{"title":"Will beach nourishment be enough to hold back the sea? Comments on Houston, J., 2020. “Beach nourishment versus sea level rise on Florida’s coasts.” Shore & Beach, 88(2), 3-13.","authors":"R. Parkinson, D. Ogurcak","doi":"10.34237/1008844","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008844","url":null,"abstract":"Comments on previously published article","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129647902","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Reply to comments by R.W. Parkinson and D.E. Ogurcak on Houston","authors":"James A. Houston","doi":"10.34237/1008845","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008845","url":null,"abstract":"Reply to comments on previously published paper.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122124896","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
J. Ellis, Mayra A. Román-Rivera, M. Harris, Peter Terezkiewicz
In many places along the U.S. East and Gulf of Mexico coasts, barrier islands are the first line of defense against extreme weather events threatening our coastlines. The trademark of these barrier islands are sand dunes that are intricately bound, from a sedimentary perspective, to the beach. Coastal storms, such as Hurricanes Matthew (2016), Irma and Maria (2017), and Florence (2018) have devastating impacts on these environments. This study investigated the volumetric changes of an anthropogenic and controlled beach-dune system on Isle of Palms, South Carolina, for approximately one year following Hurricanes Matthew (2016) and Irma (2017). This research reveals that these systems did not recover. The average loss of sand at the beach was -15.5% (nv = -0.89), whereas the dunes gained an average of 13.3% (nv = 0.79), when compared to the already diminished post-storm volumes. When considering the pre-Hurricane Irma to pre-Hurricane Florence temporal period, the recovery percentages for the anthropogenic and control dunes was -15.5% and -40.1%, respectively, suggesting a net loss of sand. Cumulative storms, such as those experienced on the coast of South Carolina and many other coasts, pose a substantial threat to the long-term viability of coastal dune systems. However, recovery at the control site in the form of incipient foredune growth is promising. This paper concludes with a list of influencing factors to dune recovery.
{"title":"Two years and two hurricanes later: Did the dunes recover?","authors":"J. Ellis, Mayra A. Román-Rivera, M. Harris, Peter Terezkiewicz","doi":"10.34237/1008841","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008841","url":null,"abstract":"In many places along the U.S. East and Gulf of Mexico coasts, barrier islands are the first line of defense against extreme weather events threatening our coastlines. The trademark of these barrier islands are sand dunes that are intricately bound, from a sedimentary perspective, to the beach. Coastal storms, such as Hurricanes Matthew (2016), Irma and Maria (2017), and Florence (2018) have devastating impacts on these environments. This study investigated the volumetric changes of an anthropogenic and controlled beach-dune system on Isle of Palms, South Carolina, for approximately one year following Hurricanes Matthew (2016) and Irma (2017). This research reveals that these systems did not recover. The average loss of sand at the beach was -15.5% (nv = -0.89), whereas the dunes gained an average of 13.3% (nv = 0.79), when compared to the already diminished post-storm volumes. When considering the pre-Hurricane Irma to pre-Hurricane Florence temporal period, the recovery percentages for the anthropogenic and control dunes was -15.5% and -40.1%, respectively, suggesting a net loss of sand. Cumulative storms, such as those experienced on the coast of South Carolina and many other coasts, pose a substantial threat to the long-term viability of coastal dune systems. However, recovery at the control site in the form of incipient foredune growth is promising. This paper concludes with a list of influencing factors to dune recovery.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"90 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128066892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
S. Cunniff, Douglas Janiec, Al Modjeski, J. Mattei
ASBPA announced the winners of the 2020 Best Restored Shores (BRS) award on 14 September 2020. This award has three goals: First, to boost recognition of the importance of shoreline restoration for building coastal resilience to climate change; second, to acknowledge the teams that put the hard work necessary to complete a project that delivers; and, third, to advance others’ capabilities and success. In this article, winners of the BRS award and the BRS Award Committee share their thoughts based on their project experience. Follow this advice and you too can implement a great coastal natural infrastructure solution and, perhaps, find your team on the receiving end of this award.
