DOCSLIB.ORG

FAU Institutional Repository

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FAU Institutional Repository FAU Institutional Repository http://purl.fcla.edu/fau/fauir This paper was submitted by the faculty of FAU’s Department of Geosciences. Notice: ©1993 Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc. [CERF] http://www.cerfjcr.org/ . This manuscript may be cited as: Finkl, Jnr. C. W. (1993). Pre-emptive strategies for enhanced sand bypassing and beach replenishment activities in Southeast Florida: A geological perspective. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 18, Beach/Inlet Processes and Management: A Florida Perspective, 58-89. 58 COASTAL PHOTOGRAPH FROM UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA'S COASTAL ENGINEERING ARCHIVES PHOTO 2. View of Government Cut. Photo dated February 17, 1936. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 18, 1993 Journal ofCoastal ReIC8l'Ch Fort Lauderdale, Florida Fall 1993 Pre-Emptive Strategies for Enhanced Sand Bypassing and Beach Replenishment Activities in Southeast Florida: A Geological Perspective Charles W. Finkl, Jor. Department of Geology Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA ABSTRACT FINKL, C.W., Jnr., 1993. Pre-emptive strategies for enhanced sand bypassing and beach replenishment activities in southeast Florida: A geological perspective. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 18, 59-89. Fort Lauderdale (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Although beaches on the southeast Florida coast are periodically replenished in an effort to reduce shoreline recession, such efforts have been only moderately successful. Erosion of sandy beaches on the downdrift (south) sides ofjettied inlets is a chronic problem that requires remediation. In order for erosion control measures to be effective, e.g. function harmoniously within the natural balance of coastal systems, coastal protection measures must consider the geological framework for this subtropical coast as it influences strategies for coastal management. Important to coastal engineering design are such factors as climate change (Greenhouse Effect), sediment discharge into the oceans, long­ and short-term causes of sea-level rise, sediment sources and sinks in terms of gross/net littoral budgets. The limited reserves of offshore borrow materials that are suitable for beach renourishment and the loss of nearshore sediments to deep offshore regions requires consideration ofalternative sand sources and enhanced sand bypassing options. Environmental impacts and socio-economic constraints of sand management schemes are related to the on-going "sand wars", and the consideration ofecologically-favored alternatives. There are several action items that need to be implemented if politically expedient solutions, such as long-range setbacks or abandonment of coastal sectors, are to be avoided. These action items are: (1) initiate full-scale comprehensive environmental monitoring of bypassingand replenishment projects, (2) set up continuous long-term ecological monitoring, (3) standardize methods and sampling techniques, (4) form Florida reference ecological stations, (5) include ecologically sensitive areas in data management plans, (6) monitor beach, borrow, and bypass installations on the basis of ecological performance, and (7) establish a central depository for environmental performance data. The advantage of beach replenishment combined with enhanced sand bypassing is a pre-emptive strategy over conventional techniques. The initiation of comprehensive, long-term environmental (ecological) monitoring is needed as a means to approach a balance between engineering solutions to erosion control and environmental concerns. ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: Beach erosion, borrow material, coastal erosion, coastal management, dredging, environmental monitoring, sand management, shoreline stabilization, tidal inlet.. 60 Fink! INTRODUCTION in accordance with local conditions. Even though most erosion control measures are Erosion of sandy beaches, a world-wide prob­ specifically designed to incorporate local pecu­ lem (BIRD, 1985), is related, in part, to long­ liarities of individual inlets, mitigation of the term (background) relative sea-level rise (RSL). downdrift beach-erosion problem has been less Beaches along the southeast Florida coast (Figure successful than anticipated. In addition to the 1) are no exception to this general trend. Because technical and engineering aspects ofsand bypass­ the value of Florida beaches as a revenue source ing and replenishment activities are other consid­ has increased in proportion to population growth erations of equal import that include, for exam­ (STEVENS, 1990), there is considerable interest ple: societal perceptions of what constitutes a in maintaining beaches as a tourist-based re­ problem, estimates ofits extent and severity, and source that will continue to support coastal what constitutes an "acceptable" solution; eco­ development (CULLITON et al., 1992). One nomic and political constraints that may limit measure ofrapidly increasing coastal populations some types ofengineering solution; and concerns is the number of residential and non-residential over the impacts of engineering works that may construction permits, as shown graphically in degrade the environmental integrity of these Figure 2. This intensive coastal development in fragile subtropical coastal zones. To this setting, subtropical Florida has increased the pressure on which already resembles a complex montage, coastal resources, particularly on sandy beaches should be added the geological framework with that have multiple uses for recreation, natural which all of these other activities play out and habitat, and storm protection. Thus, more than interact. 