Coastal Regulations Require Top to Bottom Review

When summer temperatures soar many of us seek relief along North Carolina’s coastline, as has been the case for more than two centuries. We’ve seen major changes over the past 100 years, especially in the past 50 years, and while some of these changes have added to the beauty and enjoyment of our 300 miles of coastline, some raise public policy questions we need to address from a holistic rather than our current piecemeal perspective.

Early settlers were attracted by the beauty, the rich and fertile land, the abundance of marine life and waterways that allowed transportation of goods and services, but they also recognized the ever-changing nature of our coastline. In an interview I conducted with an old Wanchese fisherman he stated the obvious: “Mister, when the ocean she decides to open a inlet, she opens a inlet. And when the ocean she decides to close a inlet, she closes a inlet, and that’s just the way it is. There weren’t nothin’ you’re gonna do to prevent it.” Sometimes we seem to forget this wisdom.

In 1974, leadership in our state became concerned about some of the unrestrained development taking place and passed the Coastal Area Management Act, concurrently creating the Coastal Resources Commission to designate areas of environmental concern, adopt rules and policies for development in the 10 counties included in this act and certify land-use plans. The commission consists of 15 members, all appointed by the Governor, with 12 having experience in a particular area of expertise like marine ecology, development or local government.  By and large we calculate this group has done a good job because environmentalists have complained of unrestrictive or excessive development while developers have complained unduly restrictive building policies.

We reinforce the property rights of individuals to develop their land, while also insisting there be protections for other public and private property owners. There is always a risk associated with building along our coastline and any landowner who wishes to enjoy the advantages of that ownership should correspondingly assume the risk of loss. It is not be the role of the public sector to replace or stabilize private property losses from wind, wave or tides or allow anyone to affect other property owners. While at the task let us affirm that there needs to be public access to and protection of some of these wonderful natural resources, something we as a state have not always embraced as well as some other coastal states.

From time to time it is valuable to review public boards and commissions to determine whether their purpose remains valuable and their performance is effective. We have had a number of recent public policy issues like beach nourishment, erosion, inlet shifting, and changing shorelines, making now a good time for a such comprehensive and impartial top to bottom evaluation of the Coastal Resources Commission, especially the process for appointing members. Our policies and enforcement should neither be overly restrictive nor permissive, insisting on policies that are best for all. Where we get into trouble is when our politicians insert themselves into coastal issues, favoring one special interest group over another.

Our coast is one of our most valuable resources and we need to ensure it remains so for generations to come.