Shoreline Shuffle: While all eyes were fixated on a single violation which extends 53 feet into the channel, just around the bend at the mouth of Whitehall Creek, another shore erosion project was allowed to protrude nearly 180 feet into the channel.

All along the tidewater, intermittent rock piles are cropping up, extending well into the public domain, constricting the channel, warming the waters, and displacing vital fisheries habitat. To protect private property from erosion and the waters of the state from silt, these projects are sanctioned and in some cases financed by government agencies. As such, the major difference in this heinous crime at Sharps Point appears to be the perpetrators’ failure to get permission.

Unfortunately, without a complete overhaul in the State’s wetland policies, including evidence of erosion, design justification, application fees and compensatory payments for any displacement of submerged public land, this public resource is at increasing risk to further adverse possession and destruction. Until then, the Costello case is less about protecting the environment and more about prosecuting a defiant opportunist with alert neighbors and sketchy contractors.

Particularly now that the terrapin is off the market, we are obligated to protect it, its habitat and other fisheries habitat from the rest of us.

The photographs below depict the shoreline of Whitehall Bay first in 1998 and then in 2007. Note the Costello property on the left and the Polm property to the right. Costello’s violation extends 53 feet beyond the original shoreline, along 180 feet of shoreline and exceeds that for which he was permitted. The Polm project was permitted to extend almost 180 beyond the original shoreline into the public domain at the northern terminus and encrust over 1400 feet of shoreline with rock. Which property owner has the greater impact on the natural environment and ended up with more free public land?

The first photo is from 1998

The second photograph is from Google Earth 2007