{"title":"Tips for a superior coastal natural infrastructure project","authors":"S. Cunniff, Douglas Janiec, Al Modjeski, J. Mattei","doi":"10.34237/1008846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008846","url":null,"abstract":"ASBPA announced the winners of the 2020 Best Restored Shores (BRS) award on 14 September 2020. This award has three goals: First, to boost recognition of the importance of shoreline restoration for building coastal resilience to climate change; second, to acknowledge the teams that put the hard work necessary to complete a project that delivers; and, third, to advance others’ capabilities and success. In this article, winners of the BRS award and the BRS Award Committee share their thoughts based on their project experience. Follow this advice and you too can implement a great coastal natural infrastructure solution and, perhaps, find your team on the receiving end of this award.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122798033","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In partnership with the U.S. Geological Survey Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program (USGS CMHRP) and the U.S. Coastal Research Program (USCRP), the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association (ASBPA) has identified coastal stakeholders’ top coastal management challenges. Informed by two annual surveys, a multiple-choice online poll was conducted in 2019 to evaluate stakeholders’ most pressing problems and needs, including those they felt most ill-equipped to deal with in their day-to-day duties and which tools they most need to address these challenges. The survey also explored where users find technical information and what is missing. From these results, USGS CMHRP, USCRP, ASBPA, and other partners aim to identify research needs that will inform appropriate investments in useful science, tools, and resources to address today’s most pressing coastal challenges. The 15-question survey yielded 134 complete responses with an 80% completion rate from coastal stakeholders such as local community representatives and their industry consultants, state and federal agency representatives, and academics. Respondents from the East, Gulf, West, and Great Lakes coasts, as well as Alaska and Hawaii, were represented. Overall, the prioritized coastal management challenges identified by the survey were: Deteriorating ecosystems leading to reduced (environmental, recreational, economic, storm buffer) functionality, Increasing storminess due to climate change (i.e. more frequent and intense impacts), Coastal flooding, both Sea level rise and associated flooding (e.g. nuisance flooding, king tides), and Combined effects of rainfall and surge on urban flooding (i.e. episodic, short-term), Chronic beach erosion (i.e. high/increasing long-term erosion rates), and Coastal water quality, including harmful algal blooms (e.g. red tide, sargassum). A careful, systematic, and interdisciplinary approach should direct efforts to identify specific research needed to tackle these challenges. A notable shift in priorities from erosion to water-related challenges was recorded from respondents with organizations initially formed for beachfront management. In addition, affiliation-specific and regional responses varied, such as Floridians concern more with harmful algal blooms than any other human and ecosystem health related challenge. The most common need for additional coastal management tools and strategies related to adaptive coastal management to maintain community resilience and continuous storm barriers (dunes, structures), as the top long-term and extreme event needs, respectively. In response to questions about missing information that agencies can provide, respondents frequently mentioned up-to-date data on coastal systems and solutions to challenges as more important than additional tools.
