I am kind of surprised that no one has yet pointed out that according to the historical shoreline comparison photo in the Sandals proposal (Figure 1.1), the shoreline of the beach in 1968 (earliest year shown) for the property in question is nearly identical to what it was in 2006 (the last year shown).
The beach shoreline was larger in the 1980. Using the 1991 shoreline, there are places that this was larger than the 1980 shoreline, and places that this was smaller than both the 1968 and 2006 shorelines.
According to this very basic information, it seems that the beach in this area will recede and expand at various rates as time goes on. Since the Negril beach has been here for literally thousands of years, and our minimal data goes back an amazingly short forty years, perhaps the erosion being mentioned is nothing more than nature doing what it naturally does.
While the current state of the beach in some areas is blamed on the usual suspects, how can it be explained that the beach in this area was smaller prior to commercial development and the climate change (1968 shoreline) than it was in 1980?
Just food for thought.