100 km of Florida's beaches have been rebuilt Knowledge of the geological framework is (artificially renourished, replenished) under the relevant to considerations ofcoastal modification Federal Shore Protection Program. because natural processes will tend, in the long In an effort to ascertain the causes of short­ run, to override human-induced perturbation of term beach erosion, researchers have recently environmental systems. Short-term consequences focused attention on shorelines that are adjacent ofinappropriate construction, such as longjetties to inlets because it has long been suspected that and deep entrance channels, can accelerate long­ navigational entrances have a substantial potential term (natural) erosional trends that ripple down to interfere with natural sediment transport the coast. processes in such a way that downdrift erosional impacts can be severe. In the example of South Purpose and Scope Lake Worth Inlet, the downdrift Boynton beach was eroded for 280 m landwards from the time It matters little what methodologies are consid­ of inlet cutting and stabilization in 1929 to 1955 ered "acceptable" if shoreline stabilization tech­ (BRUUN et al., 1966). Extreme rates of shore­ niques do not operate in harmony with natural line recession in isolated "hot spots" along the coastal processes. The purpose of this paper is southeast coast now approach 4 m yr-I , causing thus essentially twofold: (1) to briefly identify substantial loss of sandy beaches and oceanfront some relevant aspects of the geological evolution property, but in the early part of this century and framework of the southeast Florida coastal some downdrift shorelines retreated after inlet belt that may influence strategies for coastal cutting and stabilization at rates in the range of management, and (2) to indicate some new sand 20-25 m yr-I . DEAN (1990) estimates that on the management techniques that may be compatible Florida east coast, navigational entrances, espe­ with environmental conditions along this coast. cially those stabilized by jetties, are responsible for about 85 percent of the beach erosion prob­ EVOLUTION OF THE FLORIDA SOUTH­ lem. Mitigation of the beach erosion problem is EAST COAST thus clearly focused on stabilized inlets with attempts to resolve specific problems at each inlet The southeast Florida shore, which embraces Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 18, 1993 Sand Management Strategies 61 PALM BEACH him GULF 260 _ OF MEXICO DADE Study Area ~~~ ~ 0 ~5 60 Miles .:!i ~ I "I f , '. 1 ~ 0 25 50 Kilometers 25 I 820 81 0 800 Figure 1. Location ofthe study area in the southeast Florida coastal zone showing the location of Palm Beach, Broward, and Dade counties. the seaward parts of Palm Beach, Broward and environmental conditions and processes, as Dade counties (Figure 1), is regarded for man­ described by DOLAN et al. (1980), that may not agement purposes by state regulatory agencies as be applicable here. Unfortunate and unforseen a barrier island coast. The "barrier islands," as results may follow attempts to implement man­ identified by the Florida Department of Environ­ agement practices based on the assumption that mental Protection, are comprised by that section this coastal zone will behave or react to certain of the coastal zone lying between the Intracoastal stimuli, such as secular and punctuated sea-level Waterway (ICWW) and ocean beaches. Such rise or storm surge events, in a known or per­ administrative divisions should not, however, be ceived manner as based on management of other confused with natural (topographic, geomorphic, types of barrier islands (see, for example, geologic) units. Although perhaps useful for PILKEY et al., 1984). The point here is that regulatory purposes, application of the term barrier island evolution follows specific pathways 'barrier island coast' implies a whole range of (e.g. SWIFT, 1975; FIELD and DUANE, 1976) Journal of Coastal Research,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • June 2016 Division 3, 7Th CG District Aux
    The Log Publication USCGAUX Flotilla 36 Boca Raton, Florida Flotilla 36 Volume XXXV, Issue 7 Boca Raton, Florida Division 3, 7th CG District Aux July, 2011 Volume XXXX, Issue 6 June 2016 Division 3, 7th CG District Aux http://www.cgauxboca.org This version FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Disseminate to US Coast Guard and Coast Guard Auxiliary ONLY Flotilla 36 wished a fond farewell to Richard and Maddy Edwards, who have moved to Jacksonville, FL. Rick has been an FC, VFC, instructor, vessel examiner, and program visitor, as well as many other duties for the flotilla and division. He will be greatly missed. We all wish him the best in his new home. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE - PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 The information contained in this publication is subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974, and may only be used for the official business the Coast Guard or the Coast Guard Auxiliary The Log Publication USCGAUX Flotilla 36 Boca Raton, Florida And the Award goes to…. Robert Tingley (3rd from left) is sworn in by FC Tom Thayer, VCDR D3 Marvin Merritt, and IPFC Rick Edwards. Todd Greenstein is sworn in as FSO-IS by IPFC Rick Edwards, VCDR D3 Marvin Merritt, and FC Tom Thayer. The Log Publication USCGAUX Flotilla 36 Boca Raton, Florida The USGC Meritorious Team Commendation for participating on the 2015 D3 Boat Show Team is awarded to Ron Dillon, Andrea Rutherfoord, Helene Houge, Rick Edwards, and Mario Stagliano. Other flotilla members who participated received their awards at the Division meeting. The Log Publication USCGAUX Flotilla 36 Boca Raton, Florida From the Helm… Tom Thayer Flotilla Commander 3 6 [email protected] Greetings, fellow Auxiliary Members! The Flotilla year continues to roll right along.
