If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(South Jersey Courier-Post)   Flooded by Hurricane Sandy, coastal town considers salt marshes and oyster reefs to minimize future flooding. Better known as "putting back the things that naturally protected us before we destroyed them"   (courierpostonline.com) divider line 47
    More: Obvious, Asbury Park Press, barrier islands, floods, Superstorm Sandy  
•       •       •

4335 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jan 2013 at 12:34 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



47 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-20 12:35:49 PM  
EPA Lawsuit to stop this in 3... 2... 1...
 
2013-01-20 12:37:58 PM  
What, you mean farking over the environment for personal profits might have CONSEQUENCES? What Commie bullshiat is this?!
 
2013-01-20 12:38:39 PM  

Brick-House: EPA Lawsuit to stop this in 3... 2... 1...


It might disturb the habitat of the Orange-faced Guido.
 
2013-01-20 12:38:54 PM  
Good idea in theory, but it generally requires buying property, displacing people and removing buildings, all of which is expensive. Hard for a town to justify such an expense, even if it helps in the long run. But if the land isn't developed, it makes it a lot easier. Urban growth boundaries to prevent sprawl into natural barriers are like the ounce of prevention that are worth the pound of cure...
 
2013-01-20 12:39:27 PM  
Ba but, but,my condo won't have a seaside view anymore.

/
 
2013-01-20 12:40:33 PM  
Yeah, it's obvious, but it's amazing how many people just refuse to look at how natural processes can be beneficial to us all. From mangrove swamp eradication near resort areas to wetland destruction throughout the interior of the country, we've made an all out effort to make life as difficult as possible for ourselves. But oh well, your view of the ocean from your multi-million dollar home is much more important than those sea grass marshes that you dredged out in the bay. Now you'll really get to see the ocean up close!
 
2013-01-20 12:41:08 PM  

StopLurkListen: Good idea in theory, but it generally requires buying property, displacing people and removing buildings, all of which is expensive. Hard for a town to justify such an expense, even if it helps in the long run. But if the land isn't developed, it makes it a lot easier.


I would say having the town wiped off the map would make it a lot easier to do this.
 
2013-01-20 12:41:15 PM  

whatshisname: Brick-House: EPA Lawsuit to stop this in 3... 2... 1...

It might disturb the habitat of the Orange-faced Guido.


Those things are like zombies, they must be wiped out on sight before they destroy us all.
 
2013-01-20 12:41:31 PM  

Evil Mackerel: Ba but, but,my condo won't have a seaside view anymore.

/


Not only that, in 20-40 years the town will just rezone it and throw in more luxury apartments and parking again when the town rezones it. Property tax and and local back patting (money) will win out, always does.
 
2013-01-20 12:47:47 PM  

LordJiro: What, you mean farking over the environment for personal profits might have CONSEQUENCES? What Commie bullshiat is this?!


============

Yup. It ain't Murican, I tells ya'. It's time to restore Murica.....restore it to 1830.....I haven't been to a slave auction in a coon's age.
 
2013-01-20 12:49:57 PM  

Evil Mackerel: whatshisname: Brick-House: EPA Lawsuit to stop this in 3... 2... 1...

It might disturb the habitat of the Orange-faced Guido.

Those things are like zombies, they must be wiped out on sight before they destroy us all.


=================

That's not what they are worried about. They don't want to disturb the paychecks of the $150K cops and $250K school superintendents. You can't send a property tax bill to an oyster.
 
2013-01-20 12:51:26 PM  

Fissile: LordJiro: What, you mean farking over the environment for personal profits might have CONSEQUENCES? What Commie bullshiat is this?!

============

Yup. It ain't Murican, I tells ya'. It's time to restore Murica.....restore it to 1830.....I haven't been to a slave auction in a coon's age.


Was it so bad back then?
 
2013-01-20 01:02:49 PM  

Fissile: Yup. It ain't Murican, I tells ya'. It's time to restore Murica.....restore it to 1830.....I haven't been to a slave auction in a coon's age.


lounge.moviecodec.com
 
2013-01-20 01:13:37 PM  
Same as it ever was. Florida spent a billion over a hundred years in attempts to eradicate the Everglades, which wasn't such a good idea and now they're spending billions restoring it.
 
2013-01-20 01:17:59 PM  
We need to teach the rich to hide in the underground parking during floods...

It's the only way to make effective change...
 
2013-01-20 01:23:00 PM  

whatshisname: Brick-House: EPA Lawsuit to stop this in 3... 2... 1...

It might disturb the habitat of the Orange-faced Guido.


Drill.
 
2013-01-20 01:23:05 PM  
It takes a very Special Stupid to build a "permanent" structure on the shore of a lake, river, ocean.
Cute cabin, fine, disposible.
 
