Another Times article that takes something that has some connection to climate change and frames it in the headline, rather sneakily time, as all about climate change. This is why some of us who are not climate change deniers are bugged by distorted and exaggerated reports on climate change. Much of what is happening in that part of the country is largely due to land subsidence, not to any actual rise in the sea level.
2
The author does some basic research, sees the land that was lost to the sea, and comes to a single conclusion: this must be a result of global climate change. Unfortunately, this is typical work from people who have no knowledge of oceanography or other water-related sciences. In Holland, this is standard science for our children. This is called erosion, not a rising ocean. As land is reclaimed by the sea, the water level appears to be rising, but the reality is that the shoreline is merely receding. There has been no study that even pretends to have measured any change in the volume of liquid H2O off our continental shores. All recorded glacier melting has been accompanied by a refreezing on the opposite sides. Based on current measurements, completely doubling the amount of water in the oceans would bring the sea levels up less than 1 metre. While this would cover some islands, it would scarcely be noticed at over 99% of the continental shoreline worldwide, and is virtually impossible because there are just not enough water molecules on the planet for this to happen.
Fascinating article - reading about what is happening here and then thinking of the challenges facing some of the large coastal cities, it's hard to imagine how they will prepare adequately for the future.
4
Best article I've seen on climate adaptation in a very long time. Good balance among inevitable science, inadequate government policies and priorities, cultural resources losses, and the toll on real peoples' lives and history.
5
People are surprised the inevitable is coming. They build near the shore, are surprised there is creeping water and now we all are supposed to contribute holding back nature? Perhaps paving over wetlands, gorging on fossil fuel and insisting on spread-out development isn't going to have any economic effect?
4
Let the islanders vote, perhaps they will choose to Tangiexit!
As a Virginian and someone who has spent time on Tangier Island- I feel a sense of responsibility to save this island and its occupants. Virginia has Williamsburg and Jamestown and many other historical sites, but nowhere will you find a historically significant site that still has the proud, hard working sons and daughters of the original founders of the island. Nowhere in Virginia will you have the opportunity to hear a language long extinct, or witness a culture that has not changed significantly since its beginning. This is a living Jamestown or Williamsburg- not a shell of once was, restored for our learning and amusement.
5
The Times recklessly throws out an estimate of six feet in sea level rise by 2100 as if this is an established consensus.
The IPCC estimate is between 1 and 3 feet.
The current level of 3 millimeters per year extrapolates to less than a foot by 2100.
The IPCC estimate is between 1 and 3 feet.
The current level of 3 millimeters per year extrapolates to less than a foot by 2100.
1
Simply no. These houses should have never been built - even disregarding climate change impacts. We need much stronger land use planning in this country. We badly need to stop building on swamps, sand, cliffs, and flood plains. It's shocking that banks were rolling loans on these wrecklessly located houses and now the owners are unfortunately saddled with a property valued near 0. These houses need to be scraped before they become garbage in the sea.
2
While I am one who does not favor bailouts of this sort or building against the inevitable, I cannot stand with those posting things such as, "they are stupid for building there," or "they live in luxury on an exclusive island" and other like sentiments. That makes it sound like Tangier island is full of new McMansions and golf courses (Kiawah island anyone?). Fisherman/watermen from centuries ago settled where they could make a living, and their descendants kept struggling. This isn't a case of rich folks wanting to preserve their vacation homes. With all that said, I can't see a way Tangier will be saved for permanent human habitation.
6
As this article tells us climate change is real and is requiring choices of where funds can help to delay. Those areas with limited numbers will likely have no financial help. they will not be able to move buildings because soil is so wet.
Our Congress should consider where they can help and what to do to help the people move. But, congress is not working.
Our Congress should consider where they can help and what to do to help the people move. But, congress is not working.
Taniger Island is and always has been a temporary artifact of the shifting land in Chesapeake Bay. 100 years ago, if the maps are correct it was half the size it is today. The bay and the river deposited mud and silt run off from the farms upriver.
As farming ceased the run off decreased, the island has started to recede. The latest measurements of ocean water levels are very clear. In some places the water level is up, about 1mm. In other places it is down, about 4 mm. In the vast majority of the world it is unchanged. In the bay, it is unchanged.
Meanwhile, the primary source of potential sea level increases, polar ice caps, is at the largest in depth and breadth in recorded history.
Maybe you should find a new boogieman to scare people with, like the racism of Black Lives Matter or the crimes of Hillary Clinton, this dog don't hunt.
As farming ceased the run off decreased, the island has started to recede. The latest measurements of ocean water levels are very clear. In some places the water level is up, about 1mm. In other places it is down, about 4 mm. In the vast majority of the world it is unchanged. In the bay, it is unchanged.
Meanwhile, the primary source of potential sea level increases, polar ice caps, is at the largest in depth and breadth in recorded history.
Maybe you should find a new boogieman to scare people with, like the racism of Black Lives Matter or the crimes of Hillary Clinton, this dog don't hunt.
2
If 20 cm of sea level increase in 135 years is going to sink the island ... maybe they should have built somewhere else. Sea level has been increasing during the entire interglacial, but most of the increase occurred early in the Holocene, not in the last century. Climate is warming, and atmospheric CO2 is making a contribution to that warming. But most of the warming is a natural recovery from the little ice age, and is due to ocean warming caused by increased solar activity and (recently) increased atmospheric transparency.
6
Janet Troje - Hopefully you realize that there are some places in the USA where you can be arrested and prosecuted as a "denier" for your scientific mumbo-jumbo!
Is 20 cm a global average? Because in some places the water level has actually receded, while in others it has increased by feet. I would imagine that your theory combined with the contribution humans are making is just too much to overcome.
1
Historically the continental U.S. has had other islands succumb to the ocean due to sea level rise. As an example, Billingsgate Island off the coast of Wellfleet, Cape Cod, Massachusetts vanished in the early 1900's. People lived and went to school there. It is reported that they even had their own baseball team. Today it is nothing but a shoal. All the money spent on walls, sand, groins, revetments etc. will not stop the ocean from washing away these low lying lands. While it may slow the erosion it will not stop it. It is time for us to prepare to relocate these environmental refugees. This is how I want my tax dollars spent.
16
Amen. Virginia's seaside barrier islands have already been de-peopled and we now have THE BARRIER ISLAND CENTER in Machipongo , Virginia . A museum about life on the islands .
Huge shore communities like Saxis and Norfolk are going under while the Congress can't even deal with our crumbling infrastructure .
Saving Tangier makes no sense in light of the larger problem .
Huge shore communities like Saxis and Norfolk are going under while the Congress can't even deal with our crumbling infrastructure .
Saving Tangier makes no sense in light of the larger problem .
5
It is cheaper to relocate those residents.
I have empathy for them, I really do, but Mother Nature will not be satisfied in the long term and the disappearance of this small strip of land will only be delayed a short period of time before Mother Nature swallows it up.
I have empathy for them, I really do, but Mother Nature will not be satisfied in the long term and the disappearance of this small strip of land will only be delayed a short period of time before Mother Nature swallows it up.
13
It always takes a little time for people to come to grips with fundamental changes in their lives. The populism struggling to surface in politics should make it clear that the federal government should allocate whatever it can afford to moving people to high ground and leaving the beaches for the wealthy who dont mind paying excessively for a temporary view of the ocean. Private insurance and the corps of engineers cannot fight rising seas, but it will take a few years for the new realities to become clear. New building continues at a high rate in Miami, postponing the coming reckoning. Life involves a series of adaptations; unbreathable air lead to the Clean Air act, leaded gasoline was banned, desertification in the dust bowl was reduced. We will change our priorites and adapt to rising seas as well.
