Ed King was right about Plum Island

YOUR ARTICLE "On the edge: Plum Islanders say erosion puts houses at risk" (City & Region, March 28) raises a dilemma: Should development on barrier beaches be protected? Should barrier beaches be protected at all, or should we allow nature to take its course?

Debates about these private and public interests have raged for years. In 1980 a conservative Democratic governor, Edward J. King, undertook a review of the benefits and drawbacks of development on barrier beaches. Based on its findings, King signed an executive order that outlined what was the most innovative policy in the nation at that time.

The order recognized that barrier beaches can and must change, and, in so doing, that they prevent storm damage and provide flood control. It also gave priority status for disaster assistance funds toward relocating willing sellers from storm-damaged barrier beach areas, recognizing a homeowner's right to compensation for giving up the right to rebuild. Of particular import to the current Plum Island controversy, the order said that "state funds and federal grants for construction projects shall not be used to encourage growth and development in hazard-prone barrier beach areas."

It was noteworthy that the "Make it in Massachusetts" governor would set aside areas as inappropriate for construction and for the investment of state or federal infrastructure dollars.

The forces of nature on barrier beaches are huge, knowable, and predictable. Anyone who lives on such formations should do so at his or her own risk, not that of the taxpayers.

JOHN A. BEWICK
Hingham

The writer was secretary of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs in 1980.

THE OUTCRY about erosion by Plum Island residents was quite predictable. Equally predictable is that increased global warming will cause significant sea level rises along the Atlantic coastline over this century, and will promote more damaging coastal storms even in the next few years.

Many residents of Plum Island with their grotesque beachfront mansions are part of the problem in that their luxuries and excesses fuel more greenhouse gas emissions. The portion of Plum Island in Newbury that has accommodated residents for many years should have never been opened up to human habitation.

Before we all have to pay more insurance and government costs to assist these citizens living in folly, the land should be taken by eminent domain and made an extension of the Parker River Wildlife Sanctuary - that is, it should be returned to nature. Nature - pushed along strongly by misguided human behaviors and so-called needs - is already on its way to quickly reclaiming it. Residents there need to face some inconvenient truths.

DOUGLAS ZOOK
Professor of science education and global ecology
Boston University