Dune management challenges on developed

By

Nicole Elko, Kate Brodie, Hilary Stockdon, Karl Nordstrom, Chris Houser, Kim McKenna, Laura Moore, Julie Rosati, Peter Ruggiero, Roberta Thuman, and Ian Walker

Lillian Street in, Kitty Hawk, NC, October 2015. (Photo credit: North Carolina DOT, used with permission.)

Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Page 15 and dunes are large coastal features by systematic, accurate monitoring. This dunes, a request made by managers who typically formed when wind- type of approach requires effective com- were in attendance. blown sand is trapped and stabi- munication of reliable and accessible S MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES lized by vegetation. Located between information across complex stakeholder The inherent uncertainties of beach the backbeach and inland features, they networks, which can be challenging. and dune evolution, competing interests are an essential component of the coastal An adaptive management approach to among stakeholders, and multi-scale sediment budget and a primary control dune restoration and coastal protection physical, environmental, and socio- on the backshore ecosystem. In this role, is enhanced when all stakeholders have economic forces complicate the manage- coastal dunes provide essential ecosys- a basic understanding of the problem. ment of developed coasts. Management tem services, including habitat for en- The problem-solving process actually de- challenges discussed at the workshop dangered species such as piping plovers, pends on individual and societal attitudes focused on how to: (1) balance natural sites of high tourism value, groundwater and perceptions, whose inclusion can and human-use values when determining recharge zones, and protection of coastal improve the ability of coastal managers dune functions and needs; (2) sustain dy- infrastructure and properties from wave to achieve solutions that ensure a resilient namic dunes given spatial and temporal erosion and surge flooding. Fore- coastal system. For example, high dunes constraints from static human develop- dunes that back many sandy beaches can in some areas, which offer greater storm ment; (3) address long-term physical be maintained naturally by the interac- protection, can be a point of contention process challenges such as sediment tions between littoral processes (sand for residents and visitors who wish to supply, , and chronic ero- supply delivered to the beach by waves), have easy access and a clear view of sion; (4) manage stakeholder expecta- aeolian processes (sand transport by wind beaches for recreation purposes. tions and interests over both short and over the sub-aerial beach), and critical This paper represents a synthesis of long time-scales; (5) provide improved ecological processes (sand trapping and ideas generated by nearly 100 members education and outreach programs to sup- vertical accretion by plants). Recent sci- of the coastal science and management port appropriate dune construction and entific research has focused on sediment community who participated in the management; (6) improve management movement between the beach and dune, American Shore and Beach Preservation planning and policies; and (7) prioritize including interactions between ecology Association’s (ASBPA) “Dune Manage- funding challenges. The need to better and morphology (e.g. Sherman et al. ment Challenges on Developed Coasts” incorporate input from social science 1998; Lancaster et al. 2013). workshop in Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, was also identified as an emerging and Dunes protect low-lying, developed 26-28 October 2015, to identify ways to important theme across the listed man- coastal areas from elevated water lev- overcome the perceived gap between the agement challenges. els and wave erosion associated with research of scientists and engineers and Balance dune functions coastal (Sallenger 2000). The the needs of management practitioners Sand dunes provide protection against value of dunes has been recognized for and other stakeholders. The purposes wave run-up and inundation during decades (USACE 1962), but dunes have of the workshop were to (1) identify the storms, a niche for plants adapted to only recently been included as a “design challenges involved in managing, restor- dynamic coastal conditions, habitable feature” in shore-protection projects ing and/or building dunes on developed substrate for invertebrates, feeding ar- (USACE 1995). Today, coastal dunes coasts; (2) determine the highest priority eas for primary consumers, and higher are recognized as a cost-effective method research needs for managing dunes on trophic levels, nesting sites, refuge areas of protecting community infrastructure developed coasts; and (3) identify ap- and corridors for migration (Peterson and from storm damage (NRC 2014). The proaches to help bridge the gap between Lipcius 2003; Everard et al. 2010). The expanded use of beach nourishment scientific knowledge and management greatest economic value of dunes is the facilitates dune building by providing a implementation. The workshop aimed protection they can provide for human sand source, accommodation space for to promote a non-technical dialogue infrastructure (Costanza et al. 2006). The dunes to form, and potential reduction in and information sharing between re- value in reducing storm risks is related wave-induced erosion. Despite the value searchers and managers/policy makers to dune elevation relative to prevailing of dunes for shore protection and envi- to collaboratively identify ways the storms, which determines susceptibility ronmental benefits (Everardet al. 2010), technical community could provide and to wave overwash and flooding as well as their basic function as “dynamic” land- communicate solutions for design, natu- sediment volume, which dictates the abil- forms and their role in providing these ral evolution, and maintenance of dunes ity of the dune to withstand storms and benefits isn’t always well understood or for consideration by practitioners. The maintain the integrity of the crest height appreciated by coastal landowners and consensus of the workshop participants (NRC 2014). Additional factors affect- beach users, and therefore sometimes not was that successful dune management re- ing the capacity of the dune to withstand incorporated into design specifications. quires an adaptive and flexible approach storm hazards include sedimentary com- that is: (1) locally-specific, educational, Because of uncertainty in the forces position (Palmsten and Holman 2012), and engaging to stakeholders and (2) that form and maintain dunes, manag- topographic complexity (Houser 2013), systems-based, considering the combined ing a dynamic dune system at a range interaction with the built environment aspects of social, ecological, and morpho- of spatial and temporal scales requires (Nordstrom et al. 2012), and vegetation dynamic processes. This paper aims to an adaptive management approach that (Feagin et al. 2015) — including inva- summarize not only the workshop discus- is based on sound, scientific knowledge sive beach grass dynamics (Seabloom sions but also recent research on coastal of coastal dune processes and grounded et al. 2013).

Page 16 Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 As discussed during the workshop, as fences in trapping sand (Miller et al. the USACE reviewed the performance he factors influencing 2001). The longer-term evolution and of several federal storm damage reduc- Ttemporal and spatial maintenance of dunes created by humans, tion projects following Hurricane Sandy scales of dune erosion however, depends on the positioning and found that projects backed by dunes and recovery differ on and morphology of the incipient dune, generally performed better than those undeveloped and developed the sediment budget of the beach-dune without dunes (USACE 2013). How- coastlines. Humans can system, and their maintenance by aeolian ever, the benefits of engineered dunes processes. Dunes that form by natural for reducing coastal risks are not affect the likelihood for dunes processes allow spatially-dependent dune sufficiently quantified to predict their to form or grow, ultimately plant communities to keep pace with damage reduction potential. Increasing impacting the benefits dunes topographic changes, thereby provid- human pressure to develop the shorefront provide. Buildings, roads and ing surface cover and root structure that through time, and risk from coastal haz- shore protection structures maintains sand accretion and contributes ards associated with rising sea levels and can restrict the quantity of to erosion resistance. Despite the advan- possible changes in storminess accentu- sediment and the space tages of building a dune using vegeta- ate the need to find ways to maximize the tion alone, the vulnerability of landward resource value of dunes in limited space. available for dunes to form; facilities in the initial years following whereas, beach nourishment major storms often encourages human Sand dunes also have direct human projects can re-establish intervention to accelerate the process of benefits beyond shore protection, includ- sediment budgets and space dune growth. ing consumptive (mining, harvesting, waste disposal, extraction, and recharge for dunes. Spatial constraints on dune evolution of water) and passive (aesthetic, psy- Beaches and dunes are part of a linked chological, cultural and environmental veloped coastlines. Humans can affect sediment exchange system that spans the heritage, and educational) benefits. The the likelihood for dunes to form or grow, coastal margin. The conditions for dune ability of dunes to provide natural and ultimately impacting the benefits dunes formation are fairly simple: an available human values in developed areas is provide. Buildings, roads and shore pro- sand source, wind strong enough for sedi- often diminished because dune dimen- tection structures can restrict the quantity ment mobilization, and an obstacle to trap sions are reduced either intentionally or of sediment and the space available for sand (beach wrack, vegetation, micro- unintentionally to facilitate shorefront dunes to form; whereas, beach nourish- topography, driftwood, sand fencing). In construction, provide unobstructed views ment projects can re-establish sediment general, the wider the beach (or available of the water, maximize space for beach budgets and space for dunes. Natural sediment fetch), the greater the likelihood recreation, or provide easy access to the dune evolution processes in undeveloped that dunes will form and survive (Short beach. The ability of dunes to form and settings can lead to diverse morphologi- and Hesp 1982; Sherman and Bauer evolve can also be restricted by back- cal and ecological states. Humans alter 1993; Hesp 2002; Aagaard 2004; Houser shore raking for litter removal or vehicle these states and their trajectories through and Ellis 2013). Dunes also can persist traffic (Houseret al. 2012), both of which size, shape, and vegetation modifications landward of sandy beaches in relatively eliminate vegetation and beach wrack (Godfrey and Godfrey 1973; Walker et sheltered environments, such as estuaries that trap blowing sand (Nordstrom et al. al. 2013; Brodie and Spore 2015; Swann and small bays, due to low wave energy 2011; Nordstrom et al. 2012). et al. 2015). and moderate to high aeolian activity. Generally, dunes designed primarily Temporal constraints on dune evolution Dune erosion by storm waves supplies for shore protection are often maintained Episodes of dune erosion are dictated sediment to the beach and nearshore, if as stable, linear structures, similar to a by storm frequency and magnitude on dunes are not overtopped by waves. After sedimentary dike, with little diversity of developed and undeveloped coasts alike. the storm, recovery of the potentially in- topography and vegetation. In contrast, Under natural conditions, dunes eroded creased width of the beach then provides natural dunes vary in elevation and width by major storms can take years to decades a source for wind-blown sand and a wider (Elko et al. 2002) and present a more to achieve their pre-storm morphology, buffer against erosion of incipient dunes hummocky landscape with blowouts, depending on their initial height and during mild storms, allowing dunes to depositional lobes, low swales and high volume and the frequency and magnitude grow. Dunes can reform, even when wave ridges that provide a more diverse mix of subsequent storms (Morton et al. 1994; attack and periods of dune destruction of habitat types. The lack of diversity of Mathew et al. 2010; Houser et al. 2015). are frequent, although their morphology topography and vegetation in engineered Human actions can speed the rate of dune and associated vegetation types (eco- dunes in developed areas may limit their recovery. Dunes can be constructed in a morphodynamic state) will differ from ability to provide the full suite of benefits matter of weeks by bulldozers returning locations subject to less frequent wave provided by natural (i.e. geomorphologi- sand spread inland as overwash fans. attack (Roman and Nordstrom 1988; cally and ecologically dynamic) dunes. Sand fences can be used to trap sand, Wolner et al. 2013). encouraging dune growth within a year Sustain dynamic dune systems Waves from more intense storms or two. Using vegetation to initiate dune The factors influencing temporal transport sand inland via overwash. growth on the backshore will often cre- and spatial scales of dune erosion and Under natural conditions, the sand may ate a more naturally functioning dune, recovery differ on undeveloped and de- remain within the coastal system and may but it may take longer to be as effective

Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Page 17 build new dunes farther inland (Godfrey of sand fencing, for example, indicate (Orford and Pethick 2006; Williams et al. et al. 1979). This process occurs when that once dunes begin to be established, 2012). On coasts where landward trans- space exists landward to accommodate there is little difference in dune volume. gression is limited due to static human the migration or re-formation of land- Natural processes can enhance vegetation development and infrastructure, rising forms and habitats, and human efforts do growth and diversity, but do not neces- sea level can lead to reduced sediment not prevent it. Human development or ac- sarily increase dune height (Nordstrom et supply, chronic erosion, and flooding tions that restrict overwash have reduced al. 2012; De Jong et al. 2014). Because problems. At these locations, it may be the formation of new washover habitat dune recovery after storms is not im- unclear as to whether a dune system is (Elias et al. 2000). This habitat has be- mediate, vegetation plantings, aided by a sustainable, cost-effective solution for come rare in developed areas, resulting in fences, may be required to initiate further reducing storm damages. increased threats to species that make use recovery by natural processes. The subaerial beach sediment bud- of it, such as piping plovers (Maslo et al. In addition, static human structures get is a critical factor in maintaining 2011; Schupp et al. 2013). Additionally, can directly affect dune evolution. Perma- dunes seaward of human infrastructure. in developed environments, nent footpaths across dunes can result in The volume of the subaerial beach can limiting natural overwash processes also low elevation points where flood waters change in response to wave, current, and prevents the island from migrating inland can intrude or wind erosion can focus, wind-driven cross-shore and alongshore and maintaining its width and elevation compromising an otherwise continu- transport, as well as human actions, like relative to sea level. A key challenge in ous stretch of dune height and volume. beach nourishment, as the active littoral developed areas is finding and maintain- Oceanfront development restricts space zone sediment is exchanged between ing a balance between high dunes for for natural features to form. Undeveloped the surf-zone, beach, and dune systems. storm protection and the need for barrier oceanfront areas, such as empty lots or This morphodynamic response can occur islands to migrate in response to sea level protected natural areas, often have wider rapidly during storms, seasonally with rise to maintain back-barrier marshes beaches providing more space for dunes changing wave and wind climates, and through overwash (Walters et al. 2014; to grow naturally. The extent to which on longer annual to decadal scales in Rogers et al. 2015). Additionally, coastal dune systems in these areas should be response to changes in sediment supply dunes can also migrate landward by wind managed by humans or maintained by and sea level, and may vary alongshore erosion of the seaward side, with deposi- natural processes is a challenge to find the depending upon the nearshore bathym- tion on the landward side (Ollerhead et balance of a predictable level of protec- etry (e.g. Houser 2009) and underlying al. 2013). However, the inland transfer tion for the buildings and infrastructure geologic strata. The interaction of all of of sand is often prevented by human surrounding them. these processes and timescales is impor- action to avoid inundation of properties, tant for determining the evolution of the buildings, agriculture and infrastructure. As with all natural systems, allow- coastal foredune system and its ability ing dunes to be more dynamic and Dynamic features vs. to persist. For example, narrow, steep topographically variable may increase beaches result in reduced sediment sup- static infrastructure difficulties in predicting how dunes will ply for dune growth, frequent inundation Natural dunes are inherently dy- evolve or how well they will be able and destruction of recovering incipient namic features that respond to changing to reduce damage to infrastructure as a foredunes, and smaller fetches over environmental conditions and develop function of wind and high water levels. In which wind can transport sediment, ren- diverse habitats. As demonstrated by general, there was a sense among work- dering natural dune recovery processes the workshop, interest in restoring por- shop participants that a greater reliance less effective (Short and Hesp 1982). tions of stabilized dune fields to enhance on adaptive management will be required morphodynamics, landform complexity, in the future, and that incorporating new An example of particular interest to and ecosystem resilience for native and measures into initial designs will require workshop participants is from the Town endangered species is increasing (e.g. stakeholder involvement, potential policy of Kitty Hawk, NC, where the primary Nordstrom 2008; Arens et al. 2013; Hesp changes, and special project funding. foredune cannot sustain itself due to and Hilton 2013; Walker et al. 2013; Pye chronic erosion and frequent high water et al. 2014). Still, it is not known how Address long-term physical levels during storms. Without a signifi- much mobility can be integrated into processes challenges cant fore-dune, flooding and damage to dunes built for shore protection without Workshop participants noted that infrastructure can extend well inland, sacrificing integrity as a barrier against coastal managers are increasingly asked even during moderate coastal storms, overwash. Some engineering projects to develop management plans and strat- creating substantial management chal- have been developed to allow for dynam- egies that address longer-term climate lenges (G. Perry, pers. comm., 27 October ic response by mechanically altering the change impacts and their potential effects 2015). When shoreline development is dune (Schupp et al. 2013) or by judicial on coastal erosion rates, flooding and situated seaward of the foredune, the use of sand fences (Grafals-Soto 2012), shoreline development. Vast amounts of amount of sediment needed to construct but greater creativity in initial actions sediment are required for shore protec- a sustainable beach fill that will provide and greater commitment to follow-up tion, beach nourishment, and landform immediate and significant storm damage activities could be explored. restoration under present conditions, and reduction can be cost-prohibitive (K. the need will only increase with sea level Experiments comparing natural dune Willson, pers. comm., 27 October 2015). rise and possible changes in the frequen- evolution to dune development influ- Abandonment with subsequent retreat is cy and/or magnitude of coastal storms enced by humans, through the installation rarely an option for well-developed com-

