There doesn’t seem to be much love lately on the Facebook page “I LOVE Popham Beach.”

Folks are angry (maybe justifiably so, depending on one’s point of view) over a Maine Board of Environmental Protection decision Thursday that would allow Jackson and Susan Parker to remove 150 pilings near their summer home on Popham Beach.

The Parkers live in Woolwich, where Jackson is chief executive officer of Reed & Reed, but they also own a property at Popham Beach that overlooks the pilings. Last September, the Parkers applied for permits to remove the pilings — all that remain of an abandoned pier — citing erosion of the beach as their main concern.

After a DEP permit was granted, Phippsburg selectmen filed a last-minute appeal that noted the scenic value and historical nature of the pilings, the lack of public comment or a public hearing, the failure to notify abutters, inconsistent data on the effect of removing the pilings, and the property rights status of the pilings.

The department, however, had previously determined that under National Recreation and Park Association guidelines the pilings were not scenic, and the board did not overturn that determination.

Condemnation on Facebook was swift. Many comments — viewable by anyone with access to the social media platform — were made seemingly without thought or knowledge of the facts, but with vitriol and profanity.

“I hope Jack enjoys life as the most hated man in Popham,” a Jon Seamans posted, in part, on the I LOVE Popham Beach page. “If he removes those pilings and destroys a go-to fishing spot that has drawn me to Popham for 26 years he will have made an enemy of me for life. … Too bad the Maine press doesn’t have the resources to investigate how Parker’s relationship with the state influenced their decision.”

One Nancy Greenslade Chapman posted: “Can there be an appeal? Whose pockets did Parker line!!”

The chorus of conspiracy, but without proof to back their claims, continues. Loren Hunter of Popham Road was quoted in the Bangor Daily News as saying: “You are being hoodwinked by some science, governmental oversight and self-serving rich folk. The coziness of the DEP and the Reed & Reed hierarchy is unquestionably part of this system.”

The implication from these folks is that no way would a reasonable state board allow something so beautiful and sacred like a bunch of ramshackle pilings to be removed.

Change of this nature is rarely welcome in small communities, such as the ones that make up the Midcoast. Look no further than the effort to replace the Frank J. Wood Bridge connecting Topsham and downtown Brunswick. Citing its historic significance, some and would prefer a costlier restoration rather than an outright replacing the 85-year-old structure.

Back to Popham. the value of the pilings is hard to measure. No one seemed too concerned about preserving the pilings against the forces of nature. On the contrary, the condition of the pilings — old, weathered and leaning at various angles — evokes nostalgia in some. The pilings have been described in news reports as both “historic” and “dilapidated.” They may be at once a representation of a bygone era and a source of erosion.

They are a curiosity, something that adds charm or character to an oil painting or postcard.

It’s hard to quantify nostalgia. It comes from the gut. It’s visceral.

Amanda Gilnack poignantly reflected on the I LOVE Popham page: “Going to Popham ever summer and seeing these pilings was a tradition. My greatest memory is being so scared to try to walk out and touch the pilings. My grandfather (who has since passed) built up my confidence one year and I finally touched the pilings!!! That day he kept saying how proud he was of me and that meant the world. It seems like such a simple memory, but besides the abundance of history with these pilings, there are so many memories for so many people. It’s so sad to see them being taken out because of one person wanting them out.”

And yet, Jack Parker has done the considerate thing. He’s personally shown up at community discussions over the pilings, although he didn’t need to. He’s responded to criticism and has gone through proper legal channels in seeking his removal. His wealth and his position as Reed & Reed CEO is immaterial.

If the concern over erosion is legitimate, then the Parkers ought to remove the pilings and help preserve a beach that is loved and enjoyed by so many. If their motivations are otherwise, we would ask them to take a higher road and abandon their plans to remove the pilings. That would also be the considerate thing to do. The time, money and effort the Parkers have likely put into fighting the town’s appeal, however, probably makes that scenario unlikely.

Meanwhile, the trolls will fans the flames sparked by the Parkers’ seemingly innocuous request to pull the pilings. And the bridge between the Parkers and the Popham community may burn, leaving not only the charred memory of the pilings, but the ugly fight to save them.