4
My wife and I have been going to Tangier Island for the last 8yrs with our children. If you have never walked its shores, felt the sand and mud between your toes, met and become friends with these people; I am not sure how you can write some of the comments I am reading. This is the place you wish your children could grow up. Where doors are unlocked. Everyone knows everyone. People help each other, neighbors still stop just to talk. Kids roam free without worry of danger, and knowing if they do anything wrong the word will hit home before they do. These are hardworking people. They are not rich, their waterfront land is not worth a fortune, but it does not diminish the value of their community. There are still crabs, and rockfish, and oysters, and clams... and most of you have no problem eating them, but you would condemn these people to lose their heritage and their history. Can you tell me who lived in your house generations before you? They can. Do you know your Great Great Grandfather's name off the top of your head? they do. Who in your family built your house you live in? This is more than just a town, it is history, culture, a way of life. Research the place, visit, then you might understand. My wife and I bought a house there. I want my family to be a small part of this place even if it doesn't last forever. I want my children to know what it is like. Tangier Virginia deserves to survive.
15
There are many other wonderful (inland) places in America not in imminent danger of drowning. As many commenters have noted, everything changes, especially now, in the era of human - induced global warming. Its not the failt of these good folk on Tamgier Island, but they arent entitled to a tax supported temporary fix of this magnitude. Too many other problems need our tax dollars.
3
That's all very nice , Philip , but are you going to pay for your children's island pleasure ? I live on the Eastern Shore and have visited Tangier Island a few times . In fact I took my grandchildren to experience it .
The next hurricane that comes up the Chesapeake Bay is going to wash over the entire island and the first thing to go will be the crabhouses on sticks . Hopefully the watermen won't be in them and your children won't be on the island .
The next hurricane that comes up the Chesapeake Bay is going to wash over the entire island and the first thing to go will be the crabhouses on sticks . Hopefully the watermen won't be in them and your children won't be on the island .
3
It's great that you have fond memories & want your children to have similar experiences, I get that. But to have government dollars, my tax dollars, your neighbors tax dollars used to save the area from what is an overwhelming natural process, for an area that has no national value (a national seashore doesn't qualify) I don't want my tax dollars going there or to any other community. Long Island has to face similar problems in the near future. If you or the residents of Tangier want to save it, it's your decision, don't make me pay for it.
4
Cry us a river.
Our school districts in Illinois are in debt to the tune of 20 billion dollars, and you're worried about some ephemeral real estate that will be underwater in 50 years? My heart goes out to those affected by the rising tide, but there are 300+ million people in this country whose boats will not be lifted by pumping more muck behind a 20 million dollar seawall.
The coastline is moving. Get over it!
Our school districts in Illinois are in debt to the tune of 20 billion dollars, and you're worried about some ephemeral real estate that will be underwater in 50 years? My heart goes out to those affected by the rising tide, but there are 300+ million people in this country whose boats will not be lifted by pumping more muck behind a 20 million dollar seawall.
The coastline is moving. Get over it!
16
We have so many needs in this country. We should spend the money fixing our substandard infrastructure on high ground. Fighting Mother Nature is a losing proposition.
13
You have $30,000,000 to spend. Pay folks to relocate. Engineering is only a temporary fix. One time only. If they choose to move to another endangered place, no more $$$. Nature will have her way.
12
“Schulte outlined a rough engineering plan, costing around $30 million, that involved breakwaters, pumped-in sand and new vegetation that could preserve the island.” How much for Miami - $300 million? How much for New York City - $3 billion? Do you see where we are going here? Not only are the costs of “saving” coastal cities potentially prohibitive but they are unknown. Given a political climate in which congressmen from “the heartland states” are loathe to appropriate funds for basic governmental functions, the idea that they will agree to fund aid projects for “Blue” coastal regions is laughable. Now, there is always the possibility that corporate America could step up and fund these projects – as long as the affected regions add a couple of zeroes to the estimates and are willing to pay up front.
4
No absolutely do not save it or any other place such as this. That includes a significant part of the whole East Coast shore line and all of Florida.
Do not encourage anyone to stay in what is becoming below sea level.
This is one time when market forces and nature's forces agree.
Do not encourage anyone to stay in what is becoming below sea level.
This is one time when market forces and nature's forces agree.
10
I live on the Virginia Eastern Shore (It's that narrow part that hangs down from the bottom of the Delmarva peninsula and forms the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay) and have visited Tangier Island a few times (there's a ferry that runs regularly). It's historical in a way that Williamsburg can't be, because these are real inhabitants, not paid enactors. The people are separate and apart from the rest of us. For example, to my knowledge there is only one computer on the island and I'm not sure if there is internet. Climate change has probably doomed Tangier, even if it's built up eventually it will probably sink beneath the sea like Atlantis; for that matter the oversized sand bar called the Eastern Shore that I live on will probably be overwhelmed as well (but not in mine or your life time). And it will be too bad when that happens for it will take with it a unique way of life. But life and geography and history are change. So be it.
10
The Corps of Engineers can be both savior and destroyer.
I own a home in the Southern Outer Banks between the ports of Morehead City and Beaufort.
The ports are continuously dredged to keep them from filling with sand and silt.
The pumped out sand had to be dumped back into the ocean four miles out by federal law.
Years ago our beaches started to show strong erosion. Studies showed that the increased pumping from the ports was taking away the sand that normally floated back on the current to our beaches The increased pumping is caused by the need to make the ports deeper to maintain their viability. The new Panama canal will handle larger deeper ships and if the east coast ports can't handle them they'll be bypassed.
After years of fighting we did get an admission from the Corps that they were at fault.
We decided to pay out of pocket for sand pumping. This was very expensive but the towns were able to sell bonds to pay for it with increased taxes. The mainline had to be convinced that once we were gone they would be next. We agreed to pay a higher assessment. Congress was lobbied to change the law so that the dredged sand could be purchased by the towns, cheaper than pumping and the Corps saves by not taking it out to sea.
Our tax base is preserved. Thousands of people come to our beaches every year. They spend money and support the towns.
Flood insurance rates rise every year to support communities that don't buy insurance like New Orleans. Taxes take care of them.
I own a home in the Southern Outer Banks between the ports of Morehead City and Beaufort.
The ports are continuously dredged to keep them from filling with sand and silt.
The pumped out sand had to be dumped back into the ocean four miles out by federal law.
Years ago our beaches started to show strong erosion. Studies showed that the increased pumping from the ports was taking away the sand that normally floated back on the current to our beaches The increased pumping is caused by the need to make the ports deeper to maintain their viability. The new Panama canal will handle larger deeper ships and if the east coast ports can't handle them they'll be bypassed.
After years of fighting we did get an admission from the Corps that they were at fault.
We decided to pay out of pocket for sand pumping. This was very expensive but the towns were able to sell bonds to pay for it with increased taxes. The mainline had to be convinced that once we were gone they would be next. We agreed to pay a higher assessment. Congress was lobbied to change the law so that the dredged sand could be purchased by the towns, cheaper than pumping and the Corps saves by not taking it out to sea.
Our tax base is preserved. Thousands of people come to our beaches every year. They spend money and support the towns.
Flood insurance rates rise every year to support communities that don't buy insurance like New Orleans. Taxes take care of them.
3
Change is so often heartbreaking when described with the nostalgic longings for what can be imagined as an idyllic existence. The ocean is reclaiming this piece of land which makes any struggle seem doomed to failure. Many of us have "suffered" loss that is not nearly so prosaic but just as certain to result in nostalgic longing if we want to go there. The childhood home or neighborhood which has been leveled to build newer, grander edifices. The cherished woods that we wandered and played in as children now a shopping center parking lot and retention basin. A favorite trysting place by the water now the site of an expressway bridge pylon. Loss of such places dear to our memories can unmoor us in self pity or push us to realize the inevitability of change. What is dear to you now will fade and be lost in time. Grovel in the misery or recognize the challenge and get on with what comes next. Your choice. I'm not waiting around to watch or pity those whose choose to be swallowed by their anguish and longing - or by the ocean. Time to move on.
3
My wife and I have been going to Tangier Island for the last 8yrs with our children. If you have never walked its shores, felt the sand and mud between your toes, met and become friends with these people; I am not sure how you can write some of the comments I am reading. This is the place you wish your children could grow up. Where doors are unlocked. Everyone knows everyone. People help each other, neighbors still stop just to talk. Kids roam free without worry of danger, and knowing if they do anything wrong the word will hit home before they do. These are hardworking people. They are not rich, there waterfront land is not worth a fortune, but it does not diminish the value of their community. There are still crabs, and rockfish, and oysters, and clams... and most of you have no problem eating them, but you would condemn these people to lose their heritage and their history. Can you tell me who lived in your house generations before you? They can. Do you know your Great Great Granfather's name off the top of your head? they do. Who in your family built your house you live in? This is more than just a town, it is history, culture, a way of life. Research the place, visit, then you might understand. My wife and I bought a house there. I want my family to be a small part of this place even if it doesn't last forever. I want my children to know what it is like. Tangier Virginia deserves to survive.