Page 18 Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 munities, and so managers must still “do For example, the “engineering with na- something.” In this case, the community he presence of human ture” approach incorporates natural and has elected to construct an affordable Tbarriers to sediment nature-based features into management beach and dune restoration project to transport in developed areas plans (Bridges et al. 2015). This approach reduce inundation during storms and implies that much of the may enhance the natural resiliency of encourage dune growth through natural needed sediment to maintain coastal systems as the “natural” aspect and human-assisted (planting and sand- a wide beach and dune of features are allowed to continually fencing) recovery processes. How this evolve, but also introduces a lack of and similar solutions will perform over system will have to come via certainty when compared with more multiple year time-scales and in locations nourishment operations using traditional hardened shoreline protec- where there is insufficient space to sup- beach-quality sediment or via tion approaches. Workshop participants port natural dune development, however, bypass operations at inlets. discussed that these newer approaches is unknown, and highlights the manage- Determining how to effectively require strong communication between ment challenge of finding sustainable, manage dune systems so all stakeholders. Strong communication cost-effective solutions. that they can both adjust in will allow all stakeholders to have a voice (Scheffer et al. 2003) and have access The natural response of coastlines the short-term and also adapt to reliable and accessible information to sea level rise, particularly on barrier over longer time-scales to (Folke et al. 2005) which enables an ap- islands, is to transgress landward through changes in physical forcing is propriate understanding of the problem overwash processes. As discussed pre- critical to maintaining resilient and balanced decision making (Scheffer viously, dune systems on developed and Westley 2007). coastlines are often forced to remain coastal communities. static, not allowing them to recover and After all stakeholders understand the migrate with overwash processes over problem and are able to voice their inter- the longer-term functional timelines of coastal managers, scientists, and politi- ests, local managers may be challenged shoreline transgression. The presence cians (Jackson et al. 2013). with forming a stakeholder consensus in of human barriers to sediment transport order to obtain acceptance of solutions. in developed areas implies that much of A substantial body of literature has Ideally, all parties are informed of oppor- the needed sediment to maintain a wide accumulated documenting the need to tunities and constraints and the needs of beach and dune system will have to come incorporate stakeholders in design of stakeholders are balanced. When resourc- via nourishment operations using beach- projects and co-production of knowl- es are restricted, local managers need to quality sediment or via bypass operations edge (Safford et al. 2009; Nagy et al. prioritize needs of stakeholders, such at inlets. Determining how to effectively 2014), indicating the benefits of a bal- as maximizing hazard reduction func- manage dune systems so that they can anced mix of top-down and bottom-up tion or providing habitat for endangered both adjust in the short-term and also communication. The state of Delaware species. Alternatively, if preservation of adapt over longer time-scales to changes conducted workshops and established shorefront vistas, access to the beach, in physical forcing is critical to maintain- an advisory committee to acquire stake- and recreation space is prioritized, the ing resilient coastal communities. holder feedback as part of an update to final management plan may discourage its coastal development rules (DNREC formation of dunes, reducing their value Manage stakeholder expectations 2015). When the state of Texas initiated for protection and other environmental and interests over short its program in the services, even where good conditions for and long time-scales early 1990s, involvement of stakeholders dune growth exist. In the U.S., most states operate under was critical to the success and direction of the Coastal Zone Management Act of the entire program (NOAA 1996). These The desire for access paths can result 1972 (https://coast.noaa.gov/czm/act/), are two examples of ways coastal states in low points in the otherwise high dunes which emphasizes the importance of con- provide channels of communicating the in the short term leading to increased sidering ecological, cultural, historic, and needs for beach and dune management overwash problems in the long term, esthetic values as well as the needs for programs that will engage local managers and the desire for shorefront views may compatible economic development. In and residents. result in dunes that are too low to with- highly developed areas, pressure to focus stand high storm-induced water levels, Management of coastal environments management policies on maintaining the decreasing coastal resiliency over the is also complicated by inherent uncertain- physical environment’s ability to support long term. Similarly, desire for large ties about how dynamic coastal systems urban, commercial, and tourism uses, can recreation spaces and retainment of will behave over both short and long time- lead to management approaches which property rights may result in narrower scales and under competing interests and do not adequately serve all stakeholders dunes that are restricted from building changing physical, environmental, and (James 2000; Villares et al. 2006; Roca seaward, decreasing the dune’s ability to socio-economic forces. Understanding and Villares 2008; Lozoya et al. 2014). withstand repeated collisions by waves. how this uncertain system behaves at a Determining how to balance the human As presented during the workshop, the range of spatial and temporal scales and desire for short-term stability (manage- desire to maintain a suburban style of developing appropriate solutions requires ment of vulnerability) with long-term landscaping may cause owners to plant an adaptive management approach (Wil- ecosystem sustainability (management lawn grass or other exotic species that liams 2011; Conroy and Peterson 2013). of resiliency) is a great challenge for would not be found in a coastal location

Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Page 19 under natural conditions (City of Miami As discussed above, strong communi- Improve management Beach and CMC 2015). cation and education of all stakeholders planning and policies are critical components for developing Dune management planning and In contrast, some beach users may be successful dune management strategies. policy making is often the responsibil- sensitive to the state of the physical and Efforts to adequately educate all stake- ity of local municipalities and counties. biological environment placing great holders are important, but ultimately the Ordinances and codes differ in the way importance on beach ecosystem values information may not be equally accessible dunes are addressed, reflecting differ- (Lucrezi and van der Walt 2015). These to all stakeholders. For example, tourists ences in levels and types of develop- stakeholders may place higher value on and shorefront residents may be harder ment and land use, state beach and dune actions that provide care and steward- to reach than local officials, but their management policies, and the presence ship of the (Tunstall and Penning- education is critical — expectations and of other means of shore protection. More Rowsell 1998; Maguire et al. 2011; actions of tourists can influence the way comprehensive decision support models Voyer et al. 2015). Beach nourishment municipalities manage the shorefront, could help guide policy and management and restoration is also valued by many and expectations of the general public implementation, particularly in viewing stakeholders who recognize that tourism can affect the will to fund coastal projects. dunes as a multi-faceted resource to be can decline where beach widths have managed adaptively. decreased (Houston 2008) and/or ecosys- Realistic expectations of the role that tems have been degraded (McLachlan et dunes play in the coastal zone are key. An example of a local, adaptive effort al. 2013). As discussed at the workshop, Dunes may assist in protecting coastal for managing dunes mentioned at the stakeholder interests may also change communities but, especially in areas workshop is the Nueces County (Texas) over time as communities evolve—the where barrier islands are naturally trans- Beach Management Plan (Nueces County coastal management plan may need to gressive and in the face of sea level rise, 2010). The plan follows rules promul- be updated to reflect new consensus or they should not be regarded as a panacea. gated by the state for dune protection and priorities (R. Trevino, pers. comm., 27 The role of a dune during a storm is to beach access (Texas Administrative Code October 2015). Workshop participants withstand impact by large waves and §15.1-15.10, GLO 1993) that allow local stressed the need to better incorporate in- surge — a scarped or heavily eroded governments to take the lead in identify- put from social science to ensure balance dune is evidence that the dune was suc- ing critical dunes and permitting activi- in prioritization of stakeholder desires cessful in absorbing that storm impact. ties that protect them. Through the local toward resilient communities. Similarly, windblown sands and the land- permitting process the Nueces County ward progression of dunes are part of that plan allows dunes to naturally evolve and Provide improved education dynamic environment, but oftentimes are protects them via building setbacks and and outreach perceived as a nuisance that must be con- mandatory dune walkover standards. As As discussed in this paper and present- trolled or stopped altogether. Stakeholder a result of implementing the plan, local ed at the workshop, extensive scientific education and adaptive management can citizens and coastal landowners are more information exists on how dunes natu- help to appropriately convey the advan- aware of the integral role beaches and rally evolve and maintain themselves, tages, limits, and potential morphologic dunes have in storm protection. providing key ecosystem and storm states of nature-based solutions. protection functions; however, effective Private residents and/or local com- communication and dissemination of Effectively communicating accurate munities often conduct beach scraping this information to local officials and to scientific information about dynamic to restore damaged dunes. Most coastal the public is often limited. While find- three-dimensional landscapes which can states have oversight of modifications ings from academic studies are often have a variety of natural states is difficult. to the active beach, even if privately presented in peer-reviewed journals with However, educational materials that take owned (NOAA 2000). Beach scraping limited exposure to the public, some advantage of today’s technology and is a controversial policy in terms of its funding programs (e.g. National Science state-of-the-art data sets — frequent aeri- effectiveness for long-term shore pro- Foundation and NOAA/Sea Grant Col- al imagery (e.g. NOAA’s Storm Response tection and environmental compatibility lege Programs) require descriptions for Imagery http://storms.ngs.noaa.gov/ (Wells and McNinch 1991; McNinch and public outreach and education in their eri_page/index.html), time-lapse videos, Wells 1992). An updated, comprehen- calls for proposals. Many agencies use or three-dimensional point clouds from sive review of state permitting policies websites or other social media outlets Lidar or photogrammetry — may make and regulations related to sand scraping to offer publications that provide for visualizing changing coastal landscapes and other beach and dune management best management practices (e.g. Mas- more accessible. Creation and effective approaches would benefit the national sachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Man- dissemination of these materials, how- community of practice. agement); however, educating coastal ever, requires (1) scientists to make the Development of best practice guide- landowners and beachgoers remains a data available for development of educa- lines for dune building and subsequent challenge. Some workshop participants tion materials, (2) social scientists and management would help guide integrated advocated for the need to, and benefits of, educators who develop these materials beach and dune management. General distilling and synthesizing research find- to have both resources and knowledge to principles for designing dunes to provide ings into more easily accessible summary exploit, display, and translate these data, flood protection and enhanced ecological documents that community managers and and (3) local managers to help effectively functions and values exist (Nordstrom practitioners can use as they consider the distribute the educational materials. et al. 2011), and dune management role of dunes in local communities.

