[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Bonner Bridge
- To: carolinabirds@duke.edu
- Subject: Bonner Bridge
- From: Russell Lay <russlay@earthlink.net>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 20:44:17 -0400
- Delivered-to: pardo@metalab.unc.edu
- Sender: carolinabirds-owner@acpub.duke.edu
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