2013-01-20 01:23:43 PM  

catzies: Same as it ever was. Florida spent a billion over a hundred years in attempts to eradicate the Everglades, which wasn't such a good idea and now they're spending billions restoring it.


Thank the sugar industry for causing that situation in the first place.

And of course the sugar industry tried to fight restoring the Everglades tooth and nail as well.
 
2013-01-20 01:24:48 PM  
Honorable mention to volcanos, glaciers, fault lines and ground zero.
 
2013-01-20 01:26:59 PM  
How long have environmentalists been saying, "If you screw this up now, you're gonna have a BAD TIME later?"

Well, it's later, biatches. Now at warp speed, thanks to other things we've screwed up.
 
2013-01-20 01:27:30 PM  

StopLurkListen: Good idea in theory, but it generally requires buying property, displacing people and removing buildings, all of which is expensive. Hard for a town to justify such an expense, even if it helps in the long run. But if the land isn't developed, it makes it a lot easier. Urban growth boundaries to prevent sprawl into natural barriers are like the ounce of prevention that are worth the pound of cure...


You're right. This is all going to be really, really hard to pull off, so we'd better just quit while we're ahead.
 
2013-01-20 01:34:26 PM  

Mrtraveler01: catzies: Same as it ever was. Florida spent a billion over a hundred years in attempts to eradicate the Everglades, which wasn't such a good idea and now they're spending billions restoring it.

Thank the sugar industry for causing that situation in the first place.

And of course the sugar industry tried to fight restoring the Everglades tooth and nail as well.


The sugar industry in this country makes the corn industry look like a bunch of church marms.
 
2013-01-20 01:34:56 PM  
As a Florida boy overly familiar with coastal building requirements and their environmental concerns, to hear about the lack of all this stuff in NJ is just baffling to me. I considered getting my NJ license to help out with some of this stuff up there but there's two major drawbacks I see. First, no one will want to hear what I've got to say, so no one would hire me except for maybe some government job. Second, I'd have to spend a lot of time in NJ.

If they don't change their ways, they'll be sorry. THE END IS NEAR! HEED MY WARNING!
 
2013-01-20 01:39:21 PM  

sxacho: As a Florida boy overly familiar with coastal building requirements and their environmental concerns, to hear about the lack of all this stuff in NJ is just baffling to me. I considered getting my NJ license to help out with some of this stuff up there but there's two major drawbacks I see. First, no one will want to hear what I've got to say, so no one would hire me except for maybe some government job. Second, I'd have to spend a lot of time in NJ.

If they don't change their ways, they'll be sorry. THE END IS NEAR! HEED MY WARNING!


============

I'll un-baffle you. NJ is the most corrupt state in the Union. Yes, even more corrupt than Illinois.
 
2013-01-20 01:53:00 PM  

Fissile: sxacho: As a Florida boy overly familiar with coastal building requirements and their environmental concerns, to hear about the lack of all this stuff in NJ is just baffling to me. I considered getting my NJ license to help out with some of this stuff up there but there's two major drawbacks I see. First, no one will want to hear what I've got to say, so no one would hire me except for maybe some government job. Second, I'd have to spend a lot of time in NJ.

If they don't change their ways, they'll be sorry. THE END IS NEAR! HEED MY WARNING!

============

I'll un-baffle you. NJ is the most corrupt state in the Union. Yes, even more corrupt than Illinois.


Could be worse, it could be like New Orleans which is just as corrupt as NJ and Illinois minus the efficiency.

Say what you want about NJ and Illinois, but at least they get shiat done.
 
2013-01-20 02:05:26 PM  
cmsimg.courierpostonline.com
"But what you're really doing is interviewing for your own job!"
 
2013-01-20 02:17:13 PM  
As usual, short-term stupidity = long term pain.
Maybe next time some developer corporate money-grubbing asswipe decides that the farking view (and the resulting $$$) from that beachfront crap they want to build the locals will think about this sh*t and tell them to GTFO.

Or they'll just bribe the city and county councils and planning boards and any other politician who's involved, and tear sh*t up anyway like they usually do. Not like the builders will be living there... why should they care?
 
2013-01-20 02:24:27 PM  
So are the lower halves of Louisiana and Florida going to be replaced? It's only been what, 40 years or so since restoring wetlands and controlling development?
 
2013-01-20 02:32:10 PM  
Good for them. I've been saying that this should be a priority since Hurricane Katrina, if not before.