{"title":"National coastal management challenges and needs","authors":"N. Elko, Tiffany Roberts Briggs","doi":"10.34237/1008843","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008843","url":null,"abstract":"In partnership with the U.S. Geological Survey Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program (USGS CMHRP) and the U.S. Coastal Research Program (USCRP), the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association (ASBPA) has identified coastal stakeholders’ top coastal management challenges. Informed by two annual surveys, a multiple-choice online poll was conducted in 2019 to evaluate stakeholders’ most pressing problems and needs, including those they felt most ill-equipped to deal with in their day-to-day duties and which tools they most need to address these challenges. The survey also explored where users find technical information and what is missing. From these results, USGS CMHRP, USCRP, ASBPA, and other partners aim to identify research needs that will inform appropriate investments in useful science, tools, and resources to address today’s most pressing coastal challenges. The 15-question survey yielded 134 complete responses with an 80% completion rate from coastal stakeholders such as local community representatives and their industry consultants, state and federal agency representatives, and academics. Respondents from the East, Gulf, West, and Great Lakes coasts, as well as Alaska and Hawaii, were represented. Overall, the prioritized coastal management challenges identified by the survey were:\u0000\u0000Deteriorating ecosystems leading to reduced (environmental, recreational, economic, storm buffer) functionality,\u0000Increasing storminess due to climate change (i.e. more frequent and intense impacts),\u0000Coastal flooding, both\u0000Sea level rise and associated flooding (e.g. nuisance flooding, king tides), and\u0000Combined effects of rainfall and surge on urban flooding (i.e. episodic, short-term),\u0000Chronic beach erosion (i.e. high/increasing long-term erosion rates), and\u0000Coastal water quality, including harmful algal blooms (e.g. red tide, sargassum).\u0000A careful, systematic, and interdisciplinary approach should direct efforts to identify specific research needed to tackle these challenges. A notable shift in priorities from erosion to water-related challenges was recorded from respondents with organizations initially formed for beachfront management. In addition, affiliation-specific and regional responses varied, such as Floridians concern more with harmful algal blooms than any other human and ecosystem health related challenge. The most common need for additional coastal management tools and strategies related to adaptive coastal management to maintain community resilience and continuous storm barriers (dunes, structures), as the top long-term and extreme event needs, respectively. In response to questions about missing information that agencies can provide, respondents frequently mentioned up-to-date data on coastal systems and solutions to challenges as more important than additional tools.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127288616","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
With rising sea levels and more frequent exposure to extreme storms, coastlines worldwide are vulnerable to increased erosion and loss of natural marsh lands. In an effort to lessen these impacts, there is a growing practice of adapting hard or “gray” coastline protection techniques to more nature-based features that promote habitat and ecosystem health. Living shoreline marsh restorations utilize natural and naturebased materials to protect marsh shores from erosion while also allowing intertidal flushing to promote the health and diversity of the marsh. Our study investigates three types of living shoreline sill designs exposed to average and storm-energy wave conditions at varying water levels. The sills were designed to mimic constructed sills in practice (rock, oyster shell, tree root wads), but more generally vary in structure porosity and material dissipation potential. Large-scale laboratory experiments were conducted in the large wave flume at the O.H. Hinsdale Wave Research Laboratory. Wave transmission and reflection are used to demonstrate wave attenuation capability of each sill structure. Scour of the sill, bedload sediment transport rates on the seaward and shoreward sides of the sill, and sediment pore-water vertical hydraulic gradients were used to demonstrate the potential for sediment transport and liquefaction. Results will contribute to understanding the effect of sill material porosity and mass on structure stability, and the effectiveness of using green living shoreline sill structures in the continued effort to establish design criteria for living shoreline implementation.