3
I wish there are more pictures to the article. I'd bet most of those, myself included, would never see places like this before they eventually fade away.
Recognizing climate change is a good start. At least there are certain acceptance to what Nature does, in contrast to the fighting nature in so many other prosperous regions like Miami that continue to build along the shoreline as if humans shall always overcome, or as rich folks in Cape Code would pay (through their own deep pockets and/or forcing taxpayers to fund their doomed endeavor) to truck sand in to "preserve" their little beachhead.
Four feet above high tide sounds perilous, it'll never stand a chance in the face of even a relatively mild storm. It reminds of the time when I was on ferry in Sydney, Australia, on that gorgeous day, taking in all those pretty houses in various coves, set against azure sky and water. A lot of them aren't even four feet above waterline.
When Mother Nature comes calling, she won't be discriminating between rich or poor. This article hits so close to home, unlike those reports of island nations or poor countries whose people will surely lose everything they have, including their livelihood, much as Tangier Island inhabitants will.
Sadly I don't we should, nor can we afford to, turn 88000 miles of shorelines into something like Venice. For historic places like Tangier Island, they really should collect all the artifacts for a museum. At least memory can be preserved that way.
Recognizing climate change is a good start. At least there are certain acceptance to what Nature does, in contrast to the fighting nature in so many other prosperous regions like Miami that continue to build along the shoreline as if humans shall always overcome, or as rich folks in Cape Code would pay (through their own deep pockets and/or forcing taxpayers to fund their doomed endeavor) to truck sand in to "preserve" their little beachhead.
Four feet above high tide sounds perilous, it'll never stand a chance in the face of even a relatively mild storm. It reminds of the time when I was on ferry in Sydney, Australia, on that gorgeous day, taking in all those pretty houses in various coves, set against azure sky and water. A lot of them aren't even four feet above waterline.
When Mother Nature comes calling, she won't be discriminating between rich or poor. This article hits so close to home, unlike those reports of island nations or poor countries whose people will surely lose everything they have, including their livelihood, much as Tangier Island inhabitants will.
Sadly I don't we should, nor can we afford to, turn 88000 miles of shorelines into something like Venice. For historic places like Tangier Island, they really should collect all the artifacts for a museum. At least memory can be preserved that way.
8
Tiddle , I think you are on to something . At Machipongo Virginia there is THE BARRIER ISLAND CENTER . It's a museum of past human life on the deserted coastal islands .
2
I visited this wonderful place during my freshman orientation trip in 1994. I fell in love with its sunset and its friendly people. I also fell in love with the Chesapeake Bay and I have come to appreciate the diversity of its ecosystem. I hope we can save this island...
4
An excellent, comprehensive, thoroughly-researched article. Kudos and thank you.
I too would prefer that such huge amounts of tax money be spent on projects which benefit the greatest possible number of citizens.
I too would prefer that such huge amounts of tax money be spent on projects which benefit the greatest possible number of citizens.
12
Neat article, although Tangier Island is sinking--climate change has negligible effect. Yes, you need to replenish the land with sand.
3
The earth is covered in the ruins of past cities which were abandoned when the climate shifted and the local people could no longer live as they had. Ask the Puebloan Indians about the ruins of their ancestors in Chaco Canyon and across the American Southwest. Ask the Mayans about their ancestors' cities abandoned in Mexico and Central America.
Modern global warming is a new and human-driven phenomena, but climate change and abandonment of previously-viable towns and cities is an old story. And now it's our turn.
Modern global warming is a new and human-driven phenomena, but climate change and abandonment of previously-viable towns and cities is an old story. And now it's our turn.
7
Schulte’s an optimist: "... its residents were likely to become some of the first climate-change refugees in the continental United States. There are already US climate refugees. Here are a 2 examples:
• A $48 million federal grant has been announced to move 100 residents from Isle de Jean Charles, LA, to higher ground. In the 1950s,the island was 15,000 acres with 400 residents; it has eroded to 80 acres.
• $60M is planned by the 700–member Quinault tribe on the coast of Washington's Olympic Peninsula to move the entire village of Taholah (school, courthouse, police station and homes) to a safer distance from the Pacific.
Interesting budget issues are looming. $108 M to move 800 people in 2 communities to higher ground. At that per capita rate, the 5 million people at risk w/in 4' of high tide will cost $675 B to resettle. And 4' is an old estimate (about 1 meter); current estimates are 6-10' (2–3 m).
We're also getting climate refugees: thousands of Marshall Islanders have settled in HI & AR.
• A $48 million federal grant has been announced to move 100 residents from Isle de Jean Charles, LA, to higher ground. In the 1950s,the island was 15,000 acres with 400 residents; it has eroded to 80 acres.
• $60M is planned by the 700–member Quinault tribe on the coast of Washington's Olympic Peninsula to move the entire village of Taholah (school, courthouse, police station and homes) to a safer distance from the Pacific.
Interesting budget issues are looming. $108 M to move 800 people in 2 communities to higher ground. At that per capita rate, the 5 million people at risk w/in 4' of high tide will cost $675 B to resettle. And 4' is an old estimate (about 1 meter); current estimates are 6-10' (2–3 m).
We're also getting climate refugees: thousands of Marshall Islanders have settled in HI & AR.
15
Why waste resources fighting a losing battle? Conservation easements and eminent domain removal would be the most efficient and effective long-term means of addressing communities in areas of rising sea level. A national strategy must be in place.
12
What a shame. If only someone would have told us 30 years ago that this was going to happen. We might have been able to at least slow down the process.
Shouldn't climate scientists have seen this coming?
And shouldn't the government have tried to slow the process by environmental protection?
And shouldn't the government have invested in plans and projects to mitigate this?
What a shame, if only we had been warned.
Shouldn't climate scientists have seen this coming?
And shouldn't the government have tried to slow the process by environmental protection?
And shouldn't the government have invested in plans and projects to mitigate this?
What a shame, if only we had been warned.
11
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic …..
But in case not: we were warned. Very few people wanted to hear the warnings.
But in case not: we were warned. Very few people wanted to hear the warnings.
1
"What a shame, if only we had been warned"
Funny... Yes, we get it
Funny... Yes, we get it
1
They did. And yet, still, the climate change deniers block adequate legislative response.
These homes should have never been built on a marsh island and now the owners have to accept that.
17
Louisiana's coastline and barrier islands have been going under for years; We need to learn to live with the losses. Katrina in New Orleans didn't involve any making people whole, how does anybody really expect that? To live at the sea edge is to risk your house. People knew that. The Corps needs to be looking at deepwater ports along the coasts, not worrying about bad descisions made by individuals. It's harsh, but I lost everything in Katrina. Life goes on. Unless ocean shipping is completely disrupted by sea rise because ports go under and we're surrounded by shallows...
8
In any event, a lovely article. Thank you.
6
This was posted to the wrong article.
1
That was nice of you!
It's sad for those living there, with the beauty, history and memories, but I don't think any amount of engineering or money will save the island in the long run. It would be much cheaper to buy every resident a really nice house boat if they want to stay there...
6
The relevant comparison would be the Alaskan village of Shishmaref profiled by Elizabeth Kolbert in her 2006 book "Field Notes from a Catastrophe". No longer protected by early forming shelf ice due to ocean warming, the village was being eroded into the sea by the powerful winter storms. The ancient hunting culture simply became too dangerous to continue from there. A new village was built on the mainland. A way of life became extinct.
Humans do not like change, but we adapt well. The climate reality of even the next few decades had best be planned as we use to say 'immediately, if not sooner'. The scale of change and lose will be colossal given the world wide populations involved. From Tangier island to Bangladesh displacement on vast scales will take place. With reasonable foresight and prudential decision making now, tragedy and lose of life can be minimized given that "thousand year storms" are now occurring almost yearly. A lot of real estate will go under. Period.