    [Show full text]
  • Currently the Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems
    CRITICALLY ERODED BEACHES IN FLORIDA Updated, June 2009 BUREAU OF BEACHES AND COASTAL SYSTEMS DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STATE OF FLORIDA Foreword This report provides an inventory of Florida's erosion problem areas fronting on the Atlantic Ocean, Straits of Florida, Gulf of Mexico, and the roughly seventy coastal barrier tidal inlets. The erosion problem areas are classified as either critical or noncritical and county maps and tables are provided to depict the areas designated critically and noncritically eroded. This report is periodically updated to include additions and deletions. A county index is provided on page 13, which includes the date of the last revision. All information is provided for planning purposes only and the user is cautioned to obtain the most recent erosion areas listing available. This report is also available on the following web site: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/beaches/uublications/tech-rut.htm APPROVED BY Michael R. Barnett, P.E., Bureau Chief Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems June, 2009 Introduction In 1986, pursuant to Sections 161.101 and 161.161, Florida Statutes, the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Beaches and Shores (now the Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems) was charged with the responsibility to identify those beaches of the state which are critically eroding and to develop and maintain a comprehensive long-term management plan for their restoration. In 1989, a first list of erosion areas was developed based upon an abbreviated definition of critical erosion. That list included 217.6 miles of critical erosion and another 114.8 miles of noncritical erosion statewide.
    [Show full text]
  • Intracoastal Waterway, Jacksonville to Miami, Florida: Maintenance Dredging
    FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, TO MIAMI, FLORIDA MAINTENANCE DREDGING Prepared by U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville Jacksonville, Florida May 1974 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY. JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI MAINTENANCE DREDGING ( ) Draft (X) Final Responsible Office: U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville, Florida. 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Eleven shoals are to be removed from this section of the Intracoastal Waterway as a part of the regular main­ tenance program. 3. a. Environmental Impacts. About 172,200 cubic yards of shoal material in the channel will be removed by hydraulic dredge and placed in diked upland areas and as nourishment on a county park beach south of Jupiter Inlet. b. Adverse Environmental Effects. Dredging will have a temporary adverse effect on water quality and will destroy benthic organisms in both the shoal material and on the beach. In addition, some turtle nests at the beach nourishment site may be destroyed. 4. Alternatives. Consideration was given to alternate methods of spoil disposal. It was determined that the methods selected (as described in paragraph 1) would best accomplish the purpose of the project while minimizing adverse impact on the environment. 5. Comments received on the draft statement in response to the 3 November 1972 coordination letter: Respondent Date of Comments U. S. Coast Guard 7 November 1972 U. S. Department of Agriculture 8 November 1972 Florida State Museum 8 November 1972 Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services 14 November 1972 Florida Department of Transportation 20 November 1972 Florida Department of Natural Resources 30 November 1972 Environmental Protection Agency 8 December 1972 Florida G&FWFC 13 December 1972 U.
