By Peter Brace
Fred Singer and his family have photographs of their house at 63 Baxter Road from the days when people rode horses along the ever-dwindling bluff trail that’s still open to public pedestrian travel.
What’s left of the ‘Sconset Bluff Walk that traverses the Singers’ and 31 more properties from the top of North Gully Road north to Bayberry Lane - erosion having erased the trail from the 19 properties beyond 71 Baxter Road leading up to the former site of Sankaty Head Lighthouse - endures as a popular tourist attraction and is part of the charm of Nantucket’s eastern-most village, which has existed since the 1600s.
Singer is a member of the Siasconset Beach Preservation Fund (SBPF), which Nantucket voters, a bed of blue mussels and a proposal for a coastal management plan have pushed back on its heels since last winter.
“You can’t replace tradition and history,” said Singer of the possible loss of the trail and homes along the bluff from ongoing erosion.
“Only two families have owned our house in over a century,” explained Singer. “These traditions, these historical properties are worth fighting for. They were not just built five years ago; they are integral to the history of the village. The irony is that there are lots of possible solutions. We could put boulders along the bluff like they do elsewhere in the country, we could nourish the beach, but right now it’s total paralysis.
“As the political fever around this subsides, maybe residents and the town council can prevail,” said Singer hopefully.
Homeowners stymied
The summer of 2008 brought Nantucket one of its slowest summer tourist seasons in history.With charter fishermen reporting great fishing for striped bass and bluefish along the island’s eastern shore, many of them feared future fishing would be harmed by SBPF’s planned dredging of sand to help widen the ‘Sconset Bluff beach several hundred feet into the ocean.
For now, those anglers expect good fishing to continue in that area as the SBPF beach nourishment project idles after being squelched on several fronts. During hours of exhaustive, posterior-numbing public hearings before Nantucket’s Conservation Commission from spring 2007 through early 2008, coastal engineers and biologists unloaded reams of minutiae on everything from marine bird, plant and animal species, sand grain size compatibilities, dredge ship styles, currents, mitigation strategies and erosion dynamics.
In the end, SBPF withdrew its application from the Conservation Commission in face of mounting opposition and is now mulling its options. From the sound of things lately, it doesn’t seem likely that the ocean-side Baxter Road residents and their off-bluff supporters will be doing much of anything other than maintaining their current bluff “terracing” installations.
They certainly won’t be finishing their plans to dig up 1.9 million cubic yards of sand from a shoal three miles off Sankaty to rebuild their beaches from the lighthouse down to Codfish Park, at least not until the town and the state complete coastal and ocean management plans, respectively.
“We have no plans [right now],” said SBPF Executive Director Cheryl Bartlett, who is on leave from her erosion battle to work public relations for Boston’s Department of Public Health. “What’s been going on is we’ve been looking at all the options.
I guess we’ll always look at beach nourishment as an option. We’re looking at what kind of short-term things we can do while we wait for the coastal management plan. Beach nourishment may have some role in this.”
“What we learned through this is there are limits to the ConCom’s jurisdiction, that just because they permit a project, doesn’t mean that this project is going to be in the best interest of the island’s citizens,” said D. Anne Atherton, treasurer of the Coalition for Responsible Coastal Management.
Although SBPFmostly discounts its significance while project detractors stress its importance, the discovery of blue mussel beds on the shoal-mining site was cited by the opposition as an example of marine life in the area that could be damaged beyond just the burying of sponges, sea worms and rockweed.
A resounding “No”
Further pulling SBPF down into the morass of a ‘no-action’ alternative was Question Five on this spring’s Nantucket town election ballot, which asked, “Shall the Town of Nantucket allow the Siasconset Beach Preservation Fund to construct upon, and nourish, the Townowned coastal beaches on the East side of the Island?”
A resounding 2,864 voters said “No” to SBPF while 470 said “Yes,” results that came after what many local observers thought was one themost heated political campaigns on Nantucket in recent memory.
“I think it’s very sad that the referendum ever happened because it wasn’t part of the normal process,” said Kermit Roosevelt, a founding member of SBPF and resident of the bluff. “On the contrary, it seems to me it was designed to short circuit the process, which it did. It was asking people to make an advisory decision on something before it was mature.” The third leak in its foundering boat and the one that is preventing SBPF from doing anything but maintain its existing installations, was an effort spurred on by Town Clerk Catherine Stover-acting as a private citizen-for the town to produce a coastal management plan through this year’s annual Town Meeting.
The article called for the cessation of all erosion control projects on the east shore until the end of 2010 when that plan would be presumably ready.
“I am, of course, very disappointed,” said Singer. “Beach nourishment is successfully done in hundreds of communities across the United States. I personally have visited many of them. Why Nantucket is the only place in the world where it is not possible to implement a proven solution is baffling. Unfortunately, this particular project became a lightning rod for a lot of other issues. It’s sad we missed this opportunity for a win-win. The problem is not going away whether we ignore it now or not.”
Wary opposition
Several weeks before Nantucket’s town elections on April 15, island residents began receiving post cards in their mail from SBPF. One showed a blonde woman holding her infant child over her head, on a beach nowhere near the shores SBPF wanted to save proclaiming, “I want my kids to enjoy ‘Sconset Beach…just as I did.”
Another showed a father and his son, both in shorts, skipping along in breaking surf on an unidentified beach with the words, “I’m pro-environment and pro- Nantucket” at the top of it.
As the postcards filled mailboxes and post office boxes around the island, survey workers hired by SBPF canvassed the island informing islanders on the community benefits of their project and SBPF’s environmentally friendly stance.