Humans do not like change, but we adapt well. The climate reality of even the next few decades had best be planned as we use to say 'immediately, if not sooner'. The scale of change and lose will be colossal given the world wide populations involved. From Tangier island to Bangladesh displacement on vast scales will take place. With reasonable foresight and prudential decision making now, tragedy and lose of life can be minimized given that "thousand year storms" are now occurring almost yearly. A lot of real estate will go under. Period.
8
What if government used its limited resources to protect the poor and the middle class (including the residents of Tangier Island), rather than subsidizing the wealthy who continue to buy beachfront second homes, with expensive and ultimately futile restoration efforts? No, it's not the way our system works, I realize. But it would be more just.
It's especially galling when the wealthy deny man-made climate change, while driving their huge SUVs, then expecting government help to protect their beachfront properties.
It's especially galling when the wealthy deny man-made climate change, while driving their huge SUVs, then expecting government help to protect their beachfront properties.
31
Richard, its not a matter of justness, its a matter of global climate change and the need for governments world-wide to come to terms and address this potentially horrific issue.
Let it go, don't have the money to fight a losing battle with Mother Nature.....
3
Tangiers' poeople have lived a highly unique existence; whatever happens, this article gives insight into them and the options available. And without shouting, a preview of the problems to come.
What distruns me more than the prospect of trying to save this island, is that people have been allowed to build housing on barrier islands and low lying land for decades, when we have know that these areas were subject to constant change under normal circumstances, and utter disappearance with warming.
I am totally opposed to reimbursing high income people for building with the expectation that their utterly predictable losses would be insurable and covered. The damages that will come can only be, in the end, provided via public tax dollars and that is untenable.
What distruns me more than the prospect of trying to save this island, is that people have been allowed to build housing on barrier islands and low lying land for decades, when we have know that these areas were subject to constant change under normal circumstances, and utter disappearance with warming.
I am totally opposed to reimbursing high income people for building with the expectation that their utterly predictable losses would be insurable and covered. The damages that will come can only be, in the end, provided via public tax dollars and that is untenable.
13
Why did I not read about another obvious option: move without tax payer support?
25
How do you do that when you can't sell the land you're on? At an average salary of $40K per year where do the residents get the money to afford a plot on the mainland? And where do they find work from there?
5
These are not rich people who can just walk away from their homes and start somewhere else. For some of them the house is their only asset. If they did that they would be on government assistance the rest of their lives.
3
With every estimation of when lands would become vulnerable, I pushed it forward by twenty-five years. Miami uninhabitable by 2050=2025, etc. Climate change is not happening in the slow, arithmetic fashion that the climatologists would have us believe but instead with a gathering speed that will sooner rather than later overwhelm the frail human political systems we have at our disposal. In 2000, it was estimated that the Arctic Ocean would be navigable in summer by 2100. Then it was 2070, then 2050, then 2030. And of course, one can sail the Arctic in late summer today. It was widely reported to have hit 75 in Nuuk, Greenland in May, 30 degrees above normal, if anything can be called normal these days. That technical solutions exist or can be found to save the humans I have no doubt. But between our greed and our failure to recognize the human in the other, I fear we shall not.
28
No.
7
Rather than spend $30 million to try and fix it, why not just give each home-owning resident who agrees to relocate $50 thousand? With 470 residents that's a savings of $6.5 million.
Yes, many would face losses compared to what they had historically perceived to be the value of their homes, but if the offer had an expiration date and they thought that the island would be unlivable in 25 years, many would take it. $50k is a good down payment on a home in many places in the country.
And for those who didn't accept the offer, that's ok too. Renters or the elderly may not need to worry as much about the state of their homes 15-20 years from now.
Yes, many would face losses compared to what they had historically perceived to be the value of their homes, but if the offer had an expiration date and they thought that the island would be unlivable in 25 years, many would take it. $50k is a good down payment on a home in many places in the country.
And for those who didn't accept the offer, that's ok too. Renters or the elderly may not need to worry as much about the state of their homes 15-20 years from now.
11
Lots of room to resettle people in South Dakota. We could put tens of millions in the northern Great Plains.
7
Jim,
Why not send them all to your town?
Richard
Why not send them all to your town?
Richard
2
What a catastrophe
How's the crabbing there in the Dakotas? Any clams?
1
No only are we losing an island but we are losing a way of life and culture on the Chesapeake. My grandmother always told us stories of her father and family being watermen and how the island her family lived on no longer existed . My only hope is this article brings to light the importance of preserving this narrative as much as the need for thoughtful action to deal with the consquences of our changing environment
18
While heartbreaking, this situation is easy to resolve. Given the intractability of this challenge worldwide, governments should step back and let the private sector handle it. People should have private flood insurance for these properties and if they can't get it insured, then they're on their own. The free market in action.
A few points. Waterfront property is highly valued and therefore it's mainly rich people who own it. Why should governments spend millions and billions to protect rich peoples' properties?
Here near Vancouver, the below-sea level suburbs of Richmond, Ladner and Delta around the Fraser River delta have some of the most expensive real estate in Canada. They've recently started calling for government funding in "flood control". They're using annual river flood control as a cover to get government money to start protecting these lands against inexorable climate change sea level rises.
Given the scale of coastal flooding that climate change will engender over the next 85 years by 2100, it's incumbent on governments to decide now not to send good money after bad. Let the private market decide which real estate is worth defending. The truth is that real estate owners of properties under five above sea level are in trouble. People with property 5 to 10 ft above sea level: congratulations, you have the next century's new waterfront property!
Finally, what is the present day value of waterfront property that will be worth zero in 85 years in the year 2100?
A few points. Waterfront property is highly valued and therefore it's mainly rich people who own it. Why should governments spend millions and billions to protect rich peoples' properties?
Here near Vancouver, the below-sea level suburbs of Richmond, Ladner and Delta around the Fraser River delta have some of the most expensive real estate in Canada. They've recently started calling for government funding in "flood control". They're using annual river flood control as a cover to get government money to start protecting these lands against inexorable climate change sea level rises.
Given the scale of coastal flooding that climate change will engender over the next 85 years by 2100, it's incumbent on governments to decide now not to send good money after bad. Let the private market decide which real estate is worth defending. The truth is that real estate owners of properties under five above sea level are in trouble. People with property 5 to 10 ft above sea level: congratulations, you have the next century's new waterfront property!
Finally, what is the present day value of waterfront property that will be worth zero in 85 years in the year 2100?
29
The costs of Army Corps of Engineer work is paid at prevailing wage. Maybe that is why it is so expensive. Since we are opening the borders why not use refugees/migrants to do the work at minimum wage....every other employer seems to be doing it.
1
Interesting idea. Would said refugees/migrants be given a path to citizenship? If so, good luck getting THAT approved!
2
Someone needs to "tag" the Republicans in this article so they will know to read it. Honestly, what is it going to take to get them to stop saying the don't believe in climate change? If this and the article along with "In Cape Cod, Retreating from an Advancing Ocean", don't do it what will?
6
Their homes being lost.
7
It's a compelling story, but the dirty little secret is that many (although not this one) islands said to be threatened are actually not, and some even rise with rising waters because they are atolls.
Regardless, adapting to climate change is likely to be orders of magnitude cheaper than large-scale reductions in productivity, which would be required to lower emissions.
Don't forget there are enormous costs to limiting emissions just as there are costs to allowing them. And yes that includes millions of potential deaths as cheaper food and energy become unavailable to the most vulnerable due to new regs and climate deals.
Regardless, adapting to climate change is likely to be orders of magnitude cheaper than large-scale reductions in productivity, which would be required to lower emissions.
Don't forget there are enormous costs to limiting emissions just as there are costs to allowing them. And yes that includes millions of potential deaths as cheaper food and energy become unavailable to the most vulnerable due to new regs and climate deals.
4
Beautiful place, lovely people - they even have their own strange medical syndrome manifested, I seem to recall, by orange tonsils! And very odd cats. But worth saving for no other reason than... Crabcakes. I'm pretty sure those we ate in the crab shack in the harbour were the best in the world. My own extensive researches have revealed none better. Bon appetit and save Tangier Island!
