Coastal landforms, ecology and infrastructure have become greater concerns on the Island as the sea level rises.
Timothy Johnson

Changing Shoreline, Sea Level Rise Top Agenda for Coastal Conference

<p>Leading coastal scientists, managers and others will gather Monday for a daylong conference at the Harbor View Hotel looking at the Island&rsquo;s changing coastline, from shifting sands at Katama to managed retreat at Squibnocket.</p>

Leading coastal scientists, managers and others will gather Monday for a daylong conference at the Harbor View Hotel looking at the Island’s changing coastline. Shifting sands at Katama and changing Island habitats top the agenda.

Speakers and guests include Brad Washburn, assistant director of the state Office of Coastal Zone Management, Britt Raubenheimer and Steve Elgar of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, and many others from on and off the Island.

Organized by CZM and the Woods Hole Sea Grant Program with support from the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, the roughly biennial conference highlights current research and planning efforts across the Island. Three programs Monday morning will focus on shifting sands at Katama and changing Island habitats. The afternoon program will shift toward planning, with a presentation on flood mapping and others focusing on Island projects.

The day will wrap up with a brief panel discussion with MVC director Adam Turner, coastal geologist Jim Mahala of the state Department of Environmental Protection, Dukes County manager Martina Thornton and Mr. Washburn.

Coastal landforms, ecology and infrastructure have become greater concerns on the Island as the sea level rises. MVC coastal planner JoAnn Taylor will speak Monday afternoon about a new project to monitor how those changes affect wetland elevation at Felix Neck. An elevation monitoring system installed last year is the first of its kind on the Vineyard.

Another presentation will showcase ongoing efforts to restore Squibnocket Beach in the face of coastal erosion. Two much-debated projects received final approval from the town of Chilmark in May and could begin as soon as September. CZM has endorsed the effort as an example of managed shoreline retreat.

Andre Martecchini, an engineer at Kleinfelder, will discuss his recent study predicting how climate change and rising seas will affect Oak Bluffs through 2070. Mr. Martecchini presented his preliminary findings at a well-attended meeting in Oak Bluffs last September. Among other things, he said a hundred-year storm striking the Island in 2030 could create a 9.7-foot surge, enough to nearly cut off access to the Martha’s Vineyard Hospital.

In addition to the scheduled events, Mr. Turner hopes to draw attention to the many economic opportunities that revolve around the Island’s coastal environment. Over the last few months he and others have helped highlight the need for local jobs and training to nurture a so-called “blue economy.”

“It’s certainly something that I’m going to raise in talking about the relationship between the Island’s location, ecology and economic opportunity,” Mr. Turner said this week. He pointed to a number of recent projects dealing with coastal planning and infrastructure on the Island, including the MVC’s sea level rise assessment and a new seawall in Oak Bluffs that the MVC approved in January.

“You are seeing it all around the Island,” Mr. Turner said.

The 2016 Martha’s Vineyard Coastal Conference begins Monday, June 6, at 10 a.m. A related field trip to explore changes to the Katama barrier beach system will leave from the Chappy ferry Tuesday at 9:30 a.m.

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 06/04/2016 - 19:18

Permalink

deshandra brown mv

Every other coastal area with erosion manages to get the Army Corps of Engineers to do massive beach replenishment projects, using the offshore sand to shore up the beaches. I saw this done in Florida where the erosion threatened a community. Do we wait until Atlantic Drive falls into the ocean to do something? When I grew up here, the 'bunker' was above ground, on South Beach. South beach was a few hundred feet wide. One good storm over those small dunes and its all over.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 06/04/2016 - 19:24

Permalink

BS OB

The facts indicate there is no sea level rise. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. Sea level oscillates and for the last six years has decreased. It rises and falls but has no relation to so called man made climate change.

Carol formerly Chilmark

How's the weather in that state of Denial, BS? Because the facts - actual facts, ascertained and measured by actual scientists - clearly show that sea levels are rising, will continue to rise, and it is caused by giant ice sheets in Greenland and the West Antarctic melting and running off into the oceans. And it's all caused by the increase in atmospheric carbon and methane, thanks to obtaining and burning fossil fuels. There - a postcard from reality, special delivery.

Sarah

Really? In this day and age you believe that? Sea level "change" may be the more appropriate term here as it is variable however it is "real" and those who chose to ignore that fact will eventually change their minds as their homes are lost to the rising seas and increase frequency/strength of coastal storms. But by then it will be too late.

BS OB

I've lived by the ocean for over 50 years and of course there's been erosion and with erosion comes accretion, the sand just moves somewhere else. A hundred years ago there was no such thing as lighthouse beach in Edgartown. The lighthouse was surrounded by water. There is a perception that the sea level is rising but this is due to subsidence, something than humans certainly have not created. If you are a "believer" and has thoroughly read assessment 5 from the IPCC you'll note that they believe "global warming" will actually be beneficial to humans for the next 70 years. There words, not mine. Educate yourself.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 06/04/2016 - 22:03

Permalink

Dean Rosenthal Edgartown

This looks to be an important and informative session in these timely matters.

JAMES Houston, Texas

I suggest that BSC OB finds a copy of either 1970 or 1969 mvrhs yearbook. You will see the bunker Ms Brown mentioned. The sea may not be rising but there is a lot of coastal erosion.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 06/07/2016 - 09:39

Permalink

Donna Russell Braddock Bay, Lake Ontario

Here's a "Duh" moment to consider...a connected and irrefutable fact - the human population is rising. In 2015, 7.3 billion was expected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100. Every one of those people will require water. And waste more, pollute more, deplete more of every growing thing on land and sea, burn more, threaten more, fight over more, and by sheer human numbers, do it all on less land available. But people no longer speak of population growth and its consequences. It may be time to start that conversation again and be dead serious about it. Really. It's time to find a new definition of "Zip Code."

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 06/08/2016 - 12:22

Permalink

Joel VA

Unfortunately, BS from OB's remarks are rather disingenuous. From his first comment, I would challenge BS to find a staircase and take two-steps-up, one-step-down, two-steps-up, one-step-down about half a dozen times. Then come back and tell us that he ended at the same height that he started. And this he knows because his position oscillated and the last step was down. The graph that Thomas Hodgson linked to (as well as the one for Nantucket) makes it perfectly clear that sea levels are rising. The overall trends at Woods Hole and Nantucket are 3x the local subsidence rates (so you can't blame it on geology, either). From his last comment, BS would lead us to believe that because, somewhere, there will be a short-term benefit to rising temperatures, that the overall global prognosis is good. Never mind that sea level rise doesn't fit this characterization. Never mind that the supposed short-term benefits in some places (fewer winter deaths, lower winter energy costs, higher agricultural yields) would be offset by another set of detriments (more summer deaths, higher summer energy costs, disproportionately higher costs associated with pest & water mgmt). Never mind that the IPCC, in "their words, not mine", make it explicitly clear that the net harm *vastly* outweighs any localized, short-term benefit. A partial truth is not a substitute for the whole truth, and BS is cherry-picking partial truths to sell an unfortunate lie.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.