March 15, 2006 Protect our precious, popular beaches

Here is another response to the Pilkey/Coburn letter. This one is in the Herald Sun a paper that serves Durham, Chapel Hill and RTP.


At 7:56 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I will comment on only a few of the half-baked comments in Mr. Linblad of Pine Knoll Shores' letter that attempts, as others have done, to rebuke Pilkey and Coburn.
(1) Linblad accuse Pilkey of "half-truths" and then lays out many of his own. (a) he says "one of the major reasons" that Carteret voted down a beach nourishment referendum was lack of beach access. Yet Limblad never states the other reason(s) such as $$$$ and who pays., (b)Linblad says the "very residents" who live on Bogue Banks are now paying for beach nourishment. Not so, Mr. Linblad; for 97% of the cost are borne by oceanfront property owners who do not make their home there year round. In fact, you could put all of the year round residents of Bogue Banks (who pay about 3 % of the costs) into a high school auditorium.
In closing, Mr. Linblad did not need to add his address for readers to know from whence he comes (lives). Without fail, 95% of the attackers against Pilkey's renown expertise come from people who have the most $$$ to lose if this nation stops doling out everyone tax dollars to protect those who insist on building too close to the ocean.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home