USC Foundation should not allow inlet to be developed
A fellow student recently brought to my attention a state issue that I believe our student body needs to address. The University of South Carolina Foundation is considering selling the well-known Prince George tract to developers in order to increase revenue for the university. The inlet ranges from the ocean to all the way across Highway 17. It is located near the North Inlet estuary, which is home to the USC marine laboratory, and the North Inlet-Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Environmentalists are retaliating in an effort to protect the nearby estuaries, which are inhabited by an extensive array of wildlife including some endangered species. The intentions of the foundation to create profit to provide more scholarships and fellowships are good; however, this does not justify the damaging of conserved lands.
The foundation first purchased the land under conservation agreements promising to protect the area for public use and research capabilities. The North Inlet estuary located adjacent to the property holds a reputation for having some of the most pristine waters nationwide. Development in such areas would likely spoil the water and discredit all the efforts of the state to keep them clean. Estuaries in this area attract great attention in tourism, which will be jeopardized if the region is tampered with. The greatest percentage of land consists of wetlands that contribute to flood control and uphold water quality, both of which would be adversely affected by development. The foundation is considering lifting the easement protecting these wetlands, and if this is achieved, people would be able to acquire permits to fill them.
The large percent of wildlife that inhabits the Prince George tract are all threatened by this proposal. If the foundation sells the land to developers, most wildlife, including rare and endangered species, would be uprooted from their homes. One of these is the red-cockaded woodpecker, which is protected by the Endangered Species Act. The president of USC at the time of the purchase, John Palms, said that with such a unique ecosystem, this area would provide value to the university for research purposes. This still proves true today and this viewpoint should not change solely because of the university’s potential financial gain from selling the land.
Many students have already begun to take action by starting a petition to thwart the sale. I believe it is essential for the rest of the student body to support these students in their efforts in order to preserve land that is pertinent for research, wildlife habitation and tourism attraction. The public needs to work together to convince the USC Foundation that these benefits are in favor of the state of South Carolina and persuade them to find another viable solution to financial woes.