No the jetty's are not natural.they where built long ago.Some extended for 40-50 yds in below the surface..These rock structures where pivitol to our S-B fishery.Well not only where they blanketed in sand but they also took the rocks at the base of the beach on the ones that still extended into the water,.This idea was to help the sand flow from one beach to the next..Now instead of nice deep beaches to swim an fish from. We have these shallow bar
beaches with a rip current that keeps the lifeguards busy all day..
U have to basically take ur life in ur hands to get out on the rockpiles.The current that sweeps through is strong an the sand under foot is shifty..

Just that the "ecosystems" you complain about geting covered over are just as artificial as the pumping sand onto the beaches.

From what I've read about the Jersey project,it was a lot bigger in scale,and not well thought out.Am I correct that they closed herring runs with sand?
The problem at Matunuck needs to be addressed,and as said by Nib,it needs to be permanently addressed.Just the same,they gotta put the sand somewhere.If you ask me(which you didn't,I know)they're doing the right thing,but more needs to be done.

Just that the "ecosystems" you complain about geting covered over are just as artificial as the pumping sand onto the beaches.


So what is ur point..
Do u think what they did was good.
I wish I knew the dollar amounts that the FEDERAL Goverment kicked in.Off the top of my head in the high hundreds of millions an they are not done..for sand that washes back into the ocean..
So rich people can have their water front property..
Ya the jetty's where man made they existed long before I was born.
The life off these elevated structure's provided many hrs of enjoyment for many yrs for all that took advantage..
If it was to Ur enjoyment i'm sure u would see it differently..

wouldnt be surpized if they you could find any plugs..... that s*ucks its a nice spot dont trash it

So what is ur point..
Do u think what they did was good.
I wish I knew the dollar amounts that the FEDERAL Goverment kicked in.Off the top of my head in the high hundreds of millions an they are not done..for sand that washes back into the ocean..
So rich people can have their water front property..
Ya the jetty's where man made they existed long before I was born.
The life off these elevated structure's provided many hrs of enjoyment for many yrs for all that took advantage..
If it was to Ur enjoyment i'm sure u would see it differently..

As I see it, there are lot more people who enjoy the beach than those that enjoy the jetties, plus the jetties are still there. So if its a motter of who gets to enjoy what, I'd say that the money was well spent, since a lot more people enjoy the beach. Either way we are talking about man-made structure, not natural structure.

Wow, those are some tough pictures Bill. My family spends 90% of the weekends in the summer in MTK. Since those beaches are populated by tons of young kids, including my own, this is deeply disturbing. Never mind the garbage, I cannot imagine the amount of dangerous stuff that can harm beachwalkers and kids digging in the sand. Its one thing to clean the surface, but whats lying 1 foot under the sand? Can anyone point me to the article that’s been mentioned?
I know people that have been going there for over 30 years. The beach used to be pretty large in front of the Mist and towards SK beach. It has been gone for years. Many blame the retaining wall that the Carps built to the right of the Mist.
Its really sad that such a beautiful area looks like this.

I don't know the specifics of the coastal dynamics at matunuck, but in general, beach replacement is futile, rediculously expensive and... stupid. In this case, who knows what it will do.

Before the stuff can be dumped there will have to be a completed env impact statement. It would look at the quality of the dredged material and the impact on the ecosystem where it gets dumped and stuff . If people disagree with the eis they can take legal action :rotf3:

just some clarification to some. We're not talking about saving some million dollar homes in matunuck. Its a community of small cottages, trailers, small businesses, town beaches and some classic surfcasting spots with good public access. Its really a spot that time has forgotten and has a lot of value that can never be quantified.
Its sounds like this is a project that has not developed as expected, there may be hope that contractors clean up the mess, sifting through the sand. I do agree that this is a short term solution. Not sure what can be done, but ti would eb a major loss to have this area erode away or become a junk pile

Zimmy,
Do you actually think a state & town sponsored Army corps project like this did not go through an EIS? Give me a break. This wasn't some backdoor deal. It was viewed as beneficial use of dredged material (that was getting dredged anyways)
http://www.nae.usace.army.mil/navigation/publicnotices/PtJudith.pdf

It IS a short-term solution, and according to the paper something will have to change in the future if the town/state decide they need to save matunuck beach Road.

There has already been talk among town Officals and the owners of the property around the Mist and Joyce's about building a sea wall to stop the erosion.

As I see it, there are lot more people who enjoy the beach than those that enjoy the jetties, plus the jetties are still there. So if its a motter of who gets to enjoy what, I'd say that the money was well spent, since a lot more people enjoy the beach. Either way we are talking about man-made structure, not natural structure.


Sure sounds good in theory..Thats why it was such a easy sell.
it should go down as one of the ACOE biggest blunders of all time..
Well the private beach owners thank u for replenishing their beaches..
What difference does it make what kind of structure it is...When black fish that use the structures to harbor their young can't do that anymore because there are no more crabs there..
An the herring that used to come into the ponds can't make it in because the flooms are choked up with sand..Or the inlets become downright dangerous because the they are shoalled in..
They great rip at sandy hook was not a man made structure..
Never Mind the promised access that is a joke.A narrow walkway with no parking..Miles of beach to use for the rich an famous..
U claim the jettys are still there.
What do u know about jetty's???
U seem to be hung up on arguing with me..
Alright I give..

This one's easy.The channel needs dredging,the closest beaches to the channel needed replenishment.A lot more will be needed,but it's a start.

This one's easy.The channel needs dredging,the closest beaches to the channel needed replenishment.A lot more will be needed,but it's a start.


You got that right!

A lot of people wanted the dredge spoils, unfortunately it will be a drop in the bucket. It wont be long before a seawall will be needed to protect structures and the road

This trash can be dealt with. The contractor supposedly has crews out there this week.

Narragansett Surfcasters initiated a clean-up at Deep Hole on Sunday. Well, me and my daughter to start, anyways. The effort was contagious, gave away a couple of bags to someone else, and had a family of four pitching in at one point. We managed to clear about 400 feet of shoreline in front of the lot. There was an article in the Projo today that commented on how there were less cans here (because we cleaned it!), and it even noted a couple of our bags we dragged up to the lot.

We will be back out there Saturday morning at 0900, weather permitting, and will work west. Anybody that wants to pitch in is welcome to help. I should have some bags, or bring some too. Sunday morning is likely as well. We can bitch about it, or do something.

RIRock- GIve you a break :doh: ? Read more carefully.


I didn't imply anywhere that this was getting done without an eis.

My point was that it wouldn't happen until one is done.
The results will show if there are contaminates and what the impact will be.

If one disagrees with the findings get money and fight the findings.

However, this sand will not fix whatever problems are occuring.

As an aside, Matunuck is my favorite place/community just about anywhere.

Just in case someone doesn't see it, there is a meeting at URI Bay Campus tonight. Details are in another thread.

OK Zimmy;
misread.
Sorry about call you out.

RIRock: No problem, thats the way the intranet works. :kewl: