Cape Hatteras Lighthouse Newspaper Articles

Reprinted by permission of The News & Observer of Raleigh, North Carolina

February 15, 1998

The News & Observer

Cost, risk just too great

By Hugh Morton

Page: A23

When the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse was seriously threatened by erosion in 1982, the Save the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse Committee was formed to raise money to aid the National Park Service in protecting the historic beacon.

North Carolina counties bordering Tennessee were as enthusiastic in supporting the fund drive as were counties near the lighthouse, and the committee was able to buy sandbags, sand fences and Seascape synthetic seaweed, which helped the NPS protect the lighthouse for 15 years.

In 1998, when the lighthouse is again threatened by the sea, the Save the Cape Hatteras Light-house Committee continues to advocate protection of the lighthouse.

The committee, however, is absolutely opposed to a high-risk attempt to move the 208-foot-tall lighthouse half a mile from its current location.

Anyone experienced with brick construction is aware that, over time, mortar joints tend to deteriorate. The Cape Hatteras Lighthouse - a brick structure with 128-year-old mortar joints - should not be stressed as much as such a move would entail.

The Cape Hatteras Lighthouse is about 40 feet taller than the brick Bell Tower in Chapel Hill. No reason-able person whom we know would suggest moving the Bell Tower.

Many issues - travel promotion, historic value, construction dangers, environmental concerns, cost, among others - have played a part in the lighthouse commit-tee's decision to vigorously oppose trying to move North Carolina's No. 1 historic national landmark.

The committee has asked highly qualified advisers in the various fields involved, and all of them say the move should not be considered. In addition, several leaders in the construction industry have said the move would be impractical and expensive.

One highly qualified construction expert opposed to the move is Edwin Jones Jr. of Charlotte, who led J.A. Jones Construction Company on such projects as the Morehead Planetarium in Chapel Hill, Reynolds Coliseum at N.C. State University, the N.C. Legislative Building, breakwaters at Oregon Inlet, and a tunnel beneath Norfolk Harbor.

The "experts" for the National Park Service are not "expert" in the lighthouse issues that concern many North Carolinians just as much as the high risk and great expense of trying to move the huge structure.

One is that the historic value of the lighthouse will be impaired if it is moved. Another is that the promotional value of the lighthouse will be lost if it is no longer an internationally recognizable shoreline symbol of the North Carolina coast.

Professor William S. Powell of the University of North Carolina history department, generally considered the state's leading historian, strongly opposes trying to move the lighthouse because of the risk of losing it and of diminishing its historic value.

Bill Hensley and Charles Heatherly, each of whom served North Carolina well as state director of travel and tourism, think the state will suffer great loss if the lighthouse is destroyed or moved. They think too much is at stake to take the chance of not protecting it where it is.

In addition, the National Park Service is insensitive to the feelings of residents of Hatteras Island and Dare County. Many residents regard the lighthouse as a symbol of strength and stability and as a monument to courage of coastal heroes who, successfully or unsuccessfully, engaged in a battle of wits with the sea.

To turn tail and run by moving the lighthouse would tarnish its value as a monument to heroism.

Dare County commissioners voted 7-0 for a resolution to protect the lighthouse in its current location. The Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce passed a similar resolution.

Congressman Walter Jones Jr., whose district includes Cape Hatteras, has consulted the House leadership in Congress, and he seriously doubts $12 million will be appropriated to move the lighthouse.

Sean Callinicos, general counsel for U.S. Sen. Lauch Faircloth, said that the most economical way to protect the lighthouse would appeal to Faircloth.

If money is not available for the risky move, it is time to concentrate on protecting the lighthouse where it is.

There are several options, including: - A fourth groin, possibly supplemented by Seascape synthetic seaweed or Holmberg technology erosion stabilizers.

- Holmberg technology as an option on its own. Holmberg stabilizers are underwater groins or jetties made of elongated bags of durable cloth material filled with concrete and positioned on heavy mats. Functioning like speed bumps, the stabilizers slow the movement of water currents, creating deposits of sand that build up beach and eventually cover the stabilizers completely. Since the water passes over the stabilizers rather than around the ends, there is no exaggerated erosion to ad jacent shoreline property.

Moving the lighthouse would cost $12 million. Protecting it where it is would cost $2 million. Even if a move were successful, the promotional and historic value of the lighthouse would be seriously impaired. It simply is not prudent to spend $12 million to obtain a zebra-striped white elephant that would not be nearly as valuable to our state if it were moved.

Section: Question
Edition: Final
Estimated Printed Pages: 3

Index Terms:
Cape Hatteras Lighthouse
NC
coast
environment

Caption:
c photo; file

Copyright 1998 by The News & Observer Pub. Co.

Record Number: 1998045064