{"title":"Observations of wave attenuation, scour, and subsurface pore pressures acrossbthree marsh restoration sill structures on a sandy bed","authors":"J. Converse, M. Wengrove, P. Lomónaco","doi":"10.34237/1008832","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008832","url":null,"abstract":"With rising sea levels and more frequent exposure to extreme storms, coastlines worldwide are vulnerable to increased erosion and loss of natural marsh lands. In an effort to lessen these impacts, there is a growing practice of adapting hard or “gray” coastline protection techniques to more nature-based features that promote habitat and ecosystem health. Living shoreline marsh restorations utilize natural and naturebased materials to protect marsh shores from erosion while also allowing intertidal flushing to promote the health and diversity of the marsh. Our study investigates three types of living shoreline sill designs exposed to average and storm-energy wave conditions at varying water levels. The sills were designed to mimic constructed sills in practice (rock, oyster shell, tree root wads), but more generally vary in structure porosity and material dissipation potential. Large-scale laboratory experiments were conducted in the large wave flume at the O.H. Hinsdale Wave Research Laboratory. Wave transmission and reflection are used to demonstrate wave attenuation capability of each sill structure. Scour of the sill, bedload sediment transport rates on the seaward and shoreward sides of the sill, and sediment pore-water vertical hydraulic gradients were used to demonstrate the potential for sediment transport and liquefaction. Results will contribute to understanding the effect of sill material porosity and mass on structure stability, and the effectiveness of using green living shoreline sill structures in the continued effort to establish design criteria for living shoreline implementation.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116750502","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In recent years, the technology and regulation surrounding the use of unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) has rapidly advanced. This has resulted in the availability of such technology for more common applications. Here we compare manned versus UAS platforms for acquiring high-resolution imagery of subaquatic habitat for the purpose of boat propeller scar delineation in seagrass meadows in Redfish Bay, Texas. We acquired aerial seagrass imagery in three 20-hectare plots using two UASs and one manned aircraft platform. The three plots represented a priori designations of low, moderate, and high seagrass scarring intensity. Overall, we observed that a smaller amount of scarring was detected in the manned aircraft imagery compared to that collected by the two UAS platforms, and that this disparity was much greater for the high scarring intensity plot. The observed differences in scar feature delineations were at least partially related to logistical difference between these two platforms — specifically, the lower altitude flown by the UASs results in a higher spatial resolution of the imagery that is less dependent on the camera specifications. From a logistical standpoint, the potential gain in spatial resolution via lower altitude flight could result in a reduced pricetag for high-resolution mapped products. Further, the rapid deployment and local operation typically resulting from the accessibility of UAS training greatly simplify the logistics of planning imagery acquisition at the appropriate scale. However, we realize that the current trade-off with regard to higher altitude is the ability to cover large areas with fewer transects and shorter flight time. Coverage limitations for UASs is currently rooted in both technological and legal issues. However, as technology and regulations evolve, the technical and logistical comparison of imagery products from UAS and manned platforms will become increasingly important to natural resource managers and researchers looking to make this transition to UAS.
{"title":"Logistical and technical considerations for the use of unmanned aircraft systems in coastal habitat monitoring: A case study in high-resolution subaquatic vegetation assessment","authors":"","doi":"10.34237/1008825","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008825","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, the technology and regulation surrounding the use of unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) has rapidly advanced. This has resulted in the availability of such technology for more common applications. Here we compare manned versus UAS platforms for acquiring high-resolution imagery of subaquatic habitat for the purpose of boat propeller scar delineation in seagrass meadows in Redfish Bay, Texas. We acquired aerial seagrass imagery in three 20-hectare plots using two UASs and one manned aircraft platform. The three plots represented a priori designations of low, moderate, and high seagrass scarring intensity. Overall, we observed that a smaller amount of scarring was detected in the manned aircraft imagery compared