15
Sorry, but clearly not worth taxpayer money.
2
Wonderful journalism. Thank you. The item about the dialect interested me the most, in considering the islands importance to me. A rare community indeed. I want things to work out for them.
12
Thirty years ago, it would have been 'an ounce of prevention'.
Now, it's not hard to look ahead just ten or twenty years to see a world of constant battlefield triage. Tangier Island is just a taste of that.
Future Shock indeed!
Now, it's not hard to look ahead just ten or twenty years to see a world of constant battlefield triage. Tangier Island is just a taste of that.
Future Shock indeed!
6
Great article.
5
"What’s more, the land in and around the Chesapeake is sinking, because of lingering effects from geological events dating back 20,000 years."
Trying to save Tangier Island would be a fool's errand. It's not geologically stable.
Trying to save Tangier Island would be a fool's errand. It's not geologically stable.
7
I can't believe that this is even up for discussion.. saving this island. It's going to die, people! Sell, leave, or stay, but don't ask your fellow citizens to save your homes... they can't be. AND we all, who benefit nothing from subsidizing your flood insurance, should stop that as well. Sorry, very sorry, but in global warming there will be countless winners and losers......
9
Historical footnote: Tangier island lends its name to a disease of cholesterol metabolism, first discovered among its inhabitants .
5
Thanks, Dreamer9!
1
I am tired of my tax dollars being used to subsidize people building in areas that should not be lived in. No problem if the people who live in these areas are willing to assume financial risk, assuming them doing so does not cause environmental damage, but they alone should pay for their decision to assume the risk. Maybe our tax dollars should support cities like Boston and Manhattan as they encounter problems of rising seas, but people living on a vulnerable island in middle of Chesapeake Bay, or on a sand dune in the Hamptons, or in a salt marsh in Breezy Point should assume the risk of living in places so obviously vulnerable, even in best of times from things like hurricanes.
22
There is nothing so ephemeral in the geologic realm as a shoreline. Most of us are familiar with the daily effects of tides, when sea level changes of a few feet can move the shoreline back and forth tens to hundreds of feet. But longer geologic cycles and trends move sea level and shorelines hundreds of feet (and hundreds of miles). Only 20,000 years ago--a geologic blink--the shoreline of the east coat lay 10 to 50 miles east (and now submerged by 300 feet). Geologists study shore deposits (and paleo-marine environments) in the Cretaceous rocks of Wyoming, when the North American continent looked pretty similar to today--except for sea level! With this as the natural background, the acceleration of sea level rise due to human activity only adds to the urgency.
Attempts to "save the land" however, are misguided. Any student in high school or introductory college earth science can tell you about certain places to avoid building anything you expect to be permanent: flood plains, volcanoes, active fault zones, and the shorelines of coastal plains. A universal effort to raise the land or defend it behind dikes and sea walls makes as much sense as building ice-making plants on Greenland to capture more of the water cycle as glaciers and shrink the seas.
Deciding how best to help people and communities relocate will be difficult and should be the primary focus.
Attempts to "save the land" however, are misguided. Any student in high school or introductory college earth science can tell you about certain places to avoid building anything you expect to be permanent: flood plains, volcanoes, active fault zones, and the shorelines of coastal plains. A universal effort to raise the land or defend it behind dikes and sea walls makes as much sense as building ice-making plants on Greenland to capture more of the water cycle as glaciers and shrink the seas.
Deciding how best to help people and communities relocate will be difficult and should be the primary focus.
34
Are the people of Tangier Island represented by a climate denier?
8
Let it go. More will follow anyway.
1
If you are a Republican, don't even think of asking for government intervention....it's un-American.
8
They also find paying taxes un-American too.
3
As an old sixties lefty my heart goes out to the folks who stand little or no chance of their houses and communities ever ending up on the top of the Army Corps' priority list. But I'm also inclined to give nature its due and argue against any large scale, tax-payer funded rescues of such properties, New York and Miami included. I'd rather see the huge amounts of money devoted to relocation inland, along with job training when necessary, than trying to thwart the inevitable outcomes of our shortsightedness as a species. We have spat too long in nature's face at our peril, especially since it is turning out we were only spitting into the wind all along. Better to take our lumps and perhaps finally learn some important lessons than to vainly throw up more walls against an inexorable tide.
29
Managed retreat. We need to be focused on saving our major coastal cities.
5
No.
2
The army Corp reconstruction and environmental assistance projects are not particularly successful (Florida Everglades as a prime example, or Louisiana costal wetland). You can not stop sea level rise. These islands are doomed and never should have been built on to begin with. The residents need to relocate and be paid out FAIRLY! By their insurance companies.
7
If one is really worried about the rising sea-level, one should consider that sea-level would rise about 76 meters or 249 feet if all the ice sheets and glaciers in the world melted. Alas, this is not going to happen from today to tomorrow.
2
Put the billions into the transition to new energy sources so that we won't have to worry about "saving" every coastal area in the future. Places like Tangier might be temporarily saved, but the money is better spent on the trsnsition away from fossil fuels, and, by the way, to a more realistic view of growth and population. Maybe the loss of places like this will help people to wake up.
10
The basic fact is that the sea level is going to continue to rise and more and more of our coastline cities will be under water. The question is not if but when do we start making the hard decisions about what we will save and what we leave to the sea. Yes there will be winners and losers but that is the reality of life and the sooner we face it the better. This is a problem that every state with a coastline is facing and there need to get to work preparing for it.
Our elected officials need to start talking about so that people get used to the subject and what needs to be done.
Tangier island is doomed and people need to start moving away and stop with this hope that the Feds are going to build a wall around it. Sorry but those are the hard facts when you go up against Mother Nature, she always wins.
Our elected officials need to start talking about so that people get used to the subject and what needs to be done.
Tangier island is doomed and people need to start moving away and stop with this hope that the Feds are going to build a wall around it. Sorry but those are the hard facts when you go up against Mother Nature, she always wins.
11
It is sad to see the loss of such history and the turmoil for these people, but in the broader scheme of things it is hard to imagine spending the money to save the island. It raises several issues that Congress should address if the GOP can stop denying climate change and if people subject to it would stop putting their head in the sand:
1.) Who and how are we to make the value judgments on what to protect and what to abandon. Unfortunately, it is a lot cheaper to abandon Tangier, but what about New Orleans?
2.) Should the public pay for relocating and/or buying out the inhabitants? Surely it would be cheaper now than to wait until their homes are destroyed by helping them to make an orderly exit. For people like this that did not know what they were getting in to, it seems fair to spend the money to help them leave now rather than to wait for a disaster with potential loss of life. That is qualitatively different than taking care of a builder of a McMansion at the shore now, when you should know it is a risk.
3.) As noted in the article, shouldn't we be planning our response in all the other cities now, through funding research, changing zoning, requiring a response plan, providing notice that people build at their own risk (and mean it), and saving money for the engineering to come.
1.) Who and how are we to make the value judgments on what to protect and what to abandon. Unfortunately, it is a lot cheaper to abandon Tangier, but what about New Orleans?
2.) Should the public pay for relocating and/or buying out the inhabitants? Surely it would be cheaper now than to wait until their homes are destroyed by helping them to make an orderly exit. For people like this that did not know what they were getting in to, it seems fair to spend the money to help them leave now rather than to wait for a disaster with potential loss of life. That is qualitatively different than taking care of a builder of a McMansion at the shore now, when you should know it is a risk.
3.) As noted in the article, shouldn't we be planning our response in all the other cities now, through funding research, changing zoning, requiring a response plan, providing notice that people build at their own risk (and mean it), and saving money for the engineering to come.
8
Given the real and relentless rising of sea levels worldwide, it doesn't make sense to try to "save" areas that are becoming flooded. We don't have the resources, neither financial nor civil engineering, to build structures to hold back the seas. The wiser move is to relocate those whose properties are lost, sad as that may be. Since there is no global political resolve to actually do anything about climate change, we should not plan on any relief from rising sea levels. There are indications that polar ice and glaciers may melt at an increasing rate, compounding the problem.
