This issue is a pet peeve of mine. As a coastal native and family going back 300+ years on the coast, no one in their right mind would build a permanent structure on a barrier island. That was for fishing or hunting camps that could be moved or if destroyed no great loss.
A simple fix would be to end Federal Flood insurance for these areas and local municipalities to institute a policy that once a home is destroyed due to natural erosion or hurricane no structure can ever be built back on that site.
Meanwhile Senators chip away at CBRA zones. Yeah, I hear you.
The acrimonious political context is all the more reason that the Science Panel needs to broker options and explain values underpinning science assumptions.
As far as the Supreme Court decision concerning the matter, when those properties have been rebuilt at the cost of the tax payer, not the owner or the owners insurance company, the department of interior, EPA,BLN, or any other justified federal land use consumer protection agency should be able to effectively stop any rebuilding on it and environmentally pre-requisite entity. Restoring eco-habitats and saving the proletariat billions.
This issue is a pet peeve of mine. As a coastal native and family going back 300+ years on the coast, no one in their right mind would build a permanent structure on a barrier island. That was for fishing or hunting camps that could be moved or if destroyed no great loss.
A simple fix would be to end Federal Flood insurance for these areas and local municipalities to institute a policy that once a home is destroyed due to natural erosion or hurricane no structure can ever be built back on that site.
Good luck with this though....
Meanwhile Senators chip away at CBRA zones. Yeah, I hear you.
The acrimonious political context is all the more reason that the Science Panel needs to broker options and explain values underpinning science assumptions.
What assumptions? There should be no housing in such an environment. If allowed, it should be at the complete liability of the owner.
Amen amen. Amen. Saving eagle habitat in billions of dollars on the part of the federal treasury. Thank you so much.
As far as the Supreme Court decision concerning the matter, when those properties have been rebuilt at the cost of the tax payer, not the owner or the owners insurance company, the department of interior, EPA,BLN, or any other justified federal land use consumer protection agency should be able to effectively stop any rebuilding on it and environmentally pre-requisite entity. Restoring eco-habitats and saving the proletariat billions.