Conservation Insider Bulletin, Mar. 28

Conservation Insider Bulletin
Published weekly for the Conservation Council of North Carolina
Conservation News to Peruse & Use
Editor: Dan Besse, cib@conservationcouncilnc.org
March 28, 2008

Coastal regulators say no more sandbag extensions, this week in CIB:

--Administrative Watch: No, Really—Those Sandbags Must Go
--Judicial Watch: More Challengers to Cliffside
--Campaign Watch: Help CPAC Elect More Environmental Champions
--Errata: New CCNC Staff; Cliffside Appeals Filed

Administrative Watch: No, Really—Those Sandbags Must Go

The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) this week gave an emphatic "no" to a petition for rulemaking which would have allowed beachfront sandbag walls to remain indefinitely in front of "viable" commercial structures. CIB congratulates the CRC for sticking to the fundamental policy which has been in place in North Carolina since 1985: When the question is between protecting the building and protecting the public beach, the public beach prevails.
The idea for two decades plus has been this: Don't build unmovable structures smack up against the moving shoreline. The idea is simple enough. Plan ahead: When the surfline moves up to your walls, you have to move it or lose it. What's so hard to understand about that?
PS: This is not about "private property rights". The private building owner does not own the public beach. They have no right to have their structure, or walls protecting it, parked on the public beach. Barrier islands are different from upland property by their very physical nature. They move in storms, currents, and changes in sea level over time. You cannot expect to have the same level of "permanence" of your property lines on what amounts to a sand bar writ large and sitting in the surf.
In other words, physical reality forces adjustment to legal theory, and absolutely trumps political dogma.Judicial Watch: More Challengers to Cliffside
The number of environmental group legal challengers of the proposed new Cliffside coal plant is up to seven. Five groups (Sierra Club, Southern Environmental Law Center, Southern Alliance for Safe Energy, N.C. Environmental Defense Fund, and National Parks Conservation Association) asked a judge to revoke the air quality permit for the plant. Last week, two other groups (N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network, and Appalachian Voices) filed a challenge of the plant's permit with an administrative law judge.

Campaign Watch: Help CPAC Elect More Environmental Champions
CCNC members: Have you checked out the new 2007 Conservation Legislative Scorecard, including the "Dirty Dozen" and the "Filthy Five"? It's online now at www.conservationcouncilnc.org, along with the Conservation Freshman of the Year and all the key conservation votes and legislator environmental voting scores from the 2007 General Assembly.
While you're there, you can act to help CCNC's Conservation PAC elect more environmental champions to the 2009 General Assembly. Click on the "Contribute NOW!" button and help CCNC "hold politicians accountable on the environment." The contributions received by CCNC for the Conservation PAC will go to help re-elect friendly incumbents and boost the chances of green newcomers.

Errata: New CCNC Staff; Cliffside Appeals Filed
It's not often—fortunately—that we make two editing errors in the same week big enough to justify immediate correction. But, ah, ahem:
Last week we welcomed the wrong Dan to the CCNC staff. Repeating our correction: The new CCNC Dan is Dan CRAWFORD, Director of Government Relations. Dan C's email address is dan@conservationcouncilnc.org.

Remember that Dan Besse, CIB editor is still cib@conservationcouncilnc.org.

We also last week noted that the first two parties to challenge the DAQ permit for Cliffside through the administrative process had filed the necessary papers with a state administrative law judge. First out of the challenge block were N.C. WARN (Waste Awareness and Reduction Network) and Appalachian Voices (not Canary Coalition as erroneously reported last week).