Page 20 Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 guidelines for use by municipalities and Improve numerical residents are readily available (Texas oastal managers modeling capability General Land Office 2015; Rogers and Cwill be challenged to Realistic models based on field data Nash 2003; NJSGC 2016). The rationale design models for all of are needed to design projects and inform for building dunes for shore protection the lifecycle requirements policy. Models of aeolian transport and is often the focus, but the broader issues (short- and long-term needs, dune evolution need to be developed and of environmental restoration, species tradeoffs and uncertainties) evaluated on time and space scales rele- conservation, and the need for adaptive required to execute adaptive vant to human-altered dunes (i.e., several management may require attention. years to decades). Based on the coastal management. Long-term science communities’ understanding of Prioritize funding challenges funding commitments hydrodynamics and sediment transport, Planning, installation, and mainte- will require stakeholder, process-based numerical models have nance of dune restoration are frequently been developed to simulate these storm- implemented at the municipal level. The community, and state induced coastal change hazards. These cost of both dune and beach restoration manager buy-in, authorization, models, such as the eXtreme Beach projects are likely to increase in the future and appropriations. (XBeach) model (Roelvink et al. 2009) as maintenance operations become more and CSHORE (Johnson et al. 2012), frequent and additional sediment must have been shown to perform skillfully in be added to overcome increasingly large predicting dune erosion, overwash, and sediment deficits. Large-scale dune build- active funding for adaptive management. breaching processes (e.g. Splinter and ing projects may require federal and state Coastal managers will be challenged to Palmsten 2012). Significantly less atten- funding and long-term commitments for design models for all of the lifecycle tion has been paid to post-storm recovery monitoring and maintaining beaches requirements (short- and long-term processes which allow for beaches and and dunes to achieve the desired level of needs, tradeoffs, and uncertainties) re- dunes to rebuild and grow during calm protection (e.g. Kana 2012). quired to execute adaptive management conditions. Beach recovery is the ag- (Kelly et al. 2013). Long-term funding gregate of aeolian, hydrodynamic, and Shore protection alternatives have commitments will require stakeholder, ecologic processes, and not all of these previously been assessed using the risk- community, and state manager buy-in, processes are included within storm re- standard approach (most commonly ad- authorization, and appropriations. dressed in terms of the protection needed sponse models. against the 1% chance return level event) RESEARCH NEEDS To explore the simultaneous role and are presently justified federally Workshop participants identified a of aeolian and ecological processes on through the benefit-cost approach that can number of specific research needs, rang- dune evolution, the Coastal Dune Model measure the risk reduction benefits more ing from remaining fundamental science (CDM; Duran and Moore 2013) has directly in economic terms (NRC 2014). questions (e.g. the nature of interannual- been developed to explore ecomorpho- to decadal-scale dune evolution, shorter- dynamic feedbacks of vegetated sandy Studies that provide reliable eco- term recovery dynamics from erosive coastal systems. CDM solves for a 2D, nomic data to quantify benefits specific events, dune ecomorphodynamics), to spatially variable wind field and season- to dune-building projects are needed. practical questions about project design ally and spatially variable vegetation For instance, the economic value of dune and public education (Table 1). The spe- cover. Based on gradients in sediment building projects can be estimated by cific suggestions were grouped into the transport arising from vegetation cover, comparing the storm-induced economic following five research themes or goals: losses in areas lacking dunes with dam- slope effects, and wind velocities, the ages landward of areas with enhanced 1) Improve numerical models of dune model solves for changes in subaerial dunes (e.g. USACE 2013), but it is dif- formation, growth, and erosion to cross beach morphology. CDM has been used ficult to separate economic benefits of spatial and temporal scales, largely as an exploratory model for dune dunes from the beach nourishment proj- behavior and is in the process of being 2) Expand observations of beach-dune ects that accompany them (NRC 2014). validated as a field-scale model. CDM morphodynamics and sediment budgets is currently being coupled with XBeach over greater spatial and temporal scales, Economists have developed a range to allow process-based simulations of of methods for estimating nonmarket 3) Develop systems-based manage- the nearshore, beach and dune system value associated with environmental and ment approaches by integrating hydro- throughout multiple cycles of dune ero- social benefits (McNamara et al. 2011), dynamics, geomorphology, ecology, and sion and recovery following storms. but large gaps remain in the ability to coastal management, accurately measure benefits (NRC 2014). Future mechanistic modeling efforts Nevertheless, it is important to estimate 4) Identify success factors and incor- are needed to better understand the role the value of both ecosystem services and porate into dune designs and management of interactions between nearshore, beach social benefits, and then communicate the plans, and and dune systems, the role of climate value to stakeholders. change in altering beach and dune sedi- 5) Quantify and convey social and ment supply, the effects of species com- The uncertainties with future changes economic benefits to a coupled natural/ position on dune height and volume and in sea level, sediment sources, and ero- human dune system. the effects of natural vs. human activities sion rates may increase the need for pro- on dune evolution.

Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Page 21 Expand observations over greater meso-scale beach-dune morphodynamics processes, and seasonal to interannual spatial and temporal scales although new approaches have emerged phenology and ecological dynamics, so Field monitoring of both short- (epi- using near-field remote sensing (e.g. van- as to better inform vegetation manage- sodic to seasonal) and long-term (inter- tage photogrammetry, unmanned aerial ment and restoration efforts associated annual to decadal) beach-dune dynamics systems [UAS]) or high-resolution aerial with dune building and maintenance. and evolution is required to understand Lidar and terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) Such datasets, case studies, and empirical the physical processes that drive dune surveys to quantify beach-dune geomor- observations provide baseline informa- morphodynamics. This challenge is long- phic changes, transport event regimes, tion to form the basis for numerical and standing in coastal geomorphology as and/or sediment budget responses at the conceptual models. In recognition of the these processes span both terrestrial and meso scale (e.g. Stockdon et al. 2007; impetus of and needs identified by this littoral domains, have widely varying Delgado-Fernandez and Davidson-Arnott workshop, participants stressed that this spatial and temporal scales of operation 2009; Eamer et al. 2013; Walker et al. information be gathered not only from (from seconds to millennia and mm to 2013). Ideally, a meso-scale approach natural dune settings, often preferred for 100s km), and have nonlinear interactions can quantify both driving processes (i.e. research purposes, but also to include that can produce a variety of possible end frequency and magnitude regime of both developed areas subject to the additional states and trajectories. erosive and transporting events) and re- challenges of human activities, infra- sulting geomorphic and sediment budget structure and development pressures. Since the 1950s, geomorphology responses (derived from digital elevation research has generally evolved into two Develop systems-based approach model (DEM) surface maps) that, in turn dominant foci: broader “macro” scale It is important to better understand can provide a sound empirical basis for interpretation of Quaternary landscapes interactions between hydrodynamic, the development of predictive models (e.g. Holocene barrier development and geomorphologic and ecologic processes (e.g. Delgado-Fernandez 2011) and com- evolution) and a finer “micro” scale and coastal management processes in putational simulations of coastal dune study of physical process–response dy- dynamic dune systems. Coastal dunes evolution (e.g. Duran and Moore 2013). namics at the landform to sub-landform evolve through the feedback between scale (e.g. airflow and sand transport The majority of research on coastal vegetative and sediment transport pro- dynamics over beach-dune systems). dune dynamics has examined relatively cesses (Hesp 2002; Hacker et al. 2012). Over the past two decades, there has natural, undeveloped systems (Stockdon For example, in the U.S. Pacific North- been a growing emphasis on “micro” et al. 2007), although there are a number west, a suite of interdisciplinary field, scale process-oriented research that re- of recent studies that include a broad laboratory, mesocosm, and computer lies largely on site-specific, short-term range of environments (Stockdon et al. modeling experiments have examined the experiments and/or simulations that are 2012), or even focus in more developed relative role of vegetation in determining reliant on instrumentation and computa- settings (e.g. Nordstrom et al. 2007; dune geomorphology with particular at- tional technologies. Recent progress on 2011; Jackson and Nordstrom 2012). It tention to how dunes of different shapes modeling sand transport on flat vegetated is important to recognize, however, that result in variable levels of exposure to surfaces (Buckley 1987; Okin 2008; the dynamics and trajectories of each are coastal hazards (Hacker et al. 2012; Leenders et al. 2011; Dupont et al. 2014) governed by different geological, clima- Zarnetske et al. 2015). In this region dune and over foredunes (Sarre 1989; Arens tological, ecological, and oceanographic shape is primarily a function of sediment 1996; Chapman et al. 2013; Keijsers et controls – all of which are superimposed supply and two species of non-native al. 2015) is impressive, but predicting on and confounded by human interven- beach grasses (Ammophila arenaria and resulting erosion-deposition patterns and tions and infrastructure. A. breviligulata). Over recent decades, A. related dune evolution remains limited to breviligulata (American Beach grass) has An inventory of existing efforts a few novel simulations (Baas and Nield increased its dominance over A. arenaria wherein natural dune processes have been 2007; Duran and Moore, 2013) that often (European Beach grass) on dunes where incorporated and, importantly, monitored lack empirical validation. it was originally planted and has actively for over sufficient time scales to detect spread to new sites formerly dominated Given this evolution in geomorphic performance and recovery from distur- by A. arenaria. research, a knowledge gap remains at bance events is essential. Although it is the meso-scale (landform to landscape, possible that such instances are rare, field A species-specific biophysical feed- interannual to decadal) (Sherman and studies of projects implemented in devel- back occurs between sand deposition and Bauer 1993). This scale is key for dune oped areas (e.g. Nordstrom et al. 2002) beach grass growth habit, resulting in dis- management as it the operational scale can supply much-needed evidence of tinctly different dune geomorphologies for beach-dune sediment budgets, dune successes and failures. In parallel, there in locations dominated by these different maintenance and recovery cycles, and remains a need for further fundamental grass species. The dense, vertical growth plant community dynamics. In addition, research on meso-scale dune behavior habit of A. arenaria allows it to capture this is the scale at which management and recovery to erosive events so as to more sand, produce more vertical tillers, decisions are made and implemented, improve understanding of the linkages and build taller, narrower dunes, while human perceptions of risk and change and exchanges between nearshore, beach, the less dense, lateral growth habit of A. are most aware, and many political and and dune components of the system. In breviligulata is more suited for building economic processes that govern coastal addition, more information is needed on shorter but wider dunes. The species- management resonate. Currently, there the interactions between plant communi- specific feedbacks, along with invasion is comparatively little research on ties, aeolian transport and sedimentation dynamics, have a first order effect on

