Stop Elberon - Loch Arbour Beach Replenishment
  • Petitioning U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New York District

This petition will be delivered to:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New York District
New Jersey-06
Rep. Frank Pallone

Stop Elberon - Loch Arbour Beach Replenishment

    1. Petition by

      Ralph Chakkalo

      los angelas, CA

Jetties from Elberon to Loch Arbour are in jeopardy of beinge lost



The stretch of beach from Elberon to Loch Arbour in Monmouth County is a special place to fishermen. While it attracts its fair share of surfers, swimmers and sunbathers, it’s the anglers who prize it most for the excellent bass fishing from the series of jetties, or groins, located there.

 

Now they are in danger.

 

For the last several months, the Army Corp of Engineers has been pumping sand onto beaches from Sandy Hook south to Manasquan as part of the Disaster Appropriations Act of 2013 which is funding the replenishment of New Jersey’s beaches.

These jetties are vital to the health of: the surrounding ecosystem, the economy of the surrounding areas, and the safety to swimmers in nearby waters. For these reasons, this project is a huge waste of taxpayer's money.

Work has yet to begin on the stretch between Elberon and Loch Arbour as the contract has yet to be awarded. That section offers a different set of problems for engineers due to the number of outflows located along the section and the Army Corp of Engineers is still accepting public comment on the project until March 26.

 

 

To:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New York District
Rep. Frank Pallone, New Jersey-06
Stop Elberon - Loch Arbour Beach Replenishment

Sincerely,
[Your name]

Recent signatures

    News

    1. notes from the june 23rd meeting

      Ralph Chakkalo
      Petition Organizer

      Feel free to spread this around anywhere and everywhere

      Tried like hell but we really didn't get anywhere.

      The most important thing to come out of the meeting was an eye opener and came out after the meeting in a conversation in the parking lot. It can be a game changer
      According to the representative from the Army Corps, sand replenishment has nothing to do with protecting homes and property. The directive of the sand replenishment project is to impede the loss of land mass.
      How many taxpayers, and this is federal money, not just NJ, would back a 30 year 150 million dollar project that wasn't designed to protect towns and homes and is being done in an area that has never lost any more then minor land mass due to the fact that it sits on a 20+ foot high bluff (Elberon / Deal) ??

      The general public needs to know this.

      Meeting Frank Pallone’s office
      Monday June 23, 2014

      Re: Sand replenishment and jetty notching

      Attending:
      Littoral Society
      Surfrider
      Beach Buggy Association
      Shark River Surf Anglers
      Asbury Park Fishing Club
      StripersOnLine.Com
      RFA
      JCAA
      Allenhurst Town engineer
      Deal Lake Committee
      State Representative
      Army Corps Representatives
      Frank Pallone and staff

      Items discussed:

      Jetty notching
      Sand replenishment
      Dunes
      Removal of the breakwaters (T’s)
      Deal Lake Flume
      Beach Access

      Jetty notching:
      The Army Corps concept is that the six longer jetties, that will still protrude past the new pumped sand, would cause the ocean current (which runs south to north) to catch the sand on the south side and scour the sand from the north side causing scalloped uneven beaches and less protection on the north side. Because of this the six long jetties need to be notched to allow the sand to travel up the littoral current unabated keeping the beaches level. This, however, will require new sand being pumped in every few years - forever. The original studies were done and the concept was devised in the 1990’s pre-Sandy.

      The Army Corps will not be notching Allenhurst, Roseld, and Whitehall, but are planning on going through with the notching of Marine, Darlington, and Phillips

      Our concept is that the sand needs to be held in place and protected by longer jetties and breakwaters in the same way that the Army Corps is currently doing in the Coney Island NY area. The Army Corps claims that Coney Island is different although they never explained why. (I still see no difference).

      We claimed that the original science was proven untrue by Sandy who destroyed towns that received replenishment, and had no dunes. Come back to this point after reading the following section on sand replenishment

      A few alternative ideas for notching were tossed about, such as pipes going through and walkways going over the notches that could allow access to the ends but the reality is that odds of any of those things happening are exceptionally slim. Pipes would be a danger to swimmers; walkways would be washed out by the first major storm.

