Giant sea gate proposed by feds for New Jersey and New York is slammed by environmentalists

Federal officials are considering building a 5-mile sea barrier from Sandy Hook to Queens to protect northern New Jersey and New York from devastating storm surges — a proposal that has drawn overwhelming criticism from environmental advocates.

The proposal is one of six being considered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and environmental officials from both states to help prevent the kind of damage Superstorm Sandy brought to the region in 2012, when a record 12-foot storm surge inundated lower Manhattan, the Jersey Shore, communities along the Hudson River and several Meadowlands towns. 

The Army Corps has provided few details about the proposals, four of which involve the construction of large barriers. But major regional environmental groups responded with near unanimous opposition, saying the barriers will do far more damage than good.

"The biggest problem we've had in trying to control flooding is that we throw concrete at everything," said Gil Hawkins of the Hudson River Fishermen's Association. "This does the same thing. You're just pushing the water somewhere else."

New York/New Jersey Harbor is one of nine high-risk areas on the Atlantic Coast where the Army Corps says an in-depth investigation into flood prevention is warranted.

An Army Corps spokesman said the barrier proposals are in their infancy and that their cost, how large they would be and what they would be made of have yet to be determined.

“We’re not there yet,” said Michael Embrich, a spokesman for the Armys Corps’ New York district office, which covers New Jersey. "We could find that all are environmentally unacceptable or fiscally unacceptable."

The Army Corps presented six proposals at three public meetings in New Jersey and New York this week. They are: 

• Do nothing, which the Army Corps said could lead to chronic tidal flooding in the region. 
• Build a 5-mile barrier stretching from Sandy Hook in Monmouth County to Breezy Point in Queens that would be designed to keep storm surges from entering New York Harbor, the Hudson River, Newark Bay, the Hackensack River, the Passaic River and Raritan Bay. It would allow passage for ships via gates. 
• Construct multiple barriers, including ones near the Verranzano Bridge at New York Harbor, the Arthur Kill near Raritan Bay and two in Long Island Sound between the Bronx and Queens. 
• Place barriers along the southern portion of New Jersey's Hudson River waterfront around Jersey City and Hoboken. This includes a barrier around the Kill Van Kull in Bayonne, which leads to Newark Bay and the Passaic and Hackensack rivers. 
• Install several barriers around the region, including one that spans the Hackensack River. 
• Place barriers only along shorelines. The Hudson Riverkeeper says it's the only acceptable option.

Although other states and countries use such barriers, environmental groups say those projects would irrevocably damage the Hudson, Passaic and Hackensack rivers and Raritan Bay by changing tidal conditions.

The most severe would be the 5-mile barrier, opponents say. It could change fish migration patterns, affecting New Jersey's recreational and commercial fishing industry, which generates $2.5 billion annually in economic activity. It doesn't take into account sea level rise, according to the Hudson Riverkeeper. And it would reduce the dilution of industrial pollutants by the tide in all of the waterways north of Sandy Hook.

"You essentially shut off the tide, which brings in oxygen and nutrients and basically cleans the water system," said Greg Remaud, executive director of NY/NJ Baykeeper. 
"You turn a living, breathing estuary into a stagnant lake."

Environmentalists are also concerned that the 5-mile barrier would push a storm surge into communities along the Jersey Shore. 

"We know that when water hits a wall, it runs to the end of that wall," said Tim Dillingham, executive director of the American Littoral Society, a New Jersey-based coastal advocacy group. "In the case of this wall, you’re talking about a national park in Sandy Hook at one end followed by residential communities in Sea Bright, Monmouth Beach and down the rest of the shore. That's where the water is going to go."

The Corps held three public meetings this week to solicit comments, but the only one in New Jersey, at Rutgers' Newark campus on Tuesday, drew only a few dozen people, attendees said.

Opponents criticized the Army Corps for holding the meeting less than a week after it announced the proposals on July 5, in the middle of summer when many residents are on vacation, and in a community where Sandy's record 12-foot storm surge caused considerably less damage than in places like Hoboken, Little Ferry and Moonachie. 

"If they planned this better, there would have been been 300 or 3,000 people [at the meeting]," Hawkins said. 

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and state and city environmental agencies in New York are advising the Army Corps on the project. Larry Hajna, a DEP spokesman, said the project is still in its infancy and may change before a final decision is made. 

"During the course of this process, decisions will be made on which projects are most feasible and realistic, but it’s all still very early," he said.

But John Lipscomb, vice president of the Hudson Riverkeeper, said environmental concerns may not be considered by the Corps during the review. 

"Their process, because of federal legislation, is going to ignore the environmental impacts in the initial assessment," he said. "And we are basically putting the future of the Hudson and the Harbor and western Long Island Sound and the Passaic River and the Meadowlands and the Raritan River and Jamaica Bay in the hands of people whose hands are tied by bureaucratic nonsense."

Embrich said the Corps was considering adding more meetings before the Aug. 20 deadline for comments.

Comments can be emailed to NYNJHarbor.TribStudy@usace.army.mil.

Email: fallon@northjersey.com