Page 22 Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Table 1. Research needs for dunes in developed areas. Specifying functions of dunes • Identify and quantify ecosystem services • Identify the role in the food web of species found in the dunes • Quantify the benefit (magnitude and cost) in reducing storm inundation, wind and wave damages to landward infrastructure • Specify the role of dunes in barrier island evolution (including overwash areas, marshes, and inlets) • Identify the implications of sea level rise on maintenance of functions

Overcoming constraints to dune formation • Determine dune evolution under varying wave environments • Identify sediment sources and sinks (cross-shore and alongshore) and impediments to transfers • Determine potential for obtaining and using external sediment sources • Identify long-term shoreline change rates and the impacts on dune development

Addressing needs for design of dune-building projects • Develop realistic field-based models for dune building under space and time constraints • Determine transferability of data and models from natural systems to engineered dune systems • Determine metrics for success in providing storm-damage reduction and environmental benefits • Identify drivers of landform and habitat zonation under natural and developed conditions • Evaluate ways to accommodate shore-perpendicular access without threatening dune integrity • Assess the roles of undeveloped and unprotected lots within developed and protected shoreline segments • Assess tradeoffs between building dunes by natural processes versus using bulldozed sand from external sources, employing sand-trapping fences, or planting vegetation • Assess the value of resistant cores inside dunes • Identify the best ways of helping dunes evolve after initial construction • Determine how much mobility is needed for diversity of landforms and habitats • Determine how to balance mobility against the need for protection and stakeholder acceptance • Specify requirements for adaptive management to overcome future unknowns

Addressing funding needs • Develop criteria for protection levels and costs, given increasing sea levels and storm impacts • Develop more reliable benefit-cost data for the spectrum of benefits provided by dunes • Determine requirements for providing long-term maintenance and adaptive management • Identify funding sources

Policy needs • Identify tolerable risk • Develop decision support models on levels of protection to guide policy and local actions • Develop criteria for implementing managed realignment or favoring greater landform mobility • Base strategies on existing successful strategies • Make response to storm hazards proactive, not reactive

Education and outreach • Find ways to explain the advantages and limitations of nature-based solutions • Find ways of integrating physical and social processes in decision-making, including economic benefits • Ensure two-way communication pathway to obtain stakeholder expertise and support • Gear messages toward actual capabilities of local stakeholders (identify achievable options) • Ensure stakeholders (and policy makers) have realistic expectations • Target tourists and non-coastal residents to broaden the support base for coastal projects • Inform property owners of the significance of their participation on municipal and private lands • Determine level of understanding of stakeholder groups and target guidelines • Make guidelines easy to understand and useful without losing comprehensiveness • Share existing successful policies and practices

Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Page 23 the region’s exposure to coastal hazards, disturbances, adapting prior to future sen 2000). However, there is a paucity in the present day and under a range of disturbances (Schultz et al. 2012), can of studies into community perception climate change and invasion scenarios apply to the benefits provided by dunes. and understanding of coastal risks and (Seabloom et al. 2013). Height and volume, which are critical barrier island resiliency. Further study in providing protection, are only two of would stimulate and assist management Identify success factors the important factors affecting resilience. decisions of beach and dune systems, and incorporate into dune designs Dunes designed for shore protection from the construction of hard structures and management plans often have a single flat-topped ridge to to re-nourishment projects, dune restora- Metrics, functional timelines, and maintain a predictable level of protection tion, beach raking, and decisions about evaluation criteria are needed for deter- against wave run-up and flooding and beach access. mining when and how to construct dunes, maintain integrity of the crest during ero- RECOMMENDATIONS employ fences, plant vegetation or incor- sion. Recent investigations of sediment The challenges and needs identified porate resistant cores within dunes, and transport and vegetation diversity point in this paper reflect the backgrounds of assess overall project performance. The to the advantages building dunes with the workshop participants and emphasize ways dunes can be built by human efforts greater topographic complexity, includ- engineering, geomorphology, ecology are better known than the advantages and ing a double ridge crest and intervening and municipal planning. There is a clear disadvantages of these constructed dunes. swale (Grafals-Soto 2012; Smyth and need to engage a broader range of social There is a need to quantify the value of Hesp 2015), which enable the dune sys- scientists to find out how physical science dunes, once built, in terms of erodibility tem to better recover and adapt. Greater and economic evaluations can expedite and ability to evolve to provide habitat dune elevation and topographic variation social decision-making. There is also or aesthetic resources. Metrics needed can compensate for reduced beach width more dune research occurring in the to quantify success of dunes in providing in providing for greater species richness U.S. than many workshop participants storm damage reduction include beach (Bissett et al. 2014). berm width and elevation, dune shape, realized, highlighting an opportunity to dune volume (in relation to wave erosion Understanding of implications of leverage existing facilities and resources and overwash), frequency and magnitude incorporating resistant cores in dunes is and for nationwide information sharing. limited, but interest in these hybrid dune of high water levels, rates of vegetation At present, a limited national approach forms is likely to grow if restrictions growth (initial and recolonization), and has been taken in designing research in space require structural solutions as requirements for recovery and sustain- projects or applying the results to man- backup protection (Irish et al. 2013). ability of entire systems (beach/dune/ agement. Because the physical and social Combinations of techniques for dune barrier island). constraints differ between shorefront building might be more successful than communities and between state and lo- Research on use of fences and vegeta- a single technique (Mendelssohn et al. cal levels of government, broadening the tion is extensive (e.g. Woodhouse et al. 1991), indicating the need for evaluation scope of a nationally consistent effort will 1977; Knutson 1977; Miller et al. 2001), of more complex designs, as well as flex- be challenging. However, the usefulness but many time-specific and site-specific ible management programs and policies. challenges remain. For example, fence of results of individual studies will be designs that accumulate most sand ini- Finally, vegetation metrics are needed increased by coordinating efforts in data tially are not necessarily the best designs to quantify ecological and storm-damage collection and management, maintain- for later years, and similar types of fenc- reduction benefits and design a dune ing centralized databases and products, ing can yield considerable differences in system that can retain the habitat value of and developing an effective means of dune volumes, depending on location natural dunes in developed areas. Studies information sharing. Data and research (Mendelssohn et al. 1991). of vegetation are common, at least for the results that are broadly available and dune-building species, but studies of the well-communicated would enhance sci- Natural aeolian accretion can facilitate significance of human altered dunes to entific progress. The connection between sustained dune building, growth of veg- fauna are poorly represented, except for scientists/engineers and coastal manag- etation, and habitat formation on restored endangered species. ers can be addressed through a strong, dunes and reduce the need for further diverse community of practice (COP) maintenance (Smyth and Hesp 2015). Al- Quantify and convey that provides a forum to exchange ideas. ternatively, continued use of sand fences, social and economic benefits once a dune has been built, can perpetuate Workshop participants agreed that The COP would serve to advance cultural boundaries, limit public access quantifying the costs and benefits of the the field and create new directions in or restrict natural evolution of foredunes entire beach/dune system will be impor- research by increasing interdisciplinary (Grafals-Soto 2012). Identifying the like- tant to develop informed decisions on collaboration and engagement across lihood for human-altered dunes to evolve management challenges, funding levels, academia, federal and state agencies, and by natural processes could reduce the and funding sources. Managers and re- community managers. The COP could tendency to over-manage dunes. searchers need to understand personal, achieve its goals by leveraging resources social, institutional, and cultural percep- and facilitating the exchange of ideas Metrics are also required to deter- tions of the risk amongst stakeholders, and results to move the state of the art of mine success of dunes in providing which in turn requires an understanding dune management and research forward, environmental benefits (e.g. Schlacher of the governing system, stakeholder to develop community standards, and et al. 2014). The concept of resilience, relationships and public perception (Ol- communicate the results to stakeholders. absorbing damage, recovering after