to that collected by the two UAS platforms, and that this disparity was much greater for the high scarring intensity plot. The observed differences in scar feature delineations were at least partially related to logistical difference between these two platforms — specifically, the lower altitude flown by the UASs results in a higher spatial resolution of the imagery that is less dependent on the camera specifications. From a logistical standpoint, the potential gain in spatial resolution via lower altitude flight could result in a reduced pricetag for high-resolution mapped products. Further, the rapid deployment and local operation typically resulting from the accessibility of UAS training greatly simplify the logistics of planning imagery acquisition at the appropriate scale. However, we realize that the current trade-off with regard to higher altitude is the ability to cover large areas with fewer transects and shorter flight time. Coverage limitations for UASs is currently rooted in both technological and legal issues. However, as technology and regulations evolve, the technical and logistical comparison of imagery products from UAS and manned platforms will become increasingly important to natural resource managers and researchers looking to make this transition to UAS.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115702000","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) of Louisiana was created after the devastating hurricanes of 2005 (Katrina and Rita) and is responsible for planning and implementing projects that will either reduce storm-induced losses (protection) or restore coastal ecosystems that have been lost or are in danger of being lost (restoration). The first task of the CPRA board was to develop Louisiana’s first Coastal Master Plan (CPRA 2007), which formally integrates and guides the protection and restoration of Louisiana’s coast. The System-Wide Assessment and Monitoring Program (SWAMP) was subsequently developed as a long-term monitoring program to ensure that a comprehensive network of coastal data collection activities is in place to support the planning, development, implementation, and adaptive management of the protection and restoration program and projects within coastal Louisiana. SWAMP includes both natural-system and human-system components and also incorporates the previously-developed Coastwide Reference Monitoring System (CRMS), the Barrier Island Comprehensive Monitoring (BICM) program, and fisheries data collected by the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) in addition to other aspects of system dynamics, including offshore and inland water-body boundary conditions, water quality, risk status, and protection performance, which have historically not been the subject of CPRA-coordinated monitoring. This program further facilitates the integration of project-specific data needs into a larger, system-level design framework. Monitoring and operation of restoration and protection projects will be nested within a larger hydrologic basin-wide and coast-wide SWAMP framework and will allow informed decisions to be made with an understanding of system conditions and dynamics at multiple scales. This paper also provides an update on the implementation of various components of SWAMP in Coastal Louisiana, which began as a Barataria Basin pilot implementation program in 2015. During 2017, the second phase of SWAMP was initiated in the areas east of the Mississippi River. In 2019, development of SWAMP design was completed for the remaining basins in coastal Louisiana west of Bayou Lafourche (Figure 1). Data collection is important to inform decisions, however if the data are not properly managed or are not discoverable, they are of limited use. CPRA is committed to ensuring that information is organized and publicly available to help all coastal stakeholders make informed, science-based decisions. As a part of this effort, CPRA has re-engineered its data management system to include spatial viewers, tabular download web pages, and a library/document retrieval system along with a suite of public-facing web services providing programmatic access. This system is collectively called the Coastal Information Management System (CIMS). CPRA and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) are also developing a proposal to create an interface for
{"title":"Coastal monitoring and data management for restoration in Louisiana","authors":"R. Raynie, S. Khalil, C. Villarrubia, E. Haywood","doi":"10.34237/10088111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/10088111","url":null,"abstract":"The Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) of Louisiana was created after the devastating hurricanes of 2005 (Katrina and Rita) and is responsible for planning and implementing projects that will either reduce storm-induced losses (protection) or restore coastal ecosystems that have been lost or are in danger of being lost (restoration). The first task of the CPRA board was to develop Louisiana’s first Coastal Master Plan (CPRA 2007), which formally integrates and guides the protection and restoration of Louisiana’s coast. The