9
Let's just get it over with and help them to move to higher ground on the mainland. This will provide us an opportunity to learn how to do this. We will be doing this for decades to come and it's our own damn fault.
38
Sorry, but these folks cannot be our first climate change refugees. An Alaskan village has already been completely relocated further inland.
11
If you look at the research on beach restoration, such as The Corps and the Shore, or The Last Beach, both by Orrin Pilkey, you will find that the breakwaters and pumped sand will not save the island. They will just enrich some beach restoration contractors and give people a false sense of security. The money would be better spent on relocation.
10
Nope. And here in my home state of CA, we should absolve ourselves of the responsibility of paying to reimburse gazillionaires who purchase or build homes perched on the edges of eroding sea cliffs, and then wonder why it is suddenly possible for them to build sand castles in the living room.
17
Why should we spend hundreds of millions of dollars so that people can continue to choose living near oceans and rivers, who do so because they know the rest of us will be forced to pay the costs of their rebuilding, after decades of us subsidizing their flood insurance?
9
Do not, repeat, do not use my hard earned tax dollars to bail out a few people on an insignificant spit of sand in the middle of the Chesapeake Bay. The bay itself has been sinking for thousands of years, it's actually the drowned river valley of the Susquehanna, regardless of the exacerbating factors of man-made climate change with rising sea levels. No one coerced these people to purchase a home there, build a home there, or to remain there. Maybe we should buy out the natives but as for the rest, it sets an untenable, unaffordable precedent to bail them out. What next, buying out Avalon, Ocean City and Sea Isle when they sink into the Atlantic off New Jersey?
46
Our cultural heritage is literally sinking into the sea while politicians debate the obvious - that climate change is real, is escalating, and is already devastating communities around the US, both on the shorelines and far inland. This is not a "someday, somewhere, somehow" sort of theoretical possibility anymore. We lost 30+ years debating the obvious, for obvious reasons. Well, now it's here, its there, its everywhere - and still our politicians debate and argue. I guarantee when the parking lots filled with expensive cars under Congress get flooded, Congress will suddenly act. We can only pray it's not too late for the rest of us at that point.
7
The comparison of the "Haves" (Miami Beach, Cape Cod) vs. the "Have nots" (Tangier Island, Grand Isle LA) is a bit of an aggrandizement. The real "Have nots" are places like Palau and the Sundarbans who have been marginalized and trivialized.
6
Please consider this an open invitation to any conservative political representatives of Tangier Island to visit and explain to the citizens there what is actually occurring to cause their Island, their traditions, and their homes to disappear in less than two generations. If it's not climate change, then maybe it's God's will, or perhaps Obama has something to do with it.
5
Abandon it.
I've never visited Tangier but have spent a few days on Smith Island nearby. A few feet above sea level, a few houses. If people want to put their houses up on pilings to continue living in these untenable places, go ahead.
I've never visited Tangier but have spent a few days on Smith Island nearby. A few feet above sea level, a few houses. If people want to put their houses up on pilings to continue living in these untenable places, go ahead.
6
Just one small correction. Alaskan villages have had to relocate because of climate change many times AND Alaska IS part of the continental USA. If the writers are referring to the lower 48, the correct term is 'the contiguous' not continental, if you want to exclude Alaska.
10
How exactly does politics play "an outsized role" in spending tax payer money? That's like saying I play an outsized role in spending my salary.
3
Homo Sapiens will leave an interesting batch of artifacts before we literally burn ourselves into extinction. Ephemeral as the may flies that live for only one day.
6
Saving coastal villages, towns, and cities is futile. It's time to make plans to move millions of people further inland over the coming decades, and send the bill to the fossil fuel industry.
7
Great article....see...thats why i retired....at 4:30 on a Wednesday afternoon, I can lay on my bed and read such an interesting article. Yay!!!
5
The Chinese built 3 islands, in the middle of nowhere, right under our noses, and in no time. Then equipped them with all the modern accessories and military hardware to defend them.
Why can't this be done here through the same sand dredging?
Isn't the USA the leader in innovative ideas and inventions?
Why can't this be done here through the same sand dredging?
Isn't the USA the leader in innovative ideas and inventions?
1
Apparently no, we are not. Have you not noticed that our political will as a nation is paralyzed by ideological gamesmanship?
Not getting much infrastrucure accomplished these days. Lots of posturing in congress, however.
Not getting much infrastrucure accomplished these days. Lots of posturing in congress, however.
Two things:
One, you assume what the Chinese did was the right thing to do and so we should do the same;
and two, the south China sea is not the middle of nowhere and it wasn't right under our noses--that implies that is our sea to control. Take a look that geography for a moment.
One, you assume what the Chinese did was the right thing to do and so we should do the same;
and two, the south China sea is not the middle of nowhere and it wasn't right under our noses--that implies that is our sea to control. Take a look that geography for a moment.
Local governments have been too lax for years allowing development in high risk locations for the short term tax revenue while ignoring the long term risk of sure environmental disaster with the bailouts being paid by the federal government WHEN the disaster occurs. This needs to be mitigated early at the development level and high risk areas fazed out over time. I know a pipe dream given the money and homeowner value issue, but it is the only real solution. The developer side has more money and therefore more sway than the science/engineering planning side.
6
When we talk about the Corps dredging Baltimore harbor we should also ask why they're doing that. They're also dredging Miami Harbor. And here in NY-NJ we're raising the Bayonne Bridge. All of this to handle the handful of bigger ships soon to come through the bigger Panama Canal. Instead of upgrading one city's harbor we're upgrading (and paying for) all three. Why?
5
I cannot think of anything more stupid, useless, or futile, than trying to save a hundred or a thousand tiny communities from the rising seas. The United States has 12,000 miles of coastline (compared to the Netherlands' 450), and the ocean is an immoveable force. This is a battle we will lose no matter how much we spend. Most of these communities will be lost. Any resources we invest should be in moving folks inland to long-term safe ground. And we should cease offering flood insurance to new builds in these hopeless areas.
8
$30 million for 470 residents? The economics of that are pretty clear. Especially since that's just the first go-round. Better to buy them out.
If we started doing that a bunch maybe it would get our Republican Congress to address preventing climate change? Hahahahaha.
If we started doing that a bunch maybe it would get our Republican Congress to address preventing climate change? Hahahahaha.
4
The writer said, "Over the past four centuries, Schulte estimates, more than 500 islands have disappeared from the bay, about 40 of them once inhabited," and then directly attributes Tangier's problems to climate change.
So climate change has been going on for four centuries, or is there some direct connection to Tangier that he failed to mention?
So climate change has been going on for four centuries, or is there some direct connection to Tangier that he failed to mention?
2
You read the first few paragraphs and assume you know everything the article has to say. Typical of climate denier mentality.
1
This group of 6th graders has heard the naysayers but remains steadfast in helping to buy more time for a generation of Tangiermen to live out their lives and continue their heritage on their beloved island: http://www.tangierislandva.com/take-action/
4
The obvious answer is not everywhere can be saved. The Army Corps of Engineers should be challenged to develop set of objective non-political guidelines by which all areas at risk should be triaged sooner than later, into realistic classifications of what can be reasonably and economically saved. The worst of this natural disaster is going to be the uncertainty of not addressing the situation from a pragmatic science based economically driven program.
3
People who build in a place like this are fools, risking their investment for the pleasure of living near the sea. It is not the public's responsibility to cover the losses that occur because they chose to ignore the obvious dangers of living on a subsiding hurricane coast. The same applies to those who build in riverine flood plains. There is no secret where these are.
These places should never have been inhabited, and we will be better off once everyone leaves.
These places should never have been inhabited, and we will be better off once everyone leaves.
5
Perhaps the article did not explain well that many of Tangier Island's families moved there centuries ago. They came from England, worked hard as "watermen" and were anything but wealthy. No rich folks who wanted an ocean view . . . . .
4
All efforts will be in vain if we don't pass a carbon tax to slow down climate change.
6
Look to the Dutch for answers. Can you say poldar?
2
Nature gives, nature takes. It makes no sense to use tax dollars to save places like these. Spend it on education or health care.