That campaign elicited confusion and disgust from many and in response hatched the political action committee Coalition for Responsible Coastal Management, which adopted the slogan, “Ask any Fisherman: Beach nourishment is bad for ‘Sconset.” The group’s sole mission was to get out the “No” vote on Question Five. The Coalition struck a chord of widespread dissent for many year-rounders, who while claiming to be sympathetic to the plight of their wealthier neighbors along Baxter Road dismissed the massive project as one done for mostly private interests with inadequate regard for negative environmental impacts.
Many perceived that SBPF was putting concern for their property above interest in preserving public lands and waters. But what became abundantly clear was that beach nourishment as a method of erosion control was not something most Nantucketers were willing to embrace.
“I’ve been very involved in the community for 20 years, with a whole host of issues, and I have never seen the uniform agreement on something among all different parts of the community [like] I did for this,” said Atherton. “I’ve been thinking, ‘Why was there such widespread response to this proposal?’ I think it was because Nantucket citizens have great respect and reverence for environmental conditions that make Nantucket Nantucket and they don’t want to interrupt them.”
Underscoring the Coalition’s victory was the unanimous Town Meeting “Yes” vote on Article 67, which initiated creation of the town’s coastal management plan and automatically put on hold all erosion control projects on town-owned properties, which includes much of the beaches in front of Baxter Road, leaving SBPF to beef up its terracing installations and its members to consider other options.
“It’s sort of self-help for individual homeowners and if it turns out there is no possibility of doing beach nourishment, it is entirely possible that some of them will resort to ‘hard armoring,’” said Roosevelt.
Shoring up
SBPF originally installed terracing consisting of large sheets of coir fiber made of coconut husks. The coir fiber sheets, like large fishnets, were folded accordionstyle from the toe of the bluff up the face, with each fold filled with sand.
Pressure treated four-inch-by-four-inch posts are used to hold the coir fiber mats and sand in place, along with 16-inch wide pressure- treated planking attached to the posts to further strengthen these bulwarks. SBPF also placed sand-trapping plastic Dune- Guard fencing at the bottom of the bluff to help shore up the toe of the bluff.
Recently, members have put in jute fiber bags filled with sand, sewn together and secured in a similar fashion. Right now, this is all that stands between members’ properties and the ocean. But all of those erosion abatement measures permitted by ConCom could be in jeopardy now before the raging nor’east- ers that regularly whack Nantucket during the winter.
Stover has filed since filed another warrant for the special Town Meeting scheduled for next spring, a law that could end all SBPF erosion control activity. Her article asks voters to terminate SBPF’s license from the town to use the public beach along Baxter Road and requires SBPF to remove its entire beach dewatering equipment, Dune-Guard fencing and bluff terracing. If voters adopt this Stover article, the bluff and beach below it could be left unprotected, with property owners forced to take the future of their homes into their own hands. SBPF’s beach nourishment as a trial run for saving other dwndling parts of the island such as Sheep Pond Road and Smith’s Point in Madaket could lose support as an island-wide option.
“I think it is potentially a good idea to have a comprehensive solution,” said Singer speaking of the town’s coastal management plan proposal. “We are approached daily by other parts of the island worrying about their coastal shores. They were hoping we could be a test situation since we had agreed to finance it all privately. As I said, it’s a myth this issue is going away politically or legally, it’s just a matter of time before a crisis forces action, and then, of course, we won’t have the benefit of time or large private financing support.”
Common ground?
There is, of course, always hope. “A number of individuals have approached us and said they are not opposed to some sort of compromise,” said Roosevelt, “and we are optimistic that once we’re through with this coastal management plan, a compromise can be reached, and we take this as a very positive sign.”
The ‘Sconset bluff residents have so far signaled their unwillingness to follow the lead of growing numbers of Smith’s Pointers who lack the funds for a coordinated effort, so are now in various stages of relocating their cottages either further north of the advancing ocean or to new lots well inland. Many Baxter Road residents lack deep enough lots to move their houses, and some have already moved their houses once or twice.
Meanwhile, Bartlett and members of SBPF take heart in the knowledge that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is working on a statewide ocean management plan mandated by the state’s Oceans Management Act of 2008, which would probably supersede local legislative efforts. Signed into law in May by Governor Deval Patrick, the act does prohibit the mining of offshore sand but exempts projects including SBPF’s that were permitted by the state prior to its adoption.
“I think that a holding program of toe protection is about the only thing we can do until such time as we can see what the coastal management plans will provide,” said Roosevelt. “It’s interesting noting that there is only one coastal management plan in the state and that the coastal management plan addresses the issue of erosion and that the preferred method of beach erosion control is beach nourishment.”
SBPF, which acknowledges that it is examining all options at this point, believes that by the time the town’s coastal management plan is in place they will have found some sort of a method that works for its members and is tolerable to the island as a whole.
Singer stressed that he is optimistic about finding some common ground between SBPF and their opposition, knowing full well that the Baxter Road neighborhood won’t be the only loser as the Bluff crumbles away.
“Again, if my house goes, the rest of ‘Sconset is likely to suffer hundreds of millions of dollars in lost taxes and the destruction of traditions that are over a century old,” said Singer.
“I hope that is not the case. Right now, the only sure winners are going to be lawyers and the special interests who make their money around the conflict. That unfortunately is all too often what happens. But I am hopeful a win-win can be negotiated.”
Peter B. Brace is the environmental, and growth and development writer for The Nantucket Independent. His articles can be found at www.acknews.com.