Some things that protect us from storm surges and other Acts of God:

coral reefs
mangroves
marshes
sand bars
oyster beds
sea grass meadows
kelp forests
natural river flow and sedmentation
deltas
beaches
flood plains

Not only should we restore those we have destroyed and protect those we have not destroyed, but we should not build residential housing on them. They are flooded regularly. Instead of building vulnerable suburbs (full of poor people or rich people, which means us people in the middle will foot the bills even if we don't live there ourselve) we should build parks, bicycle paths, recreational areas, and other things that are easily vacated in times of crisis and which can be rebuilt relatively quickly and cheaply when they are destroyed.

I think hotels are OK also as long as they are built to withstand disasters. Tourists are likely to leave during a hurricane any way.

We should have figured out by now that it is not nice to fark with Mother Nature. And it is getting more costly each year. I don't want to pay for rebuilding the mansions of the rich when they burn, drown, slide into the valley, etc. I don't like to see the poor abandoned to their doom by eggregious politicians and racist SOBs either. They get pushed into the path of tornados, floods, storm surges, and other disasters because real estate con artists lobby politicians with buckets of money to allow them to ignore the environmental and safety issues of building on flood planes and former swamps. Screw real estate developers.

We end up picking up the tab for billions of dollars of externalities just as we do with anybody who lobbies the Government. You don't see people who grow healthy food advertising, marketing and lobbying us all to death. No, they can't afford it. It is the crap-mongers of this world who spend the big bucks to make sure we are docile, silent, and helpless victims of their exploitation, theft, and greed. Screw 'em all. Big Tobacco. Big Coal. Big Ag. Big Real Estate. Big Asbestos. Big Pollution. Every con artist man jack knave of them.
 
2013-01-20 02:32:23 PM  
I love you Subby that was awesome.
 
2013-01-20 02:35:41 PM  
Bwahahahaha!
Pwned by a hurricane, and now learning their lesson.

I wonder when they'll learn that when a government says it's there to help, that means you're about to get farked up the @rsehole.
 
2013-01-20 02:39:30 PM  

snocone: It takes a very Special Stupid to build a "permanent" structure on the shore of a lake, river, ocean.


Well, then it's a good thing our leaders in Congress and the White House carefully considered this possibility and acted accordingly based on sound environmental science, instead of throwing 60 billion dollars around because they were more interested in capitalizing on the emotions of the moment.
 
2013-01-20 02:48:58 PM  

Gulper Eel: snocone: It takes a very Special Stupid to build a "permanent" structure on the shore of a lake, river, ocean.

Well, then it's a good thing our leaders in Congress and the White House carefully considered this possibility and acted accordingly based on sound environmental science, instead of throwing 60 billion dollars around because they were more interested in capitalizing on the emotions of the moment.


Wish they would just say so.
Oh, right, you can't handle the truth.
 
2013-01-20 02:59:28 PM  

brantgoose: Good for them. I've been saying that this should be a priority since Hurricane Katrina, if not before.

Some things that protect us from storm surges and other Acts of God:

coral reefs
mangroves
marshes
sand bars
oyster beds
sea grass meadows
kelp forests
natural river flow and sedmentation
deltas
beaches
flood plains

Not only should we restore those we have destroyed and protect those we have not destroyed, but we should not build residential housing on them. They are flooded regularly. Instead of building vulnerable suburbs (full of poor people or rich people, which means us people in the middle will foot the bills even if we don't live there ourselve) we should build parks, bicycle paths, recreational areas, and other things that are easily vacated in times of crisis and which can be rebuilt relatively quickly and cheaply when they are destroyed.

I think hotels are OK also as long as they are built to withstand disasters. Tourists are likely to leave during a hurricane any way.

We should have figured out by now that it is not nice to fark with Mother Nature. And it is getting more costly each year. I don't want to pay for rebuilding the mansions of the rich when they burn, drown, slide into the valley, etc. I don't like to see the poor abandoned to their doom by eggregious politicians and racist SOBs either. They get pushed into the path of tornados, floods, storm surges, and other disasters because real estate con artists lobby politicians with buckets of money to allow them to ignore the environmental and safety issues of building on flood planes and former swamps. Screw real estate developers.

We end up picking up the tab for billions of dollars of externalities just as we do with anybody who lobbies the Government. You don't see people who grow healthy food advertising, marketing and lobbying us all to death. No, they can't afford it. It is the crap-mongers of this world who spend the big bucks to make sure we are docile, silent, and helpless victims of ...


What sort of Commie Socalist crap are you spewing? A Real American wouldn't think like this!
 
2013-01-20 03:06:48 PM  
It wasn't all that long ago when some NJ deniz...err...citizens were seriously talking lawsuits to limit or remove the dunes that blocked their view of the ocean.

I remember when filling in salt marshes and putting homes on the fill was a good thing.

