|
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 |
Quote:
|
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. |
right on SaltHeart
Quote:
|
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. |
Quote:
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
|
Quote:
|
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/naviga...s/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.
|
Quote:
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.
|
Quote:
You got that right! |
2 Attachment(s)
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
|
1 Attachment(s)
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:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com