North Kingstown, August 29, 2025
News Summary
The Quidnessett Country Club faces backlash over a 600-foot seawall built without permits, prompting state enforcement actions. The Coastal Resources Management Council called for removal and restoration plans, but deadlines were missed, raising concerns among environmental advocates about coastal regulations and erosion impact on neighboring properties.
North Kingstown — A Coastal Rumble Over a Golf Course Seawall
Golfers love a tight lie and a tricky wind, but what’s happening at the tide line behind the Quidnessett Country Club has nothing to do with a bad break or a bunker shot. It’s a full-on shoreline showdown that’s been simmering for years and just keeps getting louder. At the center of it: a 600-foot seawall that sat on the shore for more than two years despite state orders, and a regulator that environmental groups say has moved at a glacial pace.
The short version for the 19th-hole chatter
The Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) found that the stone barrier — built without the required permits — violated state and federal law. A cease-and-desist order went out, and CRMC later voted to require the wall’s removal and to demand a restoration plan. The clock was set with a 120-day removal requirement and a 30-day deadline for a restoration proposal. The club missed that August 22 deadline, and the whole affair has drawn sharp criticism from environmental groups and some hunting and fishing advocates.
Why golf people should care
Any course manager will tell you erosion is the enemy — it can eat fairways and swallow greens. The owners of Quidnessett Country Club say they have been trying for decades to protect the course from the relentless push of tides. But there’s a big difference between smart, environmentally compliant work and a massive, unapproved hard structure that changes the wave action for neighboring properties and local wildlife. The crux of the problem is the clash between the club’s effort to save turf and the law designed to protect marshes, shellfish beds, and coastal habitats.
Where the law and the landscape collide
Rhode Island law restricts the hardening of shorelines in environmentally sensitive zones because solid walls can create more problems than they solve. Instead of absorbing wave energy, a hard wall often redirects it, causing increased erosion down-current. That’s exactly what observers say is happening: the seawall deflects wave energy toward neighbors and threatens salt marshes and wildlife that depend on gentle, natural shorelines.
What the CRMC has done — and not done
CRMC issued the cease-and-desist, voted for removal and restoration, and levied three separate fines of $10,000 each. The fines are currently under appeal. Meanwhile, the council granted extensions to the club — including a 30-day extension issued on July 22 — which environmental advocates say undercuts enforcement and may encourage other property owners to test the limits of the law.
Environmental groups and advocacy voices
Local conservation groups have been vocally critical of the pace of enforcement. They argue that leaving the wall in place for over two years without significant consequences sends the wrong signal to coastal developers and landowners. Others warn that slow action may embolden future violators who see delays as an opportunity to press ahead with their own shoreline fixes.
What the club proposed — and why it wasn’t accepted
The country club’s legal team has been working on alternatives, including the use of TrapBag-style barriers. Those are sand-filled bags that can act as temporary protection. CRMC, however, communicated that TrapBags are not acceptable in this specific area because they involve non-biodegradable materials and would not meet the regulatory standards for that sensitive water classification. The council also rejected the club’s request to change the classification of the waters at the site to allow construction, so the pathway to an approved fix is narrow.
Penalty status and appeals
The three $10,000 fines are on the books but have been appealed by the club. Appeal processes add time — and that time has been one of the major concerns voiced by conservation advocates who want quicker, firmer enforcement to protect coastal ecosystems and neighboring properties.
Big-picture stakes for golf communities
For golf course managers and club members, the Quidnessett fight is a case study. Coastal courses will continue to face erosion challenges and will need to balance course preservation with environmental rules. The incident shows that even longstanding clubs can run afoul of modern coastal protections and that the methods used to protect turf matters as much as the desire to do so.
What to expect next
The next steps hinge on whether the club submits an acceptable restoration plan and on the outcome of appeals. If enforcement stiffens, expect tougher restrictions on similar projects and a push toward softer, more habitat-friendly approaches to shoreline stabilization. If delays persist, critics worry the status quo will encourage copycat projects that slice into marshes and shorelines that local anglers, hunters, and birders rely on.
