aryland, suggests that, "In [coastal] nourishment projects locals pitch in about 5 percent, state and county tax payers pay about 30 percent, and the federal government pays the rest" (Ackerman 30). Apparently, at the cost of the American government, large sums of money are being spent on these futile efforts to stop natural occurrences.Recently in the past few years, a new attribute has been looked at. A bulge formed by Ice Age glaciers is slowly settling, while the mid-Atlantic coast is falling. In many places, the sea is taking back the land at the rate of about an inch every 25 years. Originally, scientists pondered why the sea level was rising faster between Florida and New York than farther north. They hypothesized that it must have been a shift in the Gulf Stream, but this new research showing the fall of the land proved them wrong. Regardless, sea levels continue to rise and scientists are running out of ideas to prevent this from happening.Global sea level has risen 4 to 10 inches during the past 100 years because of global warming. By year 2050, a 16-inch sea-level rise is projected. Consequences of a higher sea-level to our coastal areas have not only included erosion, but some believe other effects it will have will include: tourism, the availability of drinking water, and damage from storms. The only effective solution that seems practical at the moment, without risking such large sums of money, is that human occupations of these islands become restricted. In most cases, people probably come to the seashore for recreation and rarely for necessity. Why not just live minutes away on the mainland and avoid having millions of dollars being spent on keeping beachfront property from washing away? This way federal money currently being spent on coastal projects, such as seawalls, groins and sand replenishment, can be allocated to more pressing problems of our nation. Until another economical solution, which does not contribut...
