St Pete Beach to Renourish

Yesterday, I wrote a post* discussing the fate of T-Groins in St Pete Beach. The St Pete Beach City Commission has decided to remove the T-Groins and go ahead with a beach renourishment project.

The commission decided to go forward with a beach renourishment project in 2009 and recover the T-groins.

In 2010, they'll hire an engineer to look at alternative plans for the area, such as a possible artificial reef.

Council members will then begin implementing those changes by 2012.

* I originally stated that this decision was being made by the county commissioners. This was incorrect. The decision was made by the St Pete Beach City Commission.

Hardening St Pete Beach

Between Upham Beach to the St. Pete Beach, coastal managers have been trying to address beach erosion using temporary T-Groins. Now City Commissioners of St Pete Beach are debating whether to replace existing sandbags with a more permanent structure (i.e. rocks). From baynews9.com:

The tubes are temporary to test out the size and T-shape. If approved by city commissioners, the county wants to replace the bags with rocks.

Pinellas County Coastal Coordinator Nicole Elko said during the two-year study 50 percent of the sand has eroded, without the tubes it would have been 80 percent.

The current project cost $1.5 million and is funded by the county and state.

Elko said the tubes would save millions of dollars down the road. It costs $6 million to pump in more sand and restore the beach. The bags cut that in half at $3 million.

Below is a jpeg I made using Google Earth showing these T-Groins.



Notice the convex shape of the beach around the groins. You can also see a jetty to the left of the first T-Groin. All these structures impact longshore transport of sand.

Stabilization the Hard Way

In the Charlotte Observer, Rob Young and Andrew Coburn (both from the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina) have an op-ed piece criticizing requests for a jetty at Figure Eight Island on the NC coast. There is a new NC Senate bill that, if passed, would allow a pilot project aimed at stabilizing Rich inlet

They state:

Any shore-perpendicular structure interrupts the flow of sand alongshore, causing erosion on the downdrift side. In the case of the proposed structure at Figure 8 Island, it acts like a jetty, blocking the sand moving across Rich Inlet and preventing it from reaching Figure 8 Island. This will predictably increase the rate of erosion further down on the island. The proposed structure may protect a few houses near the inlet, but it will shift the erosion threat to additional homes of neighbors down island.The structure will not reduce the need for beach nourishment, as suggested by some advocates. Our data indicate that projects like those referenced by supporters of the bill have required a total of 150 million cubic yards of sand at a cost of $730 million to stabilize nearby shoreline. Constant, costly nourishment will still be required.

It will be interesting to see if this bill is passed. North Carolina has a long history of rejecting hard stabilization projects. Figure Eight Island represents a very elite group of land owners. Do they have the political capital to get this type of project passed? It would definitely differ from the current management strategy.

Personally, I am skeptical management strategies which utilize hard stabilization structures to protect personal property. These structures alter the coastal sediment transport processes, often damaging shorelines in other locations. Are these types of structures really in the public interest or are they in the best interest of a small group of property owners? Who benefits and who incurs the cost?

Should we consider beaches and inlets critical infrastructure?

The N.C. Coastal Resources Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) recommends that beaches and inlets be treated as critical infrastructure (see Wilmington Star article). This raises some important research questions such as how to raise funds as well as methods for choosing optimal management strategies.

From the article:

"The N.C. Division of Water Resources currently funds the work on a project-by-project basis. But the money, roughly $22 million a year, wouldn't be enough if the state begins taking on a larger share of the cost of maintaining beaches, inlets and the Intracoastal Waterway."

These are areas of research that are gaining attention. One important point of emphasis should focus on the level of change a specific policy allows. These are highly dynamic environments where inlets and beaches sometimes exhibit considerable natural migration. What costs, if any, should be acceptable for keep these locations relatively static? By what criteria should we make determinations?

Many different people live, work, and recreate at these locations. There is no doubt that they are valuable. A good policy should incorporate the needs of multiple users, not just one type of user.

Here are a few papers related to this topic:

Kriesel, W.A., A. Randall, and F. Lichtkoppler. 1993. “Estimating the Benefits of Shore Erosion Protection in Ohio’s Lake Erie Housing Market,” Water Resources Research 29(4):795-801.

Landry, Craig E. 2006. “Optimal Management of Coastal Erosion on Developed Barrier Island Beaches,” Working Paper, Department of Economics, East Carolina University.

Landry, Craig E., Andrew G. Keeler, and Warren Kriesel. 2003. “An Economic Evaluation of Beach Erosion Management Alternatives,” Marine Resource Economics 18:105-127.

Parsons, George R. and Michael Powell. 2001. “Measuring the Cost of Beach Retreat,” Coastal Management. 29: 91-103.

Pompe, J.J. and J.R. Rinehart. 1995. “The Value of Beach Nourishment to Property Owners: Storm Damage Reduction Benefits,” Journal of Regional Studies 25(3) 271-86.

Smith, Martin D., Jordan M. Slott, and A. Brad Murray. 2007. "Beach Nourishment as a Dynamic Capital Accumulation Problem." Working Paper, Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences, Duke University.

And #8 is...

Dr. Beach has a new top 10 list for America's best beaches! Last year Ocracoke was #1 and this year Cape Hatteras is #8. I am somewhat biased since I am a North Carolina native, but I love the Outer Banks, especially Ocracoke where my family has a condo.

I should also note that Caladesi Island State Park is this years #1. Caladesi Island State Park is relatively close to my new job at Eckerd, but I can't claim any personal knowledge of this beach since I have never been there. That can soon be remedied!