Bottom line for golfers
This is more than a shoreline squabble. It’s about the future of coastal golf layouts, the responsibility to protect shared coastal resources, and how the sport adapts when the sea becomes an active player. Whether you’re a member worried about lost fairway or a builder thinking about sandbags and seawalls, the Quidnessett story is a reminder that shore protection needs to pass both engineering and environmental muster.
Frequently Asked Questions
What happened at Quidnessett Country Club?
A 600-foot seawall was built without permits. The Coastal Resources Management Council issued a cease-and-desist, ordered removal and restoration, and fined the club. The club missed a restoration plan deadline and has appealed fines while seeking extensions.
Why is a seawall a problem?
Hard seawalls can redirect wave energy, causing increased erosion to neighboring properties and damaging salt marshes and wildlife habitat. Rhode Island law restricts hardening in sensitive coastal areas to prevent these harms.
What is TrapBag technology and why was it rejected?
TrapBags are sand-filled barriers used for temporary protection. CRMC indicated they are not allowed in this area because they include non-biodegradable materials and don’t meet standards for the water classification at the site.
How much are the fines and what’s their status?
The club has been assessed three fines of $10,000 each. The fines are currently under appeal.
How could this affect other coastal golf courses?
The handling of this case could set a tone for enforcement. Quick, firm action could push courses toward softer, approved protection methods. Slow enforcement could encourage risky, unpermitted projects elsewhere.
Quick Reference Table
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Seawall length | 600-foot |
| CRMC orders | Removal within 120 days; restoration plan due in 30 days |
| Restoration plan deadline | Missed August 22 deadline |
| Fines issued | Three fines of $10,000 each (under appeal) |
| Extensions granted | Multiple; including a 30-day extension on July 22 |
| Proposed fix by club | TrapBag barriers (denied as acceptable in this area) |
| Key concern | Impact on wildlife, salt marshes, and erosion of neighboring properties |
For golf operators and players keeping an eye on coastal courses, this is a case that will be watched closely. The turf-versus-tide debate isn’t going away, and the Quidnessett situation is a front-row seat to how the game and the shoreline must learn to coexist.
Deeper Dive: News & Info About This Topic
HERE Resources
Evanston Golf Course Damaged by Stolen Golf Carts
Cities Develop AI Guidelines for Public Employees
Quidnessett Country Club Seawall Extension Granted Amid Protests
Golf Season Kicks Off in Rhode Island
Additional Resources
- The Boston Globe: RI Regulators Criticized over Country Club Illegal Seawall
- Providence Journal: Rhode Island Coastal Regulators Order Quidnessett Country Club to Remove Illegal Seawall
- Rhode Island Current: CRMC Shuts Down Potential for Quidnessett Country Club to Keep Its Illegal Seawall
- WPRI: Save The Bay Accuses CRMC of Power Abuse for Canceling Controversial Seawall Meetings
- Providence Journal: Private Rhode Island Golf Club Gets Extension on Plan to Remove Illegal Seawall
- Wikipedia: Coastal Management
- Google Search: Seawall Environmental Impact
- Google Scholar: Seawall Impact on Coastal Ecosystems
- Encyclopedia Britannica: Coastal Management
- Google News: Illegal Seawall Quidnessett Country Club
Author: STAFF HERE BOSTON WRITER
BOSTON STAFF WRITER The BOSTON STAFF WRITER represents the experienced team at HEREBoston.com, your go-to source for actionable local news and information in Boston, Suffolk County, and beyond. Specializing in "news you can use," we cover essential topics like product reviews for personal and business needs, local business directories, politics, real estate trends, neighborhood insights, and state news affecting the area—with deep expertise drawn from years of dedicated reporting and strong community input, including local press releases and business updates. We deliver top reporting on high-value events such as Boston Marathon, Head of the Charles Regatta, and Boston Harborfest. Our coverage extends to key organizations like the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce and Associated Industries of Massachusetts, plus leading businesses in finance, biotech, and insurance that power the local economy such as Fidelity Investments, Biogen, and Liberty Mutual Insurance. As part of the broader HERE network, we provide comprehensive, credible insights into Massachusetts's dynamic landscape.
