A business on 7-mile that cries 'henny penny' and then cites one study claiming a loss of 1m/yr is most definitely 'sensationalizing' for their own benefit. But with all due respect, Rob, time-lapsed photos from a single site doesn't tell the whole story of beach erosion either. The Univ. of the West Indies has been studying the issue of beach erosion for decades .... and UWI's study, which estimates a net average loss of 23cm/yr, was not cited in the article .... Why not?? Because it's not as sensational. That there is such a disparity in estimates between the Smith-Warner study and UWI's study suggests that there is variability and uncertainty, but both conclude that beach erosion has been an issue for decades. UWI used data from 1971-2008 to estimate the 23cm/yr loss ... and states that is is not a gradual loss, but rather episodic (particularly following storm events), and most certainly some areas experience more loss than others based on many factors (ie. site position relative to the wave action, vegetation cover/loss, etc). Yes, the sand comes and goes .... that's a natural phenomenon. And the remaining reef structure that still sits in the bay will continue to be an important source of sand as it degrades .... but it is predicted that as the reef structure continues to deteriorate it will also become less effective in protecting the shoreline from the force of the waves ...... in other words, if action isn't taken - erosion rates will get worse. And that's why the university is studying it - they are hoping to find a solution, whether it is through conservation efforts, stronger environmental policies, or to raise funds for long-term protection. The original article most definitely 'sensationalized' the situation ..... but look, it's also raising awareness .... which is an important first step in environmental conservation. A little I & E never hurts.