6
51% of Tangier voted for the Republican candidate in the last general election, th e only conservative party in the world that denies climate change. why should we save these people from themselves?
46
This nation can save this place, turn our people loose! It will be a start to much larger projects to come.
If we try to build our way out of the impact of rising sea levels, two things will happen. First we'll bankrupt ourselves (put us into a debt hole that even our grandchildren's grandchildren won't be able to dig out of), and Second, there will be catastrophic failures resulting in enormous property loss, injuries and loss of life. Better to prioritize the areas that need to be abandoned and relocated and get started now. While we're at it, let's find a way to raise the flood insurance premiums so that at least that program stays solvent even if it can't pay for preemptive relocations.
13
No one has a right to live where ever they want in the US and have taxpayers rescue them. If fact, at this moment, real estate is soaring in the "doomed" places mentioned meaning people are choosing it instead of being caught by surprise.
If this article about a sinking island of 470 (who could easily be relocated unlike residents of Kiribati) is meant to illustrate the insurmountable problems related to global warming, it takes an irritatingly long time and presents irrelevant details to get to a depressing but obvious point.
If this article about a sinking island of 470 (who could easily be relocated unlike residents of Kiribati) is meant to illustrate the insurmountable problems related to global warming, it takes an irritatingly long time and presents irrelevant details to get to a depressing but obvious point.
5
Time to abandon ship.
Poor choice for settling, and there should be no bailout.
Sorry, sad news.
Poor choice for settling, and there should be no bailout.
Sorry, sad news.
4
$1.4 Billion for private property with just 470 residents is too expensive. If Tangier Island gets Federal Aid, then every small community threatened by the rising oceans can justify getting Federal Aid.
If you can justify that, then Miami Beach with a population of 91,000 should get $270 Billion for it's rising water problems. Where does it all end?
At some point we as a nation have to prioritize. Unfortunately, economic triage will have to take place. In this case it is best to let Tangier Island disappear.
To all the Climate Change Deniers, places like Tangier Island are the Poster Child of real Facts on the Ground vs the Fantasy of Denial.
If you can justify that, then Miami Beach with a population of 91,000 should get $270 Billion for it's rising water problems. Where does it all end?
At some point we as a nation have to prioritize. Unfortunately, economic triage will have to take place. In this case it is best to let Tangier Island disappear.
To all the Climate Change Deniers, places like Tangier Island are the Poster Child of real Facts on the Ground vs the Fantasy of Denial.
40
I believe the estimate to save Tangier was 30 million. 1.4 billion was the cost of the poplar island project
Sadly, the fate of Tangier Island has already been decided. The rate of warming and climatic shift has a decades-long head-start. In other words, what we are experiencing now in 2016 is the result of emissions in the Reagan Administration! And as I recall, Ronald Reagan was a global-warming denier.
This is the tragedy of climate change: it works on a geological time-scale, not a political one, or one based on human need. Tangier Island, like the rest of the world, has had decades in which prepare for the inevitable. But as Upton Sinclair noted, it is impossible to convince someone of a fact, when their livelihood depends on their not understanding it. Politicians of every stripe have continually argued against climate science because the cure that it mandated--better ecological management, increased fuel economy, less development and more forestation--would cost money and votes. Denial cost nothing, or so it seemed. Today, Tangier Island is just one piece of that true cost. And, as its neighbors like Little Fox Island, Goose Island, and Upper Tump disappear beneath the waves, Tangier's eventual fate becomes clear.
I foresee a new book for sale: Lost Islands of Chesapeake Bay!
This is the tragedy of climate change: it works on a geological time-scale, not a political one, or one based on human need. Tangier Island, like the rest of the world, has had decades in which prepare for the inevitable. But as Upton Sinclair noted, it is impossible to convince someone of a fact, when their livelihood depends on their not understanding it. Politicians of every stripe have continually argued against climate science because the cure that it mandated--better ecological management, increased fuel economy, less development and more forestation--would cost money and votes. Denial cost nothing, or so it seemed. Today, Tangier Island is just one piece of that true cost. And, as its neighbors like Little Fox Island, Goose Island, and Upper Tump disappear beneath the waves, Tangier's eventual fate becomes clear.
I foresee a new book for sale: Lost Islands of Chesapeake Bay!
9
Permanent development should not be allowed in coastal areas, beaches, flats, marshes, etc. That "high enough" ground you sink that foundation into isn't going to stay high enough for long. The changes that occur along the coast may be slower than most people can observe, but they are regular, and they are inevitable.
9
I am sorry for the problems the residents of this island are facing but we see this over and over. People build their homes where nature rules then when the inevitable happens they look to the rest of us to pay for their problems or, at the least, fix the problem for them.
You see it along our great rivers and coasts as people build, or rebuild, right in a rivers flood plain or the edge of the ocean or gulf. They enjoy being on the water until the inevitable flood or erosion occurs. Then they cry out for the country to fix the problem or pay for their damages.
The person in this article lives almost on the sea shore and it now seeking someone to save her from her long time decision to live where nature makes the decisions. I feel sorry for her, but I don't feel responsible for the problem.
You see it along our great rivers and coasts as people build, or rebuild, right in a rivers flood plain or the edge of the ocean or gulf. They enjoy being on the water until the inevitable flood or erosion occurs. Then they cry out for the country to fix the problem or pay for their damages.
The person in this article lives almost on the sea shore and it now seeking someone to save her from her long time decision to live where nature makes the decisions. I feel sorry for her, but I don't feel responsible for the problem.
8
And how you write this article with no mention, by any of the players, of James Michener's immensely popular "novel" "Chesapeake" - I do not know.
For those not familiar- the inevitable disappearance of these islands features hugely in the book. While his "Devon Island" is fictional; like all else he wrote about - it was based on solid reality. No surprise- known long ago, dictated by geology first, and only accelerated by sea level rise.
As to what to do- I'll just point out that our species has built entire towns - on stilts, over water - many times. It just may be the cheapest alternative.
For those not familiar- the inevitable disappearance of these islands features hugely in the book. While his "Devon Island" is fictional; like all else he wrote about - it was based on solid reality. No surprise- known long ago, dictated by geology first, and only accelerated by sea level rise.
As to what to do- I'll just point out that our species has built entire towns - on stilts, over water - many times. It just may be the cheapest alternative.
8
"The land in and around the Chesapeake is sinking, because of lingering effects from geological events dating back 20,000 years. … Over the past four centuries, Schulte estimates, more than 500 islands have disappeared from the bay, about 40 of them once inhabited.”
People who build in places like this are not taking a risk; they are, with certainty, building a temporary structure that will stand for a very finite period of time. They probably cannot buy insurance, because the insurance industry knows the house will disappear. They are not “likely to become some of the first climate-change refugees in the continental United States”; they are just more victims of their own stupidity (or perhaps their own ignorance).
No, the government should not bail them out. What the government can do is to refuse permits to build or to rebuild structures that stand on land that is actively eroding.
People who build in places like this are not taking a risk; they are, with certainty, building a temporary structure that will stand for a very finite period of time. They probably cannot buy insurance, because the insurance industry knows the house will disappear. They are not “likely to become some of the first climate-change refugees in the continental United States”; they are just more victims of their own stupidity (or perhaps their own ignorance).
No, the government should not bail them out. What the government can do is to refuse permits to build or to rebuild structures that stand on land that is actively eroding.
10
"they are just more victims of their own stupidity (or perhaps their own ignorance." More likely, their own poverty. The Island has been inhabited by hard-working fisher folk for centuries! They did not arrive here from England with pots full of cash.
5
How will the Republicans explain this to their constituents?
3
I feel for the folks of Tangier Island, but how does one hold back the sea? This is just one small area that is facing higher , and rising, water levels. The powers that be need to get on the ball and help folks plan for what is inevitable: the loss of land and livelihoods.
10
The answer to the title question should be an easy No if the country is serious about climate change. The country will simply waste trillions of taxpayer dollars better spent elsewhere if it attempt so "save" what cannot be saved. The instinct of politicians will be to buy votes with money wasted, but the citizens must resist these impulses. This will happen on all coasts and now is the time to just say No.