    [Show full text]
  • Description of the Proposed Action
    United States Department of the Interior FIS H AND WILDLIFE SERVICE South Florida Ecological Services Office 1339 20 111 Street Vero Beach. Florida 32960 Service Log Number: 41910-2011-F-0170 March 13, 2015 Alan M. Dodd, Colonel District Commander U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 701 San Marco Boulevard, Room 3 72 Jacksonville, Florida 32207-8175 Dear Colonel Dodd: This letter transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's revised Statewide Programmatic Biological Opinion (SPBO) for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Civil Works and Regulatory sand placement activities in Florida and their effects on the following sea turtles: Northwest Atlantic Ocean distinct population segment (NW AO DPS) of loggerhead (Carella caretta) and its designated terrestrial critical habitat; green (Chelonia mydas); leatherback (Dermoche!ys coriacea); hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata); and Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) ; and the following beach mice: southeastern (Peromyscus polionotus niveiventris); Anastasia Island (Peromyscus polionolus phasma); Choctawhatchee (Peromyscus polionotus a!lophrys); St. Andrews (Peromyscus polionotus peninsularis) ; and Perdido Key (Peromyscus polionotus trissyllepsis) and their designated critical habitat. It does not address effects of these activities on the non-breeding piping plover (Charadrius melodus) and its designated critical habitat or for the red knot (Calidris canutus rufa), a species currently proposed for listing. Effects of Corps planning and regulatory shore protection activities on the non-breeding piping plover and its designated critical habitat within the North Florida Ecological Services office area of responsibility and the South Florida Ecological Services office area of responsibility are addressed in the Service's May 22, 2013, Programmatic Piping Plover Biological Opinion.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, State Of
    987 INDEX Volume 39 1972-1974 A & D, Inc., permit, Highlands County 455,497 Acme Fish Co. marina, Palm Beach County 227 Acquisition land, Ten Thousand Islands 403 Adair & Brady: R." M. Wright dredge, Palm Beach Co. 41 Adams, A. A: Gen. Tel. Co., Sarasota County 746 Adams, A. Maitland, dredged material, Monroe Co. 343, 566-8,596 Adamson, Andrew, Indian Lake permit 236 729 A. Duda & Sons agric . lease, Palm Beach Co. Aerial photography, O.P.S. funds 735 Aerojet-General Corp., Dade County land, litigation 128-9 Agreements D.O.T., F.C.D., S.C.R.R., Palm Beach County land 6 Lindrick Corp., boundary line, Pasco County 204 McFadden, W. A., Hutchinson Island, St. Lucie Co. 828-9 Tampa Elec . Co. 61 Windsor Trust (Estero Bay land) 238 Agrico Chemical Company permit 929 Ahern, F. L. , dredge, Duval County 219 Al Pflueger Art. Reef, Dade County 921 Alachua County Bond, Dumont, et al, land sale 837 -8 Bond, Roger, Murphy Act land sale 560 County detention site land 526 County permit , Lake Santa Fe 99 D.O.T. lease, warehouse 71 Gainesville city utilities easement 724 Gilmore, T. , Murphy Act land sale 628 Hadley, R. V., Murphy Act land sale 668 Henderson, R. L., Murphy Act land sale 773-4 Lewis, N.M., Murphy Act land sale 520 Matthews, J. H. , Hardship Act sale 55 Matthews, J. L. , Murphy Act land sale 919 McDavid, Lucille B. , Hardship Act sale 54 Merry, R. 0., Murphy Act land sale 716 Mount Olive Church, Hardship Act sale 45 Road right of way easement 170 Shaw, Lila F., land sale 774 Sutton, Harold J.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix I: Critical Erosion Report 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan ______
    Appendix I: Critical Erosion Report 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan _______________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX I: Critical Erosion Report _______________________________________________________________________________________ Florida Division of Emergency Management Critically Eroded Beaches In Florida Division of Water Resource Management Florida Department of Environmental Protection August 2016 2600 Blair Stone Rd., MS 3590 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 www.dep.state.fl.us Foreword This report provides an inventory of Florida’s erosion problem areas fronting on the Atlantic Ocean, Straits of Florida, Gulf of Mexico, and the roughly sixty-six coastal barrier tidal inlets. The erosion problem areas are classified as either critical or non-critical and county maps and tables are provided to depict the areas designated critically and non-critically eroded. Many areas have significant historic or contemporary erosion conditions, yet the erosion processes do not currently threaten public or private interests. These areas are therefore designated as non-critically eroded areas and require close monitoring in case conditions become critical. This report, originating in 1989, is periodically updated to include additions and deletions. All information is provided for planning purposes only and the user is cautioned to obtain the most recent erosion areas listing available in the updated critical erosion report of 2016 on pages 4 through 20 or refer to the specific county of interest listed
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricane Floyd and Irene (1999)