System-Wide Assessment and Monitoring Program (SWAMP) was subsequently developed as a long-term monitoring program to ensure that a comprehensive network of coastal data collection activities is in place to support the planning, development, implementation, and adaptive management of the protection and restoration program and projects within coastal Louisiana. SWAMP includes both natural-system and human-system components and also incorporates the previously-developed Coastwide Reference Monitoring System (CRMS), the Barrier Island Comprehensive Monitoring (BICM) program, and fisheries data collected by the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) in addition to other aspects of system dynamics, including offshore and inland water-body boundary conditions, water quality, risk status, and protection performance, which have historically not been the subject of CPRA-coordinated monitoring. This program further facilitates the integration of project-specific data needs into a larger, system-level design framework. Monitoring and operation of restoration and protection projects will be nested within a larger hydrologic basin-wide and coast-wide SWAMP framework and will allow informed decisions to be made with an understanding of system conditions and dynamics at multiple scales. This paper also provides an update on the implementation of various components of SWAMP in Coastal Louisiana, which began as a Barataria Basin pilot implementation program in 2015. During 2017, the second phase of SWAMP was initiated in the areas east of the Mississippi River. In 2019, development of SWAMP design was completed for the remaining basins in coastal Louisiana west of Bayou Lafourche (Figure 1). Data collection is important to inform decisions, however if the data are not properly managed or are not discoverable, they are of limited use. CPRA is committed to ensuring that information is organized and publicly available to help all coastal stakeholders make informed, science-based decisions. As a part of this effort, CPRA has re-engineered its data management system to include spatial viewers, tabular download web pages, and a library/document retrieval system along with a suite of public-facing web services providing programmatic access. This system is collectively called the Coastal Information Management System (CIMS). CPRA and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) are also developing a proposal to create an interface for ","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117308101","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
S. Khalil, B. Forrest, Mike Lowiec, B. Suthard, R. Raynie, E. Haywood, Q. Robertson, J. Andrews
The System Wide Assessment and Monitoring Program (SWAMP) was implemented by the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) to develop an Adaptive Management Implementation Plan (AMIP). SWAMP ensures that a comprehensive network of coastal data collection/monitoring activities is in place to support the development and implementation of Louisiana’s coastal protection and restoration program. Monitoring of physical terrain is an important parameter of SWAMP. For the first time a systematic approach was adopted to undertake a geophysical (bathymetric, side-scan sonar, sub-bottom profile, and magnetometer) survey along more than 5,000 nautical miles (nm) (excluding the 1,559 nm currently being surveyed from west of Terrebonne Bay to Sabine Lake) of track-line in almost all of the bays and lakes from Chandeleur Sound in the east to Terrebonne Bay in the west. This data collection effort complements the regional bathymetric survey undertaken under the Barrier Island Comprehensive Monitoring (BICM) Program in the adjacent offshore areas. This paper describes how a study of this magnitude was conceptualized, planned, and executed along the entire Louisiana coast. It is important to note that the initial intent was to collect bathymetric data only for numerical modelling for ecosystem restoration and storm surge prediction. Geophysical data were added for oyster identification and delineation. These first-order data also help comprehend the regional subsurface geology essential for sediment exploration to support Louisiana’s marsh and barrier island restoration projects.
路易斯安那州海岸保护和恢复局(CPRA)实施了全系统评估和监测计划(SWAMP)，以制定适应性管理实施计划(AMIP)。SWAMP确保沿海数据收集/监测活动的综合网络到位，以支持路易斯安那州沿海保护和恢复计划的发展和实施。物理地形监测是SWAMP的一个重要参数。这是第一次采用系统的方法，沿着从东部Chandeleur Sound到西部Terrebonne Bay的几乎所有海湾和湖泊的轨道线进行超过5000海里(海里)(不包括目前从Terrebonne Bay以西到Sabine Lake的1,559海里)的地球物理(测深、侧扫声纳、海底剖面和磁力计)的测量。这项数据收集工作补充了Barrier Island Comprehensive Monitoring (BICM)项目在邻近近海区域进行的区域水深测量。这篇论文描述了在整个路易斯安那州海岸如何构思、计划和执行这一量级的研究。值得注意的是，最初的目的是收集水深数据，仅用于生态系统恢复和风暴潮预测的数值模拟。加入地球物理资料进行牡蛎识别和圈定。这些一级数据还有助于理解区域地下地质，这对沉积物勘探至关重要，以支持路易斯安那州的沼泽和堰洲岛恢复项目。