Page 24 Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 The workshop participants agreed that the • Thomas Gay — City of Virginia • Kenneth Pye — Kenneth Pye Associ- American Shore and Beach Preservation Beach ates Ltd Association (ASBPA) was an ideal orga- • Evan Goldstein — UNC-Chapel Hill • John Ratzenberger — Town of Nags nization, with its partners, to coordinate • Daniel Govoni — NC Division of Head and foster the new COP, through contin- Coastal Management • Britt Raubenhiemer — WHOI ued workshops and an online presence. • Brandon Grant — Moffatt & Nichol • Katherine Renken — USC Baruch ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS • Jessica Gray — UNCW Institute The authors thank the U.S. Army • Bianca Reo — University of Penn- Corps of Engineers, Engineering Re- • Chris Houser — Texas A & M Uni- sylvania search and Development Center and the versity U.S. Geologic Survey for their support • Frank Jennings— NC Division of • Ken Richardson — NC Division of of the Dunes Management Challenges Coastal Management Coastal Management on Developed Coasts workshop. We • Brad Johnson — USACE ERDC • Mayra A Roman-Rivera — Univer- also recognize the presenters (some cited sity of South Carolina • Haiqing Kaczkowski — Coastal Sci- as personal communication references ence & Engineering • Julie Rosati — USACE-CHL herein), as well as input from all partici- • Peter Ruggiero — Oregon State pants provided in the breakout sessions • Donny King — Better Beaches OBX University during the workshop: http://www.asbpa. • Charles Kocur — EarthBalance • David Ryan — Town of Nags Head org/dunes/dune_workshop.htm. • Todd Krafft — Town of Nags Head • Beth Sciaudone — North Carolina Meeting participants • Christopher Layton Town of Duck State University • Safra Altman — USACE ERDC • Jeff Lillycrop — USACE • Douglas Sherman — University of • Spicer Bak — USACE-ERDC • Joe Long — USGS Alabama • Rob Barron — Coastal Management • Jordan Loran — Maryland Dept. of • Jonathan Simm — HR Wallingford & Consulting Natural Resources • Matt Slagel — SC DHEC-OCRM • Natalie Bell — Texas General Land • Greg Loy — Town of Kill Devil • Nick Spore — USACE-ERDC Office Hills • Hilary Stockdon — USGS • George Bonner — U.S. Coast Guard • Rex Luzader — Pine Island Home- • Todd Bridges — USACE ERDC owners Association • David Stout— Broward County EPCRD • Derek Brockbank — ASBPA • Coraggio Maglio — USACE ERDC • Roberta Thuman — Town of Nags • Kate Brodie — USACE ERDC CHL Head • Jenna Brown — USGS • Tucker Mahoney — FEMA • Christopher Timpson — TenCate • Brian Caufield — CDM Smith • Pamela Mason — CCRM/ VIMS • Reuben Trevino — City of South • Aaron McCall — The Nature Con- • Andy Coburn — WCU PSDS Padre Island servancy • Nick Cohn — Oregon State Univer- • Ian Walker — University of Victoria, • Terence McGean — Town of Ocean sity Canada City Maryland • Ian Conery — East Carolina Univer- • Denise Walsh — Town of Duck sity/UNC Coastal Studies Institute • Kim McKenna — Delaware DNREC • J.P. Walsh — East Carolina Univ. & • Brina Montoya — North Carolina • James Cottrell Jr. — Pine Island UNC CSI Homeowners Association State University • Brett Warner — Town of Bethany • Laura Moore — University of North • Donald Cresitello — USACE Beach Carolina at Chapel Hill • Sandy Cross — Town of Duck • Jeff Waters — Coastal & Hydraulics • Mike Muglia — UNC CSI • William Curtis — U.S. Army Corps Lab - FRF • Karl Nordstrom — Rutgers Univer- of Engineers • Margarita Wells — City of Miami sity • Elsemarie deVries — University of Beach • Meg Palmsten — Naval Research North Carolina • Jonathan Westcott — FEMA Laboratory • Steve Elgar — WHOI • Amy Williams — Stevens Institute of • Rachel Patrick — Town of Southern • Nicole Elko — ASBPA Technology Shores • Stewart Farrell — Stockton Univer- • Ken Willson — CB&I • Katie Peek — WCU PSDS sity Coastal Research Center • Chris Wilson — Pine Island Home- • Gary Perry — Kitty Hawk, Mayor • Rusty Feagin — Texas A&M Uni- owners Association • Candice Piercy — USACE ERDC versity • Jessica Winterwerp • Jason Pinchback — State of Texas/ • Craig Fischenich — USACE ERDC • Bob Woodard — Dare County Com- Texas General Land Office • Ashley Frey — USACE-ERDC mission, Chair • David Powers — HR Wallingford • Linda York — National Park Service

Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Page 25 REFERENCES Aagaard, T., 2004. “Sediment supply from shore- dunes.” Geomorphology 130(3-4): 230–243. (editors), Restoration of Coastal Dunes. Hei- face to dunes: linking sediment transport Delgado-Fernandez, I., and R. Davidson-Arnott delberg, Germany: Springer, 67-92. measurements and long-term morphological 2009. “Sediment input to foredunes: descrip- Houser, C., 2009. “Synchronization of transport and evolution.” Geomorphology 60(1-2): 205- tion and frequency of transport events at supply in beach-dune interaction.” Progress 224. Greenwich Dunes, PEI, Canada.” J. Coastal in Physical Geography 33: 733-746. Arens, S., 1996. “Patterns of sand transport on Res. SI56: 302–306. Houser, C., and J. Ellis 2013. “Beach and Dune vegetated foredunes.” Geomorphology 17: Dupont, S., G. Bergametti, and S. Simoëns 2014. Interaction.” In Shroder J.F. (Ed.), Treatise 339-350. “Modeling aeolian erosion in presence of on Geomorphology, Vol. 10. San Diego, CA: Arens, S.A., Q.L. Slings, L. Geelen, and H. van der vegetation.” J. Geophysical Res.: Earth Sur- Academic Press, 267-288. Hagen 2013. “Restoration of dune mobility face 119: 168-87. Houser, C., 2013. “Alongshore variation in beach- in The Netherlands.” In Martinez, M.L., J.B. Duran, O., and L. Moore 2013. “Vegetation controls dune morphology: Implications for barrier Gallego-Fernandez, and P.A. Hesp (editors.), on the maximum size of coastal dunes.” Pro- island response.” Geomorphology 199: 48-61. Restoration of Coastal Dunes Berlin, Ger- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Houser, C., B. Labude, L. Haider, and B. Weymer many: Springer, 107-124. 110(43): 17217-17222. 2012. “Impacts of driving on the beach: case Baas, A., and J. Nield 2007. “Modelling vegetated Eamer, J., I. Darke, and I. Walker 2013. “Geo- studies from Assateague Island and Padre Is- dune landscapes.” Geophysical Research morphic and sediment volume responses of land National Seashores.” Ocean and Coastal Letters 34(6): L06405. a coastal dune complex following invasive Management 71: 33-45. Bissett, S.N., J.C. Zinnert, and D.R. Young 2014. vegetation removal.” Earth Surface Processes Houser, C., P. Wernette, E. Rentschlar, H. Jones, B. “Linking habitat with associations of woody and Landforms. 38(10):1148-1159. Hammond, and S. Trimble 2015. “Post-storm vegetation and vines on two mid-Atlantic Elias, S.P., J.D. Fraser, and P.A. Buckley 2000. beach and dune recovery: implications for barrier islands.” J. Coastal Res. 30: 843-850. “Piping plover brood foraging ecology on barrier island resilience.” Geomorphology Bridges, T.S., P.W. Wagner, K.A. Burks-Copes, New York barrier islands.” J. Wildlife Man- 234: 54-63. M.E. Bates, Z.A. Collier, C.J. Fischenich, J.Z. agement 64: 346-354. Houston, J.R., 2008. “The economic value of Gailani, L.D. Leuck, C.D. Piercy, J.D. Rosati, Elko, N., A. Sallenger, K. Guy, and K. Morgan beaches: 2008 Update.” Shore & Beach, E.J. Russo, D.J. Shafer, C.S. Burton, E.A. 2002. “Barrier island elevations relevant to 76(3): 22-26. Vuxton, and T.V. Wamsely 2015. “Use of potential storm impacts.” 2. South Atlantic: Irish, J.L., P.J. Lynett, R. Weiss, S.M. Smallegan, Natural and Nature-Based Features (NNBF) U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report and W. Cheng 2013. “Buried relic seawall for Coastal Resilience.” ERDC SR-15-1, 2002-288. mitigates Hurricane Sandy’s impacts.” Vicksburg, MS. U.S. Army Engineer and Everard, M., L. Jones, and B. Watts 2010. “Have Coastal Engineering 80: 79-82. Research Development Center. we neglected the societal importance of sand Jackson, N.L., and K.F. Nordstrom 2012. “Aeolian Brodie, K.L., and N.J. Spore 2015. “Foredune dunes? An ecosystem services perspective.” sediment transport and morphologic change classification and storm response: auto- Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwa- on a managed and an unmanaged foredune.” mated analysis of terrestrial lidar DEMs.” ter Ecosystems 20: 476-487. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms Proc. Coastal Sediments 2015, San Diego, Feagin, R.A., J. Figlus, J.C. Zinnert, J. Sigren, M.L. 38(4): 413-420. California. Martínez, R. Silva, W.K. Smith, D. Cox, D.R. Jackson, N.L., K.F. Nordstrom, R.A. Feagin, and Buckley, R., 1987. “The effect of sparse vegetation Young, and G. Carter 2015. “Going with the W.K. Smith 2013. “Coastal geomorphology cover on transport of dune sand by wind.” flow or against the grain? The promise of and restoration.” Geomorphology 199: 1-7. Nature 325: 426-28. vegetation for protecting beaches, dunes, James, R.J., 2000. “From beaches to beach environ- Chapman, C., I. Walker, B. Bauer, P. Hesp, R. and barrier islands from erosion.” Frontiers ments: linking the ecology, human-use, and Davidson-Arnott, and J. Ollerhead 2013. in Ecology and the Environment 13: 203-210. management of beaches in Australia.” Ocean “Reynolds stress and sand transport over a Folke, C.T., P. Hahn, P.L.H. Olsson, and J. Nor- Coast Manag. 43(6):49-–514 vegetated foredune.” Earth Surface Processes berg 2005. “Adaptive governance of social- Johnson, B.D., N. Kobayashi, and M.B. Gra- and Landforms 38(4): 1735-1747. ecological knowledge.” Annual Review of vens 2012. “Cross-shore numerical model City of Miami Beach and Coastal Management Environment and Resources 30: 441–473. CSHORE for waves, currents, sediment trans- Consulting (CMC) 2015. “Citywide Coastal Godfrey, P.J, and M.M. Godfrey 1973. “Comparison port and beach profile evolution.” Coastal Dune Management Plan.” Miami Beach, FL. of ecological and geomorphic interactions and Hydraulics Laboratory (U.S.), ERDC/ Conroy, M.J., and J.T. Peterson 2013. “Decision between altered and unaltered barrier island CHL TR-12-22. making in natural resource management: A systems in North Carolina.” In Coates, D.R. Kana, T.W., 2012. “A brief history of beach nour- structured, adaptive approach.” Wiley-Black- (editor), Coastal Geomorphology. Bing- ishment in South Carolina.” Shore & Beach well, Oxford, UK. ISBN 978-0-470-67175-7. hamton, NY: State University of New York, 80(4): 9-21. Costanza, R., M. Wilson, A. Troy, A. Voinov, S. 239-258. Keijsers J, A. De Groot, and M. Riksen 2015. Liu, and J. D’Agostina 2006. “The value of Godfrey, P.J., S.P. Leatherman, and R. Zaremba “Vegetation and sedimentation on coastal New Jersey’s ecosystem services and natural 1979. “A geobotanical approach to classifica- foredunes.” Geomorphology, 228: 723-34. capital.” Burlington, VT: Gund Institute tion of barrier beach systems.” In Leatherman Kelly, R.A., A.J. Jakeman, O. Barreteau, M.E. for Ecological Economics, University of S.P. (Ed.), Barrier Islands from the Gulf of St. Borsuk, S. ElSawah, S.H. Hamilton, H.J. Vermont. Lawrence to the Gulf of Mexico. New York, Henriksen, S. Kuikka, H.R. Maier, A.E. Riz- De Jong, B., J.G.S. Keijsers, M.J.P.M. Riksen, J. NY: Academic Press, 99-126. zoli, H. van Delden, and A.A. Voinov 2013. Krol, and P.A. Slim 2014. “Soft engineer- Grafals-Soto, R., 2012. “Effects of sand fences on “Selecting among five common modelling ing vs. a dynamic approach in coastal dune coastal dune vegetation distribution.” Geo- approaches for integrated environmental as- management: A case study on the North Sea morphology 145-146: 45-55. sessment and management.” Environmental barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands.” Hacker, S., P. Zarnetske, E. Seabloom, P. Ruggiero, Modeling and Software 47: 159-181. J. Coastal Res. 30: 670-684. J. Mull, S. Gerrity, and C. Jones 2012. “Subtle Knutson, P.L., 1977. “Planting guidelines for dune DNREC (Delaware Department of Natural Re- differences in two non-native congeneric creation and stabilization.” Coastal Engi- sources and Environmental Control) 2015. beach grasses significantly affect their colo- neering Technical Aid No 77-4. U.S. Army Beach Regulatory Advisory Committee, nization, spread, and impact.” Oikos 121(1): Coastal Engineering Research Center, Fort Updates to Delaware Regulations Governing 138-148. Belvoir, VA. Beach Protection and the Use of Beaches, Do- Hesp, P., 2002. “Foredunes and blowouts: initiation, Lancaster, N., D.J. Sherman, and A.C.W. Baas ver, Delaware (http://www.dnrec.delaware. geomorphology and dynamics.” Geomorphol- (eds.), Vol. 11: Aeolian Geomorphology. In: gov/swc/Shoreline/Pages/Beach-Regulatory- ogy 48(1-3): 245-268. Shroder, J.F., (ed.) Treatise on Geomorphol- Advisory-Committee.aspx). Accessed 26 Hesp, P., and M. Hilton 2013. “Restoration of ogy. Elsevier: Oxford. January 2016. foredunes and transgressive dunefields: Case Leenders, J., G. Sterk, and J. Van Boxel 2011. Delgado-Fernandez, I., 2011. “Meso-scale mod- studies from New Zealand.” In Martinez, “Modeling wind-blown sediment transport elling of aeolian sediment input to coastal M.L., J.B. Gallego-Fernández, and P.A. Hesp around single vegetation elements.” Earth