Pave The Earth!

/now get offa da lawn!!
//doesn't matter if it's 20 years or 200, NJ's going to be seeing a lot more swamps...no matter what people do.
///and much better views of the ocean
 
2013-01-20 03:21:03 PM  
Maybe one of these days people will figure out that it is not nice to screw with Mother Nature.

Or, we could just write a law, eh?
 
2013-01-20 04:05:06 PM  

TyrantII: Not only that, in 20-40 years the town will just rezone it and throw in more luxury apartments and parking again when the town rezones it. Property tax and and local back patting (money) will win out, always does.


New Jersey has green space credits available. Basically, the green zone funds are used to purchase "building credits" and put a deed restriction onto land. The land can't be developed after that. A number of farms have taken advantage of this program.
 
2013-01-20 04:06:36 PM  

CBob: It wasn't all that long ago when some NJ deniz...err...citizens were seriously talking lawsuits to limit or remove the dunes that blocked their view of the ocean.


Yup, we had that on Fark.
 
2013-01-20 06:37:40 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com

"Human beings are a disease."
 
2013-01-20 06:37:57 PM  
When can we expect subby to bulldoze his house so the land can be returned to its natural state?
 
2013-01-20 07:10:49 PM  

brantgoose: Some things that protect us from storm surges and other Acts of God:

coral reefs
mangroves
marshes
sand bars
oyster beds
sea grass meadows
kelp forests
natural river flow and sedmentation
deltas
beaches
flood plains

Not only should we restore those we have destroyed and protect those we have not destroyed, but we should not build residential housing on them. They are flooded regularly. Instead of building vulnerable suburbs (full of poor people or rich people, which means us people in the middle will foot the bills even if we don't live there ourselve) we should build parks, bicycle paths, recreational areas, and other things that are easily vacated in times of crisis and which can be rebuilt relatively quickly and cheaply when they are destroyed.


Absolutely.  Right down the hill from where I live, just a few minutes walk away, used to be a residential area.  It got pretty much wiped out in 1946.  So... they rebuilt.  Then it got pretty much wiped out again in 1960.  And they were enlightened.  Now we have huge parks with lagoons for fishing and soccer fields and bridges and memorials and exhibition spaces and pavilions for parties and a beach and a golf course and so on, all of which everyone is pretty happy with.  I've seen other, urban places where you come off the beach and have a quarter-mile of park with grass and trees and pavilions and drainage canals and whatever before you get to any serious "development," and again, nobody complains, because heck, they're living in an urban area and parks are nice things.
 
2013-01-20 07:19:20 PM  
germ78:   The sugar industry in this country makes the corn industry look like a bunch of church marms.

Because cornfields have replaced coastal wetlands?

Fark Big Sugar and the SFWMD.
 
2013-01-20 08:36:03 PM  
Nothing "Naturally protected" anything before. Theyre things that arose out of the disasters that came before. The reason there is a problem now is people building permanent settlements on that land that once nothing would have cared about being destroyed.
 
2013-01-20 11:09:30 PM  

Richard Saunders: germ78:   The sugar industry in this country makes the corn industry look like a bunch of church marms.

Because cornfields have replaced coastal wetlands?

Fark Big Sugar and the SFWMD.


And that was I meant when I brought it up in the first place.

/remembers Marjory Stoneman Douglas from childhood in the Grove
 
2013-01-20 11:17:38 PM  

StopLurkListen: Good idea in theory, but it generally requires buying property, displacing people and removing buildings, all of which is expensive. Hard for a town to justify such an expense, even if it helps in the long run.


Duh. Just convert the excess biomass to Soylent Green and sell it to help offset the cost! Were you asleep during Econ 101?

i651.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-21 01:00:48 AM  

ongbok: . Instead of building vulnerable suburbs (full of poor people or rich people, which means us people in the middle will foot the bills even if we don't live there ourselve) we should build parks, bicycle paths, recreational areas, and other things that are easily vacated in times of crisis and which can be rebuilt relatively quickly and cheaply when they are destroyed.


They do this in Japan. Look at a major river through Tokyo like the Tamagawa, it's surrounded by playgrounds, picnic areas, baseball and soccer fields on a flat area just above the flow, usually followed by embankments (to give the river room to flood without flooding the surrounding areas), which are topped by bike/footpaths that allow you move easily along the river instead of weaving through the streets to get places.

Believe me, a small part of that land is worth more than an entire podunk town in America, but it's been given over in the name of common sense.
 
2013-01-21 03:25:13 AM  

LordJiro: What, you mean farking over the environment for personal profits might have CONSEQUENCES? What Commie bullshiat is this?!


Numbskulls they are
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report