SUPPORTS SBPF
My View
By Kermit Roosevelt
The 100 percent privately funded project proposed by the Siasconset Beach Preservation Fund to preserve 'Sconset beach and address 'Sconset's long-term erosion challenge offers substantial public benefits to Nantucketers. If it is to be constructed, it cannot cause environmental harm, since it

will have to pass environmental muster with the Nantucket Conservation Commission and 10 other state and local agencies. The project is faced with concerted opposition from a group of opponents intent on clouding these facts by asserting a number of distortions unfairly characterizing the project. In that vein, two weeks ago Captain Bobby DeCosta, representing project opponents, shared his thoughts about the project in this space. I don't question Captain DeCosta's sincerity in his feelings of concern. I do question many of his assertions about project characteristics and potential impacts, which presumably arise from his concerns, but which are substantial distortions of the record. Here are some examples of project features and the associated distortions:

Scientific models of the project and experience in other beach nourishment installations have clearly demonstrated that the project will have no lasting negative impacts on the environment.

Distortion: The project "will have devastating affects on the environment."

The project will take approximately three and a half months to complete.

Distortion: The dredging will take "approximately six months."

The project will have two pipelines at any point in time, ultimately using three or four locations and having minimal direct contact with the bottom and therefore virtually no impact on the bottom.

Distortion: The project will have "five pipelines running through the habitat (causing) extensive damage to the bottom."

SBPF will relocate the adult selfregenerating surf clam population from the borrow site to a suitable location and will not dredge any mussel bed at the borrow site.

Distortion: "There are mussels and sea clams in the borrow site. The dredge will suck up these shellfish and the mortality rate will be 100 percent."

Based on a scientific survey of sea duck feeding of the area off of 'Sconset, the areas north, east and south of the borrow site are intensely used by feeding sea ducks and the borrow site itself is relatively unused.

Distortion: The borrow site "is now an important feeding ground for our winter population of sea duck and would be lost."

Beach nourishment has been a widely used beach preservation technology for decades in the northeast and globally, and there is virtually no precedent for destruction of active local ecologies as a result.

Distortion: As a result of prop scour caused by the dredge as it pumps sand onto the beach, "there will be nothing left of the bottom."

Based on extensive monitoring of prior beach nourishment projects, the benthic community in the nearshore area reestablishes itself quickly, in a matter of months.

Distortion: "SBPF's new sand will kill the entire benthic community. There will be nothing for the birds to eat."

To be fair, Captain DeCosta also acknowledged a number of the positive features of the SBPF proposed project, though in each case he went on to downplay the benefit of those features. Again, some examples:

"SBPF states that the loss of cobble habitat will only be five percent of the total cobble bottom". True, based on a meticulous survey and unchallenged.

"SBPF has stated that they will mitigate for any damage done to the cobble bottom or the environment." True, and SBPF fully expects to be held to that pledge by the Nantucket Concom and 10 other state and federal agencies.

"SBPF believes that they can just dump a bunch of rocks overboard and everything will be all right." True: the offsetting cobble will be essentially identical in nature and origin to 'Sconset cobble. Extensive precedent and science indicate that the flora and fauna settling on and among the offsetting cobble will be well established in a year and thoroughly developed within two-to-three years.

"SBPF has stated that the new beach created by the project will create new habitat for endangered birds such as plovers." True. This feature of beach nourishment projects has been promoted by the Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program, and specifically acknowledged in their comment letter regarding the SBPF project.

""SBPF has stated that they will pay the commercial fishermen for any lost income." Again true. SBPF has been willing to offer this guarantee, since based on extensive dialogue with fishermen it has substantially tailored the project to have minimal impact on commercial, charter or recreational fishing.

Again, the SBPF project is targeted at preserving 'Sconset Beach and successfully addressing 'Sconset's long-run erosion challenge. It is 100 percent privately funded and it employs the technology which has been commonly used for decades to address erosion in the northeast and globally. Please vote yes on ballot question number five to ask the Board of Selectmen to approve this

project subject to appropriate conditions. I

Kermit Roosevelt is president of the Siasconset Beach Preservation Fund