{"title":"Overview of statewide geophysical surveys for ecosystem restoration in Louisiana","authors":"S. Khalil, B. Forrest, Mike Lowiec, B. Suthard, R. Raynie, E. Haywood, Q. Robertson, J. Andrews","doi":"10.34237/10088112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/10088112","url":null,"abstract":"The System Wide Assessment and Monitoring Program (SWAMP) was implemented by the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) to develop an Adaptive Management Implementation Plan (AMIP). SWAMP ensures that a comprehensive network of coastal data collection/monitoring activities is in place to support the development and implementation of Louisiana’s coastal protection and restoration program. Monitoring of physical terrain is an important parameter of SWAMP. For the first time a systematic approach was adopted to undertake a geophysical (bathymetric, side-scan sonar, sub-bottom profile, and magnetometer) survey along more than 5,000 nautical miles (nm) (excluding the 1,559 nm currently being surveyed from west of Terrebonne Bay to Sabine Lake) of track-line in almost all of the bays and lakes from Chandeleur Sound in the east to Terrebonne Bay in the west. This data collection effort complements the regional bathymetric survey undertaken under the Barrier Island Comprehensive Monitoring (BICM) Program in the adjacent offshore areas. This paper describes how a study of this magnitude was conceptualized, planned, and executed along the entire Louisiana coast. It is important to note that the initial intent was to collect bathymetric data only for numerical modelling for ecosystem restoration and storm surge prediction. Geophysical data were added for oyster identification and delineation. These first-order data also help comprehend the regional subsurface geology essential for sediment exploration to support Louisiana’s marsh and barrier island restoration projects.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"109 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117198427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Wave forcing from hurricanes, nor’easters, and energetic storms can cause erosion of the berm and beach face resulting in increased vulnerability of dunes and coastal infrastructure. LIDAR or other surveying techniques have quantified post-event morphology, but there is a lack of in situ hydrodynamic and morphodynamic measurements during extreme storm events. Two field studies were conducted in March 2018 and April 2019 at Bethany Beach, Delaware, where in situ hydrodynamic and morphodynamic measurements were made during a nor’easter (Nor’easter Riley) and an energetic storm (Easter Eve Storm). An array of sensors to measure water velocity, water depth, water elevation and bed elevation were mounted to scaffold pipes and deployed in a single cross-shore transect. Water velocity was measured using an electro-magnetic current meter while water and bed elevations were measured using an acoustic distance meter along with an algorithm to differentiate between the water and bed during swash processes. GPS profiles of the beach face were measured during every day-time low tide throughout the storm events. Both accretion and erosion were measured at different cross-shore positions and at different times during the storm events. Morphodynamic change along the back-beach was found to be related to berm erosion, suggesting an important morphologic feedback mechanism. Accumulated wave energy and wave energy flux per unit area between Nor’easter Riley and a recent mid-Atlantic hurricane (Hurricane Dorian) were calculated and compared.
{"title":"In situ hydrodynamic and morphodynamic measurements during extreme storm events","authors":"S. Borrell","doi":"10.34237/1008743","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008743","url":null,"abstract":"Wave forcing from hurricanes, nor’easters, and energetic storms can cause erosion of the berm and beach face resulting in increased vulnerability of dunes and coastal infrastructure. LIDAR or other surveying techniques have quantified post-event morphology, but there is a lack of in situ hydrodynamic and morphodynamic measurements during extreme storm events. Two field studies were conducted in March 2018 and April 2019 at Bethany Beach, Delaware, where in situ hydrodynamic and morphodynamic measurements were made during a nor’easter (Nor’easter Riley) and an energetic storm (Easter Eve Storm). An array of sensors to measure water velocity, water depth, water elevation and bed elevation were mounted to scaffold pipes and deployed in a single cross-shore transect. Water velocity was measured using an electro-magnetic current meter while water and bed elevations were measured using an acoustic distance meter along with an algorithm to differentiate between the water and bed during swash processes. GPS profiles of the beach face were measured during every day-time low tide throughout the storm events. Both accretion and erosion were measured at different cross-shore positions and at different times during the storm events. Morphodynamic change along the back-beach was found to be related to berm erosion, suggesting an important morphologic feedback mechanism. Accumulated wave energy and wave energy flux per unit area between Nor’easter Riley and a recent mid-Atlantic hurricane (Hurricane Dorian) were calculated and compared.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"189 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121853122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：