      Sand Replenishment:

      This was extremely enlightening

      The most important part of this discussion came in the parking lot after the meeting and this is the first time most of the people attending the meeting will hear this. It seems that we have been looking at the situation in the wrong way. According to the representative from the Army Corps, sand replenishment has nothing to do with protecting homes and property. The directive of the sand replenishment project is to impede the loss of land mass. It was claimed that towards this directive replenishment has worked even better than expected.

      With that concept in mind, I can understand the concept having merit on the barrier islands, such as Long Beach island, where land has been lost, but what is the reasoning behind doing any replenishment at all in the areas of Deal and Elberon, both of which sit on top of a twenty foot high bluff and have never been in danger of losing land mass? Additionally the public needs to be educated about this as virtually every person in the state, including those of us at today’s meeting, believed that this project was directed primarily at protecting homes and property.

      Dunes:
      The Corps has not looked into dunes because of the above, the directive is not to protect homes, rather to retain land mass. Dunes are something to be dealt with between the local municipalities and the state.

      Removal of the breakwaters (T’s) on the ends of the jetties:
      They are to be removed to minimize danger to swimmers as sand washes away and exposes the rocks. I can understand this at the breakwater in front of Ocean beach Club, but to do this to the remaining breakwaters where swimming is illegal is an egregious waste of taxpayer dollars.

      Deal Lake Flume:
      There is a problem with sand clogging the flume and impeding the drainage of the lake and the migration of fish. Options were discussed as to how to deal with this. I need to leave these explanations to the people at the meeting who are more familiar with the situation and better equipped to discuss the details.

      Access:
      The Army Corps and the state are saying that access will be enhanced in the area with two more street ends being opened to provide additional entry ways to the beaches. Tim Dillingham of the Littoral Society brought up an important point asking for legislative guarantees that all access point will remain open forever. It is mainly a legal issue that needs to be explored. We also pressed the point that access is meaningless without parking.

    2. The RFA got us the meeting with Pallone and the Army Corps

      Ralph Chakkalo
      Petition Organizer

      Next Wednesday

      I know that Joe Palotta the president of Asbury will be attending as will Greg Hueth president of Shark River
      Not sure who else

    3. Reached 100 signatures
    4. Meeting at 8th ave jetty

      Ralph Chakkalo
      Petition Organizer

      Please join concerned citizens who are meeting 5 pm Friday, March 21st at the Deal Lake flume/8th Avenue jetty in Asbury Park. Groups including the Asbury Park Fishing Club, Deal Lake Commission, surfers, fishermen, swimmers and Deal Lake homeowners are opposed to the notching of jetties as part of the replenishment project.

      Your support would be appreciated.

    5. Reached 5 signatures

    Supporters

    Reasons for signing

    • Patty Cronheim DEAL, NJ
      • 3 months ago

      I care about Deal's jetties being preserved so that swimming remains SAFE!

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • greg o'driscoll SEWELLL, NJ
      • 6 months ago

      Because it doesn't work and only destroys marine life !!

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Joseph Brown TOMS RIVER, NJ
      • 7 months ago

      Because the replenishment will destroy living ecosystem as well as take away need atructure for new life

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Brian Zemlanicky WEST MILFORD, NJ
      • 7 months ago

      my family and i have been surf fishing the area for 4 decades. it is a very uniques section of coast line with the bluffs and rocks. the rocks attract a tremendous amount of aquatic biodiversity.

      I would be less opposed to the project if i saw some research that showed the biodiversity per acre increased or stayed the same after replenishment and notching.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • kevin carter ASBURY PARK, NJ
      • 7 months ago

      waste of tax payers money and you are destroying prime breeding ground for the fish!!!

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:

    Develop your own tools to win.

    Use the Change.org API to develop your own organizing tools. Find out how to get started.