5
Quite a luxury to live on an exclusive island and have America bail you out. What group of people get to isolate themselves from those who are different than they are, and get the federal government to finance their choices? The Methodist church appears to be the main source of organization/leadership in Tangier and Smith islands. They handle federal money coming in. The populations appear homogeneous to a fault. Children are transported by boat to school in Va. It's an expensive way of life, and the federal government is paying the bill.
7
I think you will not find many families in Tangier living in luxury.
4
Yes, it should be saved. The biggest practical reason for which is that we need to accept that this will become an increasingly popular reality for many places around the nation and we need to get a lot of people trained up to do it. The cost estimates are far too high, and we need the economics of scale to bring these projects down into reasonable numbers, I have a hard time believing it costs so much to save our own country when China is literally creating islands daily using similar processes.
We need to create the infrastructure to quickly react, in a cost efficient manner, by damming, filling in, raising from sea level, and installing emergency pumps in case of extreme weather.
The sooner we start the cheaper and more effective it will be, we've been unintentionally geo-engineering the planet for over a hundred years, now it's time to treat earth like a large garden and intentionally geo-engineer it for our purposes and survival.
We need to create the infrastructure to quickly react, in a cost efficient manner, by damming, filling in, raising from sea level, and installing emergency pumps in case of extreme weather.
The sooner we start the cheaper and more effective it will be, we've been unintentionally geo-engineering the planet for over a hundred years, now it's time to treat earth like a large garden and intentionally geo-engineer it for our purposes and survival.
3
This story really hits home. My father is from the Eastern Shore of Virginia, and I still have relatives living there, and many more buried there. It is a thin strip of land between the Atlantic and the Chesapeake, low lying and steadily eroding, from both sides. It has more time than Tangier, but not too much more. The legitimate economy has narrowed to things related to chicken production, with a smattering of healthcare for a steadily aging population and a bit of tourism. The open coastline combined with easy access to larger east coast cities makes it an attractive entry for drugs. A bad hand and getting worse. People who can leave will continue to, but it is heartbreaking that it has come to this. Climate change exacerbates the problems, but the wounds we have inflicted on rural America are just as deep as those in urban areas, just sometimes too spread out to be really visible.
12
As a transplant to the east coast years ago, I visited the island and spent a lovely day soaking up the sun and the uniqueness of the way of life there. When I mentioned the trip to my father, a World War II B-29 pilot, he recalled that one of his crewmen was from Tangier Island and that he had "a devil of a time understanding anything the man said" due to the unusual accent. Thanks, NYT for the in depth educational article as well as the memories evoked. I live on a barrier island and know that its future is also in doubt; tough times are ahead for many of us.
21
My high school class spent a couple of days on Tangier Island in 1993 staying in a timber dorm with sawdust toilets built for just this purpose. It is a beautiful place where we picked muscles on the shoreline and had a wonderful time exploring the island.
Even back then the ground was soaked in many places and boards were laid down to walk on. At the time environmentalism was a big thing for kids (not so much for the next generation, as I understand it) and we were taught about living with the land and not to waste resources. The saying "if it's yellow let it mellow, if it's brown flush it down" was the mantra instilled in us there to impart some lesson of environmental stewardship to carry with us when we got home.
It's a shame that this island and its rich culture will disappear from the USA as I highly doubt funds will be dedicated to save it. The town infrastructure is old or non-existent and its buildings deteriorating so there isn't an economic reason to actually save this place except to keep a bit of history alive.
Perhaps Tangier Island will find a savior one day by some benevolent billionaire but I seriously doubt it (I hope I'm wrong). Good luck Tangier Island & its residents!
Even back then the ground was soaked in many places and boards were laid down to walk on. At the time environmentalism was a big thing for kids (not so much for the next generation, as I understand it) and we were taught about living with the land and not to waste resources. The saying "if it's yellow let it mellow, if it's brown flush it down" was the mantra instilled in us there to impart some lesson of environmental stewardship to carry with us when we got home.
It's a shame that this island and its rich culture will disappear from the USA as I highly doubt funds will be dedicated to save it. The town infrastructure is old or non-existent and its buildings deteriorating so there isn't an economic reason to actually save this place except to keep a bit of history alive.
Perhaps Tangier Island will find a savior one day by some benevolent billionaire but I seriously doubt it (I hope I'm wrong). Good luck Tangier Island & its residents!
7
How heart-rending!
I've been sailing the Chesapeake since 1965; have visited Tangier, and its MD neighbor Smith Island, many times. Around 1980 I navigated the tiny channel into the pier on Jefferson Island (a part of what is now the expanded Poplar Island) and stayed overnight in the bunkhouse -- the island had been purchased by a group of families I knew. The first eagle I ever saw had a nest in the tallest tree there.
And I've witnessed the complete disappearance of several small islands, here and there on the Bay. One a mile from my home was about 1,000 sq ft and 10 ft high 20 years ago; today it's maybe 50 sq ft and 6 ft high. the next hurricane will probably level it.
Gertner interviewed the people who have remained on Tangier. He doesn't mention the far larger number of their children, cousins, etc. who left over the years -- seeking not only higher ground but also more gainful, less painful employment. Not everybody wants to be a waterman, with hard work and little monetary rewards from the diminishing harvests of rockfish, crabs, and (are there still any?) oysters. Heart-rending or not, these islands, and some of the low-lying parts of the mainland shore, are doomed. I fail to see why US taxpayers, or Maryland or Virginia taxpayers, should throw money into such obviously and certainly doomed efforts. Politically correct or not, the remaining residents will just have to follow their many friends and relatives, and leave. There is life on the mainland.
I've been sailing the Chesapeake since 1965; have visited Tangier, and its MD neighbor Smith Island, many times. Around 1980 I navigated the tiny channel into the pier on Jefferson Island (a part of what is now the expanded Poplar Island) and stayed overnight in the bunkhouse -- the island had been purchased by a group of families I knew. The first eagle I ever saw had a nest in the tallest tree there.
And I've witnessed the complete disappearance of several small islands, here and there on the Bay. One a mile from my home was about 1,000 sq ft and 10 ft high 20 years ago; today it's maybe 50 sq ft and 6 ft high. the next hurricane will probably level it.
Gertner interviewed the people who have remained on Tangier. He doesn't mention the far larger number of their children, cousins, etc. who left over the years -- seeking not only higher ground but also more gainful, less painful employment. Not everybody wants to be a waterman, with hard work and little monetary rewards from the diminishing harvests of rockfish, crabs, and (are there still any?) oysters. Heart-rending or not, these islands, and some of the low-lying parts of the mainland shore, are doomed. I fail to see why US taxpayers, or Maryland or Virginia taxpayers, should throw money into such obviously and certainly doomed efforts. Politically correct or not, the remaining residents will just have to follow their many friends and relatives, and leave. There is life on the mainland.
118
“And the concept of retreat, which is sort of un-American, ..." I'm not sure where this came from. Is there something unique in being from the USA. "Un-American" is thrown about sooo much. Could someone (German, Brazilian, Cambodian, etc.) fill me in?
Let's save Tangier Island and not bother to save Florida when its time comes just a few years from now.
Tangier recognizes that the problem is global climate change and is asking for assistance. Florida's State environmental officials have been ordered not to use the terms “climate change” or “global warming” in any government communications, emails, or reports. [e.g., http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article12983720.html#story...]
Tangier recognizes that the problem is global climate change and is asking for assistance. Florida's State environmental officials have been ordered not to use the terms “climate change” or “global warming” in any government communications, emails, or reports. [e.g., http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article12983720.html#story...]
158
Same thing in North Carolina where the legislature has deemed the term "sea level change" persona non grata. So there is no need to spend federal dollars on saving the Outer Banks since climate change doesn't exist in North Carolina.
10
That would be great except for the millions of innocent people who actually live in Florida.
Not all of us voted for our Gov. Scott!
Mother Nature always wins.
78
In this case, human nature is what's "winning."
4
Whatever Mother Nature giveth, it taketh away.
1
This $1.4 Billion dollar project covers a relatively small area on a national scale. How many other places will need such "biblical" intervention?
Are we dealing with a King Canute situation?
Are we dealing with a King Canute situation?
29