Private interests overshadow stakeholders for new DNR dock rules

A 12-member stakeholder group representing homeowners, builders, local officials, environmental organizations, and technical experts spent months meeting and crafting new rules for private recreational docks in Coastal Georgia.

But the recommendations from this public-facing group are not what’s shaping the limits on dock size in draft regulations the public has until Wednesday to weigh in on.  

Instead, a  former EPD commissioner and consultants who represent clients seeking to build long docks across the publicly owned marsh have been working behind the scenes to push for relaxed limits on length and width, correspondence The Current GA obtained through an Open Records Request shows.

In an email dated June 11, 2026, former EPD commissioner Jud Turner – now a partner with Atlanta-based law firm  Fortson, Blalock, Turner & Germany  – wrote to Alton Brown and Dan Bucey of Resource + Land Consultants with the subject “Coastal Coalition CRD Mess.” The email was later included in a string sent to the DNR.

“Rulemaking – sounds like the Board is headed in the right direction, but we need to pour gas on their fire,” Turner wrote in part. He suggested highlighting to the DNR officials  a minority report of the stakeholders’ group that allowed for longer docks. Bucey, a member of the stakeholder group, supported the minority report.  

Turner goes on to write that the proposed length of 1,000 feet with a possible variance for another 10% wouldn’t be enough for the docks two individuals were planning. 

“New issue for us is that a 10% variance won’t help Jack (or Munger)  – so let’s make sure we discuss how to get that talking point to the board members – variance without paltry 10% limit.”

Turner’s efforts seem successful. While the June meeting of the DNR board saw the agency present regulations to allow docks up to 1,000 feet long and six feet wide, with a variance of up to 10% on the length, those numbers didn’t stand long. Despite scores of public comments denouncing the proposed docks as too big, the agency Coastal Resources Division in August suggested extending the permitted length to 1,500 feet with no hard limit on length if a variance was requested.  The DNR board pulled back only on the unlimited variance, instead approving a draft to allow docks of the same width but 1,500 feet long with a 10% variance available. 

As a participant in the stakeholder process, Alice Miller Keyes of One Hundred Miles spent multiple days preparing for and attending meetings only to have that effort largely set aside.  

“I was appointed by CRD to serve on the stakeholder committee designed to recommend a balanced rule that enables reasonable dock access for landowners and ensures only minor impacts to shared marshlands,” she wrote in an email to The Current GA.  “We did just that when we delivered a consensus report to CRD in March 2025. It is inexcusable that some individuals felt it was their right to bypass that transparent public process for their own advantage.”  

Stakeholder Courtney Reich of the Georgia Conservancy is worried the interests of a few powerful people have outweighed that of the public. 

“The GA DNR has a long history of effectively convening stakeholders and inviting public comment to inform management decisions, particularly when it could impact public resources such as our coastal marshlands,” she wrote in an email to The Current. “We are concerned that the current process surrounding the development of Rules for Private Recreational Docks has not adequately considered the input of stakeholders or the public and instead rested on the interests of a few individuals.”

Neither Turner nor Brown responded to a request for comment.

Living near a long dock

For Wilmington Island resident Betsy Cain, the damage a long dock can engender isn’t a discussion, it’s a lived experience. Her neighbor added 880 feet of walkway to his 100-foot dock in 2007. Since then, Cain has struggled with the periodic buildup of trapped wrack that smothers the marsh in front of her modest home. 

She sent in a public comment ahead of the August board meeting detailing her experience. 

“After the dock was built it collected approximately 7 acres of wrack on its north side, and blocked all creeks including ours,” she wrote. “Within time the accumulation suffocated the marsh underneath from the heavy inundation. We organized help to physically move the wrack out into deeper water. Despite the fact that the marsh is resilient and wants to thrive, we have witnessed the slow impacts to the marsh from this dock: creek collapse, marsh degradation slowly turning into dead pan salt flats and because of the loss of marsh more flooding on our property.”

She’s doubtful her comment made a difference to the DNR board and decision makers at the agency. 

“What’s critical here is that they’re not talking about the damage to upland marshes from these docks,” she said. “And the importance of the upland marsh for habitat and also for wave retention and protection of people’s property up close.”  

Even if officials at DNR considered her comment before, they won’t be reviewing it ahead of the October 27th DNR board meeting, when the panel is scheduled to vote on the latest draft regulations. In fact, the Coastal Resources Division will not be considering any of the previous 103 comments. 

“To be clear, since we are starting from scratch, we do not need to consider and respond to the comments we received on this version of the rule in future meetings,” DNR attorney Kate Iannuzzi, Deputy Executive Counsel at the DNR wrote to Chief of Coastal Management Jill Andrews.  

Commenters have until the end of the day Wednesday to resubmit their previous comments or send in a new one.