Fact-Checking The Nantucket Coastal Conservancy

To the editor: The Current’s news reporting is consistently outstanding, but it appears that its practice is to not fact-check letters to the editor from readers. That was made obvious to me when reading Mr. Balkinds’s recent letter. So let me give it a try.

Referring to the geotube installation – which has successfully protected a vital stretch of Baxter Road, and the related utilities and homes for over a decade – as a “seawall” and alleging that that installation is “illegal” is just the beginning of Mr. Balkind’s departure from the facts. To start with, a “seawall” is typically made from concrete, steel, wood, vinyl, boulders or gabions – none of which are part of the geotube installation. “Sea wall” may illicit a powerful emotional reaction from the uninformed, but it has no place in this discussion.

As for “illegality,” the subject installation was approved by our Conservation Commission 12 years ago and was confirmed on appeal to the state’s Department of Environmental Protection. It is not “illegal” as Mr. Balkind shamelessly asserts. The performance of that installation has proven to be outstanding – the top of the bluff above the geotubes has been entirely stable since its installation despite significant erosion in all the adjacent, unprotected areas. The geotubes have done what they have been designed to do, and are routinely doing the same elsewhere in Massachusetts and around the world. It’s a proven and broadly applied erosion protection measure. There is nothing experimental or unproven about that technology - and certainly nothing illegal!

As to Mr. Balkind’s concern about the loss of the beach beneath the 'Sconset Bluff, the delay in extending the geotubes for the full length needed has resulted in the loss of approximately 25 acres of 'Sconset Beach that had been set aside for public use by our proprietors. By engaging with people like Mr. Balkind and failing to act earlier to expand the geotubes, the Town has allowed the sea to “steal” the northern end of the 'Sconset town beach. The property lines there have been allowed to creep westward up the face of the Bluff so that all the “public beach” has been lost as the toe of the Bluff moves west. That process will continue until the geotubes are expanded.

In short, Mr. Balkind is spewing fiction to support the opposition of a small and determined set of opponents who would be delighted if all of 'Sconset just fell into the sea.

Sincerely,
David Golden