    The Impact of Hurricane Floyd & Hurricane Irene on the Florida East Coast 1999 Post-Storm Report No. BCS-00-01 Ralph R. Clark Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems April 2000 STORM SUMMARIES Hurricane Floyd Hurricane Floyd formed in the eastern north Atlantic as a tropical wave that moved off the African coast on September 2nd (figure 1). After traveling westward several days, the eighth tropical depression of the season became organized on September 7th and was upgraded to Tropical Storm Floyd on September 8th and then to Hurricane Floyd on September 10th when it was about 200 miles from the Leeward Islands. On September 11th, Floyd slowed, turned to the northwest and avoided the northeast Caribbean. A turn westward coincided with strengthening, and from September 12 to 13 Floyd strengthened to an intense category four hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Classification Scale. Floyd passed just northeast of San Salvador and the Cat Islands in the Bahamas late on September 13 but grazed Eleuthera Island on September 14 in the morning and turned northwest moving over Abaco Island in the afternoon where there was slight weakening from its peak intensity. Floyd finally veered from its track toward Florida moving northwest then north paralleling the coast. Hurricane Floyd’s eye came within 95 nautical miles off Cape Canaveral on September 15 before heading north toward the Carolina’s where it made landfall with 10-foot storm tides as a category two hurricane near Cape Fear on September 16. The Tropical Prediction Center reports maximum intensity winds of 135 knots (155 miles per hour) on September 13th when Floyd was located in the Atlantic east of the Bahamas.
    [Show full text]
  • EA IAA Cut DA-9 at Bakers Inlet
    CESAD-ET-CO-M (CESAJ-C0/21Jun97) (ll-2-240a) 1st End Mr. DeVeaux/ dsm/(404) 331-6742 SUBJECT: Advanced Maintenance Dredging of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (IWW) Jacksonville to Miami, in the Vicinity of Bakers Haulover Inlet, Dade County, Florida Commander, South Atlantic Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 77 Forsyth Street, S.W., Room 322, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3490 10 July 1997 FOR THE COMMANDER, JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT, ATTN: CESAJ-CO 1. Your request to perform advanced maintenance in subject channel is approved subject to completing all appropriate environmental documentation, coordination, and clearance. Approval of the Memorandum of Agreement with the Florida Inland Navigation District is also required. 2. You should continue to monitor the cost of maintenance to assure that the proposed advanced maintenance dredging results in the least costly method of maintaining the channel. FOR THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES: ~&Peei JR., PE~ . Chief, Construction-Operations ~ Directorate of Engineering and Technical Services !<. c v ~...': 7 Yv / 9 7 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS P. 0. BOX 4970 JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 32232-0019 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF CESAJ-CO (ll-2-240a) 21 June 1997 ~MORANDUM FOR CDR, USAED (CESAD-ET-CO-M), ATLANTA, GA 30335 SUBJECT: Advanced Maintenance Dredging of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (IWW) Jacksonville to Miami, in the Vicinity of Bakers Haulover Inlet, Dade County, Florida 1. Reference ER 1130-2-520. 2. Advanced maintenance dredging is proposed for the IWW in the vicinity of Bakers Haulover Inlet to reduce the frequency of dredging required for this reach of the IWW.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Appendix 1C: the Status Of
    APPENDIX 1C: THE STATUS OF SANDY, OCEANFRONT BEACH HABITAT IN THE COASTAL MIGRATION AND WINTERING RANGE OF THE PIPING PLOVER (Charadrius melodus)1 Tracy Monegan Rice Terwilliger Consulting, Inc. May 2012 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS’s) 5-Year Review for the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) recommends developing a state-by-state atlas for wintering and migration habitat for the overlapping coastal migration and wintering ranges of the federally listed (endangered) Great Lakes, (threatened) Atlantic Coast and Northern Great Plains piping plover populations (USFWS 2009). The atlas should include data on the abundance, distribution and condition of currently existing habitat. This assessment addresses this recommendation by providing this data for one habitat type – sandy, oceanfront beaches within the migration and wintering range of the southeastern continental United States (U.S.). Sandy beaches are a valuable habitat for piping plovers, other shorebirds and waterbirds for foraging, loafing, and roosting. METHODS In order to evaluate the status of sandy, oceanfront beaches along the coastlines of North Carolina (NC), South Carolina (SC), Georgia (GA), Florida (FL), Alabama (AL), Mississippi (MS), Louisiana (LA) and Texas (TX), several methods were used. Non-sandy oceanfront areas were excluded since they do not currently provide this habitat; these areas occur along marshy sections of coast in Louisiana, the Big Bend Marsh coast of northwest Florida, the Ten Thousand Island Mangrove coast of southwest Florida, and the Florida Keys. The status of sandy, oceanfront beaches were evaluated through an estimation of the length and proportions of shoreline that were developed, undeveloped, preserved, armored and receiving beach fill or dredge spoil placement.
