George Washington predicted that Montauk Light would last 200 years. But what about the next century? (Montauk Point Lighthouse Museum)

Montauk Lighthouse, on the eastern tip of Long Island, N.Y., stands on the edge of Turtle Hill plateau, 100 feet from a bluff angling sharply down to the sea. At the bluff's base, punishing waves steal teaspoons of sand and carry them downstream. That this lighthouse, built in 1796 during George Washington's administration, is threatened by the receding coastline is not in question. The bluff has lost 200 feet to erosion since the lighthouse was originally constructed. Clearly, Montauk, the oldest lighthouse in New York, must be saved. Where the battle heats up is in how to protect it.

The Controversy

"A phenomenal effort has gone into coming up with a solution," says Gregory Donohue, a bluff-stabilization expert who serves as the erosion control director at Montauk Lighthouse.

Donohue, who has been responsible for stabilizing the bluff for a quarter of a century, says the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' past efforts have not "been up to snuff."

The Corps' solution, developed and executed in the mid-20th century, was to construct a 700-foot stone revetment at the bluff's base. However, wave overwash and other factors proved the revetment insufficient. A local resident designed a terraced system, which, helped contain erosion.

Now, with a new proposal, Donohue believes the lighthouse's future is brighter.

The solution, as far as the Montauk Historic Society is concerned, is to build a $14 million seawall of boulders. But that plan has come under attack from an unlikely source: surfers.

The Surfriders Foundation, a not-for-profit environmental group interested in protecting beaches and the waves that shape them, doesn't want to see the sea wall constructed. The problem, they say, is that a sea wall will change Alamo, a famous surf break, as well as another break at Turtle Cove.

Tom Naro, chairman of the Eastern Long Island chapter of the foundation, says building the wall is only a stopgap measure that would hold off major erosion for a while. Eventually, Naro says, the bluff will erode or face that dreaded major storm event. Naro says the lighthouse should instead be moved.

"The Corps of Engineers says the rock wall design is supposed to survive a 73-year storm event, but what happens if they get a 150-year storm event?" Naro asks.

Move "The Eiffel Tower?"

Donohue says moving the lighthouse is not an option. Not only is it almost twice as costly as building the seawall, but, he contends, Montauk is too fragile to move. Indeed, the lighthouse has shown signs of age over the past 20 years and was restored in 1998.

Proponents of the move say it can be done safely. They point to the relocation of North Carolina's Cape Hatteras Lighthouse, which was also dangerously close to the ocean's waves. The Hatteras lighthouse project, which hundreds of thousands of people tracked by Web cam, not only succeeded, but did so without significant damage to the illustrious tower.

Of course, moving a lighthouse does change the building's historical significance. Not only is the original site lost, but so is its 13-foot foundation, which must remain behind. For purists, that's unacceptable. But Naro says it's a necessary loss when weighed against forfeiting the entire structure.

"George Washington predicted that the lighthouse would last for 200 years, and he's been proven correct," Naro says.

Montauk Lighthouse postcard

Ray Jones, author of more than two dozen books, including a soon-to-be-released volume on preserving America's historic treasures, says he sees both sides of the Montauk Light preservation issue.

"This lighthouse is like the Eiffel Tower of North America," Jones says. "You'd never be able to move that. You'd have to move it and put it on some concrete, and that would certainly reduce the historical value of the structure." Jones says he also doesn't like the idea of reinforcing the coastline, which changes the shape and nature of beaches as well as downdrift. But although he believes both options have their drawbacks, either is preferable to letting the lighthouse be destroyed.

"If it can be moved, they should [do it]," Jones says. “But any opportunity to save Montauk should be given a chance, even if it requires hardening the coast."

The Future

Orrin Pilkey, the James B. Duke Professor Emeritus of Geology, Earth and Ocean Sciences Division at Duke University and an expert in shorelines and coastal geography, has studied coastal erosion for decades and is considered one of the world's leading authorities on barrier islands. Pilkey says the lighthouse is doomed in its present location.

Montauk Light (Montauk Point Lighthouse Museum)

Pilkey believes the current sea level predictions by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are way too low. "In my opinion, their [February] 2007 report is going to jack [sea level estimates] up between one and one-and-a-half meters or higher," he says.

Here's how the professor's forecast plays out: If sea level rises at the rate he believes it will, by the year 2100, both Miami and Manhattan will be flooded. Barrier islands like Topsail, off the coast of North Carolina, will disappear underwater. It will also severely impact locations like Montauk Point.

"The outlook for change, if you're talking 100 years from now, is huge. Anybody 50 or under will see some real impact," Pilkey says. "And it all depends on whether the storm of the century comes along."

Sign up for our weekly e-newsletter >>

Recent Stories