The administrations of the two previous Presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, tried to shut down this pioneering program that partners federal, state, and local governments in an effort that is dedicated to preserving the nation’s coasts and protecting the people and infrastructure who live there. The stated excuse was the need to cut federal spending, but the real reason was a lack of concern for preserving the nation’s coastal resources.

Under the Obama administration, the budget knife was replaced with guarded funding for coastal protection. During the first two years of his administration, the president proposed funding levels four times that of his predecessor. In each of those years, Congress started with the president’s figure and then doubled it. At the heart of this increased level of support is the combined voice of coastal communities whose residents are determined not to let our country lose one of its most important national treasures.

For a generation, they have been the targets of budget-cutters, but this year the federal government plans to spend $148 million on shore-protection projects - believed to be a record amount.

About $40 million of that would go toward beach projects in South Jersey from Long Beach Island to Cape May, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which released its spending plan last week.

"I was surprised," said Howard Marlowe, the nation's most prominent coastal lobbyist. He said it would be the biggest annual expenditure since he started keeping track in 1995, and available federal records indicate no greater amounts in prior years.

On average, the government has spent from $80 million to $100 million annually on what has been a controversial program.

"This is an enormous vote of support," said Marlowe, noting that presidents since George H.W. Bush had sought to cut the program.

"It's not dead or even dying. It's thriving."

Sea level rise threatens Bogue Banks not only with beach erosion, but also from inundation.

Jeffrey Allenby, a master’s student at Duke University Marine Science Lab gave a presentation to the N.C. Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) Thursday at the regular commission meeting. Mr. Allenby has been working on a program that uses geographic information systems to map out areas on Bogue Banks affected by sea level rise for his master’s project.

Marine scientists have determined that sea levels have been rising and are becoming one of the biggest threats on the coast. This rise is often associated with climate change and beach erosion. This is a concern for the state coast because large areas here are very close to sea level.

According to Mr. Allenby’s program, Emerald Isle, Salter Path/Indian Beach, Pine Knoll Shores and Atlantic Beach could all be seriously affected by sea level rise. Sea level rise has been associated with beach erosion.

“Recently, the island has been experiencing beach erosion that has been combated with beach nourishment,” Mr. Allenby said.

However, according to Mr. Allenby’s program, sea level rise could also cause the water levels to rise on the sound side of Bogue Banks, as well, causing areas to become both periodically and permanently submerged. In Emerald Isle, areas around Archer’s Creek are particularly at risk, as well as along the eastern edge of town, where the impact could become so great new inlets could form.
 

President Obama released his FY12 Budget Proposal last week and the $44.7 million allocated for coastal projects in FY12 is far below the anemic level of $53 million proposed in FY11.  Marlowe & Company was pleased to learn that a record 7% of the President’s proposed spending will benefit our clients in various regions of the country.  However, we are still disappointed to see the President, like the others before him, miss a tremendous opportunity to use his budget request to invest in infrastructure protection initiatives along the coast.

In recent weeks the President has spoken of the need to invest in projects around the country that can show a true return on their investment.  Coastal protection projects do just that.  On average, for every dollar that is spent on protecting our nation’s coastline, the government saves seven in post-disaster assistance that would otherwise have to be given out by FEMA.  When our beaches are full and protected, our businesses, roads, and utilities are protected, but when we allow our shores to erode, we put all of these resources at risk.  All it takes is one storm and many of these resources can be washed away.  The cost of repairing or replacing damaged infrastructure is often far greater than the costs of protecting it in the first place.

We can assure you that we will continue to be successful working with Congress and the Administration to make sure that our clients along the coast have their needs met.  If you are living along the coast without the benefit of government affiars specialists, we wish you the best of luck in getting the federal government’s attention.  However, if you would like to ensure that your needs are expressed effectively to Congress and the Administration, give us a call today at (202) 775-1796 or e-mail us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . 

Please follow the link below to a chart that compares the number of projects needing immediate assistance to those which received support in the President’s FY12 budget and to learn more about the importance of protecting America’s coasts.

Rep. Bill Young (FL) Supports Beach Funding