    [Show full text]
  • UFL/COEL-92/008 HISTORICAL SHORELINE RESPONSE to INLET MODIFICATIONS and SEA LEVEL RISE by Jonathan R. H. Grant Thesis
    UFL/COEL-92/008 HISTORICAL SHORELINE RESPONSE TO INLET MODIFICATIONS AND SEA LEVEL RISE by Jonathan R. H. Grant Thesis May 1992 HISTORICAL SHORELINE RESPONSE TO INLET MODIFICATIONS AND SEA LEVEL RISE By JONATHAN R. H. GRANT A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1992 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Robert Dean, for all of his assistance and utmost patience in helping me complete this thesis. The assistance of my other committee members, Dr. Ashish Mehta and Dr. Daniel Hanes, is greatly appreciated. I would like to thank Cynthia Vey, Sandra Bivins, Becky Hudson, Helen Twedell and Sabarna Malakar for their patience, humor and help in transforming my research into a thesis. I would also like to thank all of the professors who have taught me so much outside of my research work. This work was sponsored by Florida Sea Grant, whose continued support of coastal re- search is appreciated. The data used in this study were supplied by the Florida Department of Natural Resources. Special thanks goes to Emmett Foster (of FDNR) for taking the time to help furnish the most up to date shoreline data. The salvation of my sanity is the result of all my friends in Gainesville, to whom I am indebted. Thanks to all my fellow Coastals: Steve, Sam (my initial tutor to graduate school), Paul, Phil D., Jei and Mike and especially Mark and Phil H. (of G. H.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Beach Management Plan Introduction
    Strategic Beach Management Plan Introduction Division of Water Resource Management Florida Department of Environmental Protection June 2015 Manatee County Shore Protection Project being constructed in 2013. 2600 Blair Stone Rd., MS 3590 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 www.dep.state.fl.us FOREWORD The Strategic Beach Management Plan (SBMP) provides an inventory of Florida’s strategic beach management areas fronting on the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, Straits of Florida and an inventory of Florida’s 66 coastal barrier tidal inlets. The Florida Legislature has declared that the Department of Environmental Protection constitutes the beach and shore preservation authority for the state and has directed the Department to develop and maintain a comprehensive long-term management plan for the restoration and maintenance of the state’s critically eroded beaches fronting the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico and the Straits of Florida. The Department has developed the SBMP, incorporating by reference adopted Inlet Management Implementation Plans (IMP’s), and held public meetings for the which the SBMP has been prepared, in accordance with Sections 161.091, 161.101, and 161.161, Florida Statutes. The Department initially adopted the SBMP in October 2000, and has subsequently updated the SBMP in May 2008, to reflect current conditions and management strategies. Public meetings were held on December 9th, 10th and 11th of 2014 for the updated SBMP, dated June 2015. Comments were received from the public during the meetings and also by way of e-mails after the public meetings. The public comments were reviewed and edits were made to the SBMP by the Department that were deemed necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Beach Managment Plan
    Strategic Beach Management Plan: Southeast Atlantic Coast Region Office of Resilience and Coastal Protection Florida Department of Environmental Protection April 2020 Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Southeast Atlantic Coast Region Table of Contents Introduction - Southeast ........................................................................................................................... 1 Northern Palm Beaches ............................................................................................................................ 2 Strategies for Inlets and Critically Eroded Beaches .......................................................................... 2 Blowing Rocks Beach, Martin County, R126-R127.4 ........................................................................ 2 Coral Cove Park, Tequesta, and Jupiter Inlet Colony, Palm Beach County, R1-R10......................... 3 Jupiter Inlet, Palm Beach County, R12-R13 ....................................................................................... 3 Jupiter-Carlin, Palm Beach County, R12-R19 .................................................................................... 4 Town of Jupiter, Palm Beach County, R19-R26 ................................................................................. 5 Juno Beach, Palm Beach County, R26-R38 ........................................................................................ 6 Singer Island, Palm Beach County, R60.5-R69 .................................................................................
    [Show full text]