[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bonner Bridge



Thanks for the explanation.  As an Outer Banks junkie, and a true old salt -
I plan to retire one day on the Banks - I hope Opt. 4 is selected.   Humans
don't need access to Pea Island for goodness sake, they have everywhere else
along 12 to stop and fish, surf, etc. - not to mention all of the southern
end from Rodanthe to Frisco and beyond, and all of the other end from Nags
Head to Corolla and beyond.  I hope Opt 4 will win.

Liz Youngs
Mt Pleasant, SC


----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell Lay" <russlay@earthlink.net>
To: <carolinabirds@duke.edu>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:44 PM
Subject: Bonner Bridge


> I attended one of the two workshops (Rodanthe and Buxon were the
locations)
> tonight.
>
> The 17-mile option avoids virtually all critical wetlands, require pilings
> of only 20 ft in depth, and avoids all Hwy 12 "hotspots" that currently
> suffer overwash, even in moderate n'oreasters. This is known as Option 4.
>
> Option 1, which is preferred by Dare County government, comes in just
south
> of the current bridge. It zooms right over the Pea Island marshes north of
> North Pond, including some smaller ponds. If you are concerned about salt
> flats and marsh habitat, this is poor option. Additionally, a "sub-option"
> of Option 1 actually comes in over North Pond; right through the upper
1/3.
> Of course, this option also requires a high bridge with deep pilings that
> will be subject to the same erosion problems as the current bridge, and
> dumps traffic back onto Hwy 12 north of two of the most common over wash
> "hotspots". Dare County prefers this option because it wishes to maintain
> access for surf and inlet fishermen, surfers, and beach goers. The county
> will fight hard to have this option chosen. You will still have access to
> Pea Island and the ponds under this option, but it will be a marred
habitat.
>
> Option 2 is currently off the table, and it also affects the major ponds
> and cuts out a giant swath of wetlands.
> Option 3 is similar to Option 4, the difference being that it hugs the
> soundside shoreline considerably closer than Option 4, and in the process
> takes out some shallow sound vegetation, runs over some small soundside
> "islands", and perhaps encroaches on small creeks and water passages that
> shelter fry and juvenile fish.
>
> That said, I think a proper combination of political pressure can create
an
> obvious common-sense approach. Option 4 is obviously the best choice for
> habitat. However, one USFWS representative said tonight that if the state
> and county government would agree to maintain a non-asphalt corridor
> (crushed shells, compacted sand), he could see the "Feds" agreeing to
> limited vehicular access with the understanding that over wash situations
> or Colonial nesting shifts would close the road more often than at
present.
> There is also some talk of trying to implement a north bound tram (from
> Rodanthe) similar to the one used in Back Bay/False Cap in Virginia.
>
> As a Rush Limbaugh Republican, even I am in support of Option 4--even if
it
> means an end to access on Pea Island!
>
> Russ Lay
> Nags Head, NC
>
>