Community Petition

Text: STOP LIPA/FPL’S INDUSTRIAL WIND POWER FACILITY OFF OUR OCEANFRONT STATE PARKS........

DOWNLOAD WINDFARM PETITION: (doc)

LETTER 1

Text: PLEASE PROTECT AND PRESERVE NEW YORK’S OCEANFRONT STATE PARKS.........

DOWLOAD WINDFARM LETTER1: (doc)

LETTER 2

Text: PLEASE INSIST ON A COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS).........

DOWNLOAD WINDFARM LETTER2: (doc)

You may add your own letters in our FORUMS section as well.

SHORTCUT TO FORUMS: (explore)

Comments on EIS Scoping for the LIOWP Project:
Minerals Management Service, MS 5412
1201 Elmwood Park Blvd.
New Orleans, LA 70123

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Save the Montauk Lighthouse and Save the Waves

No better time to take action, here are some talking points

- Rebuilding the revetment is just a temporary measure that offers no guarantee that the bluffs will not severely erode in the next big coastal storm. The ocean and especially ocean storms are full of uncertainty. The money is better spent moving the lighthouse back from the bluff where it will be safe for another 300 years.

- The US Army Corps final environmental impact statement admits that quote, “While the proposed revetment alternative will continue to limit the coastal erosion at the Point protecting the Lighthouse complex, forces such as the tidal currents and waves will continue to erode the north and south down drift shores continuing the curvature process, especially immediately adjacent to the revetment.” If we keep adding more revetments as the land next to the new stones erodes quicker and quicker, aren’t we just going to eventually create and island out at Montauk Point? The Lighthouse should represent man’s respect for the ocean rather then his constant misguided efforts to control it.

- There are hundreds of residential and commercial buildings along the south shore of Long Island that are too close to the ocean and in danger from coastal storms. If the government moves ahead with such a controversial, high profile project to install a shore hardening structure at Montauk Point, what is to sop the others from doing the same for their coastal property? The multi-million dollar “Fire Island to Montauk Point” study being done by the US Army Corps is supposed to be all about moving away from this kind of shore hardening.

- Instead of piling more rocks in front of the lighthouse as planned by the Army Corps of Engineers, the lighthouse should be moved. Other prominent lighthouses in the North east have been safely moved, for example: Cape Hatteras, NC – Block Island, RI – Cape Cod, Ma In each case it was decided that, although initially more expensive, moving the lighthouse was the only guaranteed long term solution, and in each case tax payers will end up saving many millions of dollars.

- Why are Montauk’s beaches getting so small? One reason could be that putting rocks in front of the lighthouse to protect it in the 1940s and again in the 1990s has stopped the natural erosion of material that should be replenishing these beaches. According to a US Geological Survey document: “Today, the sand and gravel eroded from the headlands at Montauk and from the massive sand reservoir offshore (originally derived from the moraine and out wash) are the primary sources for sand on the beaches along southern Long Island.”

US Geological Survey document: (explore)

CURRENTLY: Area elected US House of Representatives, official Tim Bishop, has yet to take a position on this issue! Your call (and/or letter) now will make a difference, please share your concerns and comments with him today:

Mr. Timothy Bishop, US House Representative
Local Office
3680 Route 112, Suite C
Coram, NY 11727
(631) 696-6500
(631) 696-4520 (fax)

East End (Montauk) Assemblyman:
Fred W. Theile, Jr.
2Nd Assembly District
2302 Main Street
ox 3062
Birdgehampton, NY 11932
631-537-2583

LINK TO SURFRIER E.L.I. DIAGRAM OF LIGHTHOUSE PROPOSAL: (link)

DOWNLOAD MONTAUK PT LIGHTHOUSE LETTER: (pdf)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

LIABILITY LETTER

A bill set forth to exempt state and public corporations from liability for injuries and death of persons fishing, surfboarding or scuba diving when lifeguards are not on duty.

Assembly bill # A07843 - Summary: Exempts state and public corporations from liability for injury of persons who use public beaches for fishing, surfboarding or scuba diving when lifeguards not on duty.

READ ENTIRE # A07843 TEXT ONLINE: (link)

WHAT THIS MEANS TO ME: A positive step for beach access! At the moment, there is opposition to granting permits and ocean access during the offseason (when the beachs are technically closed to swimmers because lifeguards are not on duty) due to liability reasons. The aforementioned bills simply hold "swimmers" accountable for their own safety. (Besides, us surfers should always be with a buddy anyway, right?)

At a recent meeting it was brought up and we decided to support it as a chapter. We sent a letter to the assemblymen athe senators demonstrating our support for such a bills.

We encourage everyone to write their own personal letters to your assemblymen/women and senators, asking for their support of these bills.

Text: The Central Long Island Chapter of the Surfrider Foundation is strongly in support of bill S03596. Currently our chapter consists of over 500 members in addition to other supporters of various water user groups.

Our members understand that under this bill they would hold their own liability in the sports they partake as well as the responsibility to preserve the environment that they recreate in.

DOWNLOAD LIABILITY LETTER: (doc)