Long Beach Island (NJ) and Barnegat Inlet (NJ) have been and continue to be well maintained by USACE’s interventions at the expense of taxpayer dollars. It is therefore important to understand how the USACE picks their projects, who is funding them, and who are the primary actors benefiting. 

The USACE writes, 

“In making recommendations to Congress for project authorization, USACE determines that the proposed project's benefits will exceed costs, its engineering design is sound, the project best serves the needs of the people concerned, and that it makes the wisest possible use of the natural resources involved and adequately protects the environment.”

USACE relies heavily on cost-benefit analysis to decide whether proposed projects are viable. These feasibility reports calculate avoided damages to property and infrastructure and estimate increased economic productivity, such as improved navigation or recreation. With about 10,000 properties on Long Beach Island and an average home price of 1.5 million dollars, the costs associated with damages to property compared to those associated with the USACE’s project are viable. The cost-benefit system does not consider the social, cultural, or environmental context that shapes the project site economy. When CBA is used as the primary means of decision-making, factors that do not fit within the confines of standard monetary units fail to fit into the equation. While the USACE aims to ‘adequately protect the environment,’ this value is subjective in its extent and meaning, especially in comparison to factors with clear monetary values that are more quantitative in comparison to one another.