Gov. Mark Sanford's view of an unconstitutional deficit ultimately may have a devastating effect on the cash flow and services at all South Carolina's state parks.

The cash cow of the state park system is Hunting Island State Park here in Beaufort County. Tuesday night the governor vetoed a $5 million plan that would have helped protect the park's beaches from washing into the sea, shoring up not only the beach but the budget of more three dozen state parks.

The $5.5 billion House- and Senate-approved state budget passed last week included hard-fought money to build groins and add sand along the shoreline of Hunting Island State Park -- a quickly deteriorating treasure whose gate receipts help keep other South Carolina state parks afloat. The $5 million would have been added to the $3.2 million the state already has set aside for the estimated $9 million beach preservation project.

But Sanford, looking to cut down a $155 million state budget deficit, gave no vote of confidence to the oft-called "crown jewel" of the state park system, instead saying the beach should be allowed to grow and diminish naturally. "Renourishment on Hunting Island is not the kind of investment that our state should be making," Sanford wrote in his veto letter.

Orin Pilkey, a nationally recognized coastal geologist of Duke University has been preaching the message used in the govern's speech for years. Pilkey is joined by University of South Carolina naturalist Rudy Mancke in urging people, including state agencies, not to build close to the waters edge.

The governor makes a valid points in the justification of his veto:

The state has an obligation to correct the deficits that he perceives to be unconstitutional;

"It's reckless budget setting" to include money that the Board of Economic Advisors wouldn't certify;

That the neediest of the needy should be a priority for state government. (The legislative budget cut Department of Social Services money $6.7 million below the governor's recommendations.)

But the state also has an obligation to protect and maintain its property. Never mind the frivolity of building structures close to the water's edge, the state long ago ignored the decades old advice of Pilky and other geologists. The state has an investment in the structures and the park. To allow it to fall into the ocean unfathomable. More than 1.2 million people visited the state park last year, bringing in $2.1 million in revenue for the state Parks, Recreation and Tourism department. By not supporting Hunting Island, which loses an average of about 15 feet of beach to the sea each year, the governor is, in fact, putting at risk South Carolina's other state parks. By not vetoing money for Hunting Island, the governor also ignores the less affluent who have aren't privy to gated beaches. Hunting Island is the only public beach access between Edisto Beach and Hilton Head Island.

While many park supporters are quick to offer doomsday scenarios, consider the facts:

Erosion at Hunting Island has washed away 20 island facilities, including restrooms, showers and cabins over the past seven years;

Three additional restrooms at the park, two serving the park's 200 campsites, are within 30 feet of the high-water mark and are in danger of being washed away; and

When the first nourishment project was done at the park in 1979, about 150 feet of beach was available at high tide. Today no beach exists at high tide, which rips away trees and high ground each year.

Luckily, it has been about five years since a hurricane has hammered the Lowcountry coast. But one more major tropical storm could sound the death knell for this public beach.

The House overrode the governor's veto on Wednesday. Now only a two-third vote to override by Senate can help keep further distructive damage at bay. If the Senate fails to override, the Gov. Sanford -- and voters -- will watch nature take its course.