Page 26 Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Surface Processes and Landforms 36: Coastal Management Program and Final cinski 2009. “Modelling storm impacts on 1218-29. Environmental Impact Statement for the beaches, dunes and barrier islands.” Coastal Lozoya, J.P., R. Sardá, and J.A. Jiménez 2014. State of Texas.” August 1996, Silver Spring, Engineering 56: 1133-1152. “Users expectations and the need for differ- Maryland. Rogers, S., and D. Nash 2003. The Dune Book. ential beach management frameworks along NOAA (National Oceanic Atmospheric Administra- Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Sea Grant. the costa Brava: urban vs. natural protected tion, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Rogers, L.J., L.J. Moore, E.B. Goldstein, C.J. beaches.” Land Use Policy 38: 397-414. Management) 2000. “State, Territory, and Hein, J. Lorenzo-Trueba, and A.D. Ashton Lucrezi, S., and M.F. van der Walt 2015. “Beach- Commonwealth Beach Nourishment Pro- 2015. “Anthropogenic controls on overwash goers’ perceptions of sand beach conditions: grams: A National Overview.” Technical deposition: Evidence and consequences.” demographics and attitudinal influences, Document No. 00-01: OCRM Program J. Geophysical Res.: Earth Surf 120(12): and the implications for beach ecosystem Policy Series. 2609-2624. management.” J. Coastal Conservation, DOI Nordstrom, K., 2008. Beach and dune restoration. Roman, C.T., and K.F. Nordstrom 1988. “The effect 10.1007/s11852-015-0419-3. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University of erosion rate on vegetation patterns of an Maguire, G.S., K.K. Miller, M.A. Weston, and K. Press. east coast barrier island.” Estuarine, Coastal, Young 2011. “Being beside the seaside: beach Nordstrom, K.F., N.L. Jackson, M.S. Bruno, and and Shelf Science 26: 233-242. use and preferences among coastal residents H.A. DeButts 2002. “Municipal initiatives for Safford, T.G., M.L. Carlson, and Z.H. Hart 2009. of southeastern Australia.” Ocean Coast managing dunes in coastal residential areas: “Stakeholder collaboration and organizational Manag. 54:781-788. a case study of Avalon, New Jersey, USA.” innovation in the planning of the Deschutes Maslo, B.,S.N. Handel, and T. Pover 2011. “Restor- Geomorphology 47(2-4): 137-152. Estuary feasibility study.” Coastal Manage- ing beaches for Atlantic Coast piping plovers Nordstrom, K.F., N.L. Jackson, A.L. Freestone, ment 37, 514-528. (Charadrius melodus): a classification and K.H. Korotky, and J.A. Puleo 2012. “Effects Sallenger, Jr., A.H., 2000. “Storm impact scale tree analysis of nest-site selection.” Restora- of beach raking and sand fences on dune di- for barrier islands.” J. Coastal Res. 16(3): tion Ecology 19: 194-203. mensions and morphology.” Geomorphology 890-895. Mathew, S., R.G.D. Davidson-Arnott, and J. 179: 106-115. Sarre, R., 1989. “The morphological significance Ollerhead 2010. “Evolution of a beach–dune Nordstrom, K.F., N.L. Jackson, J.M. Hartman, and of vegetation and relief on coastal foredune system following a catastrophic storm over- M. Wong 2007. “Aeolian sediment transport processes.” Z Geomorphology 73, 17-31. wash event: Greenwich Dunes, Prince Edward on a human-altered foredune.” Earth Surface Scheffer, M., and F.R. Westley 2007. “The evolu- Island, 1936-2005.” Canadian Journal of Processes and Landforms 32(1): 102-115. tionary basis of rigidity: locks in cells, minds, Earth Sciences 47(3): 273-290. Nordstrom, K.F., N.L. Jackson, N.C. Kraus, T.W. and society.” Ecology and Society 12(2): 36. McLachlan, A., O. Defeo, E. Jaramillo, and A.D. Kana, R. Bearce, L.M. Bocamazo, D.R. Scheffer, M., F.R. Westley, and W. Brock 2003. Short 2013. “Sandy beach conservation and Young, and H.A. DeButts 2011. “Enhancing “Slow response of societies to new problems: recreation: guidelines for optimizing manage- geomorphic and biologic functions and values causes and costs.” Ecosystems 6: 493-502. ment strategies for multi-purpose use.” Ocean on backshores and dunes of developed shores: Schlacher, T.A., D.S. Schoeman, A.R. Jones, J.E. Coast Manag. 71(1):256-268. a review of opportunities and constraints.” Dugan, D.M. Hubbard, O. Defeo, C.H. Pe- McNamara, D.E., A.B. Murray, and M.D. Smith Environmental Conservation 38: 288-302. terson, M.A. Weston, B. Maslo, A.D. Olds, 2011. “Coastal sustainability depends on how Nueces County 2010. “Nueces County Beach Man- F. Scapini, R. Nel, L.R. Harris, S. Lucrezi, economic and coastline responses to climate agement Plan.” http://www.co.nueces.tx.us/ M. Lastra, C.M. Huijbers, and R.M. Connoly change affect each other.” Geophysical Re- pw/pdf/beachmanagement.pdf (accessed 2014. “Metrics to assess ecological condition, search Letters 38(7): L07401. November 2015). change, and impacts in sandy beach ecosys- McNinch, J.E., and J.T. Wells 1992. “Effectiveness Okin, G., 2008.” A new model of wind erosion in tems.” Journal of Environmental Manage- of beach scraping as a method of erosion the presence of vegetation.” J. Geophysical ment 144: 322-335. control.” Shore & Beach 60(1): 13-20. Res. 113(F2): F02S10. Schultz, M.T., S.K. McKay, and L.Z. Hales Mendelssohn, I.A., M.W. Hester, F.J. Montefer- Ollerhead, J., R. Davidson-Arnot, I.J. Walker, 2012. “The quantification and evolution of rante, and F. Talbot 1991. “Experimental and S. Mathew 2013. “Annual to decadal resilience in integrated coastal systems.” dune building and vegetative stabilization morphodynamics of the foredune system at ERDC TR-12-7. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army in a sand-deficient barrier island setting on Greenwich Dunes, Prince Edward Island, Engineer Research and Development Center. the Louisiana coast, USA.” J. Coastal Res. Canada.” Earth Surface Processes and Land- Schupp, C.A., N.T. Winn, T.L. Pearl, J.P. Kumer, 7: 137-149. forms 38: 284-298. T.J.B. Carruthers, and C.S. Zimmerman Miller, D.L., M. Thetford, and L. Yager 2001. Olsen, S.B., 2000. “Educating for the governance 2013. “Restoration of overwash processes “Evaluating sand fence and vegetation for of coastal ecosystems: the dimensions of the creates piping plover (Charadrius melodus) dune building following overwash by Hur- challenge.” Ocean and Coastal Management habitat on a barrier island (Assateague Island, ricane Opal on Santa Rosa Island, Florida.” 43(4-5): 33-341 Maryland).” Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Sci- J. Coastal Res. 17: 936-948. Orford, J.D., and J. Pethick 2006. “Challenging ence 116: 11-20. Morton, R.A., J.G. Paine, and J.C. Gibeaut 1994. assumptions of future coastal habitat de- Seabloom, E., P. Ruggiero, S. Hacker, J. Mull, and “Stages and durations of post-storm beach re- velopment around the UK.” Earth Surface P. Zarnetske 2013. “Invasive grasses, climate covery, southeastern Texas coast.” J. Coastal Processes and Landforms 31(13), 1625-1642. change, and flood risk in coastal ecosystems.” Res. 10: 884-908. Palmsten, M.L., and R.A Holman 2012. “Labora- Global Change Biology 19(3): 824-932. Nagy, G.J., L. Seijo, J.E. Verocai, and M. Bidegain tory investigation of dune erosion using stereo Sherman, D.J., and B.O. Bauer 1993. “Dynamics 2014. “Stakeholders’ climate perception and video.” Coastal Engineering 60: 123-135. of beach-dune systems.” Progress in Physical adaptation in coastal Uruguay.” International Peterson, C.H., and R.N. Lipcius 2003. “Concep- Geography 17(4): 413-447. Journal of Climate Change Strategies and tual progress towards predicting quantitative Sherman, D.J., D.W.T. Jackson, S.L. Namikas, and Management 6: 63-84. ecosystem benefits of ecological restora- J. Wang 1998. “Wind-blown sand on beaches: National Research Council (NRC) 2014. Reducing tions.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 264: an evaluation of models.” Geomorphology Coastal Risks on the East and Gulf Coasts. 297-307. 22: 113-133. Washington, DC: The National Academies Pye, K., S.J. Blott, and M.A. Howe 2014. “Coastal Short, A.D., and P.A. Hesp 1982. “Wave, Beach and Press. dune stabilization in Wales and requirements Dune Interactions in Southeastern Australia.” NJSGC (New Jersey Sea Grant Consortium) 2016. for rejuvenation.” Journal of Coastal Conser- Marine Geology 48(3-4): 259-284. “Draft Dune Manual, New Jersey Sea Grant vation 18: 27-54. Smyth, T.A.G., and P.A. Hesp 2015. “Aeolian Consortium.” http://njseagrant.org/extension/ Roca, E., and M. Villares 2008. “Public percep- dynamics of beach scraped ridge and dyke coastal-concerns/dune-it-right/. Accessed 26 tions for evaluating beach quality in urban structures.” Coastal Engineering 99: 38-45. January 2016. and semi-natural environments.” Ocean and Splinter, K.D., and M.L. Palmsten 2012. “Modeling NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- Coastal Management 51(4): 314-329. dune response to an East Coast Low.” Marine ministration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Roelvink, D., A. Reniers, A., A. van Dongeren, J. Geology 329-331: 46-57. Resource Management) 1996. “Combined van Thiel de Vries, R. McCall, and C. Les- Stockdon, H.F., A.H. Sallenger, R. Holman, and P.

Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016 Page 27 Howd 2007. “A simple model for the spatially “Design of Beach Fills.” Engineer Manual in North Carolina with special reference to variable coastal response to hurricanes.” Ma- 1110-2-3301. Washington, DC: U.S. Army its effectiveness during Hurricane Hugo.” J. rine Geology 238: 1-20. Corps of Engineers. Coastal Res. SI 8: 249-261. Stockdon, H.F., K.J. Doran, D.M. Thompson, K.L. USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) 2013. Williams, B.K., 2011. “Adaptive management of Sopkin, N.G. Plant, and A.H. Sallenger 2012. “Hurricane Sandy Coastal Projects Perfor- natural resources—framework and issues.” “National assessment of hurricane-induced mance Evaluation Study: Disaster Relief J. Environmental Management, 92(5), 1346- coastal erosion hazards: Gulf of Mexico.” Appropriations Act.” Washington, DC: U.S. 1353. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.041. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report Army Corps of Engineers. Williams, S.J., J. Flocks, C. Jenkins, S. Khali, and 2012-1084. Villares, M., E. Roca, J. Serra, and C. Montori J. Moya 2012. “Offshore sediment character Swann C., K. Brodie, and N. Spore 2014. “Coastal 2006. “Social perception as a tool for beach and sand resource assessment of the northern Foredunes: Identifying coastal, aeolian and planning: a case study on the Catalian coast.” Gulf of Mexico, Florida to Texas.” J. Coastal management interactions driving morphologi- J. Coastal Res. 48: 118-123. Res. SI60: 30-44. cal state change.” ERDC/CHLTR-17873. U.S Voyer, M., N. Gollan, K. Barclay, and W. Gladstone Wolner, C.W.V., L.J. Moore, D.R. Young, S.T. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC. 2015. “‘It’s part of me’; understanding the Brantley, S.N. Bissett, and R.A. McBride Texas General Land Office (GLO) 1993. “Rules values, images, and principles of coastal users 2013. “Ecomorphodynamic feedbacks and for management of the beach/dune system.” and their influence on the social acceptability barrier island response to disturbances: Administrative Code 31 TAC. §§15.1-15.11. of MPAs.” Mar. Policy 52: 93-102. insights from the Virginia barrier islands, Texas General Land Office (GLO) 1991; revised Walker, I.J., J.B.R. Eamer, and I.B. Darke 2013. Mid-Atlantic Bight, USA.” Geomorphology 2015. “Dune Protection and Improvement “Assessing significant geomorphic changes 199: 115-128. Manual for the Texas Gulf Coast.” Austin, and effectiveness of dynamic restoration in a Woodhouse, Jr., W.W., E.D. Seneca, and S.W. Texas, 32 p. coastal dune system.” Geomorphology 199: Broome 1977. “Effect of species on dune Tunstall, S., and E.C. Penning-Rowsell 1998. “The 192-204. grass growth.” International Journal of Bio- English beach: values and perceptions.” The Walters, D., L.J. Moore, O. Duran, S. Fagherazzi, meteorology 21: 256-266. Geographical Journal 164(3): 319-332. and G. Mariotti 2014. “Interactions between Zarnetske, P.L., P. Ruggiero, E.W. Seabloom, and USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) 1962. barrier islands and backbarrier marshes affect S.D. Hacker 2015. “Coastal foredune evolu- “Coastal Storm of 6-7 March 1962 Post Flood island system response to sea level rise: in- tion: the relative influence of vegetation and Report.” Philadelphia, PA: U.S. Army Corps sights from a coupled model.” J. Geophysical sand supply in the U.S. Pacific Northwest.” of Engineers Philadelphia District. Res.: Earth Surface. 119: 2013-2031. Journal of the Royal Society Interface USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) 1995. Wells, J.T., and J. McNinch 1991. “Beach scraping 12(106): 20150017-20150017.

Editorial n Continued from page 2 range provided by the IPCC. The State of California, my employer, is one such group, with sea level rise projections that are based on a National Research Council report de- veloped specifically for the western continental U.S. Jim’s paper should spark some interesting discussions and people are encouraged to submit additional Coastal Forum pieces to add to or counter Jim’s discussion. Articles in this issue all come back to the proliferation of coastal data and observations and questions about how to use them. Jim Houston notes that some agencies use the likelihood of new information as a reason to use sea level rise projections that are outside the range provided by the IPCC. The IPCC process provides for a 5-year update cycle that systematically allows new data to be vetted and incorporated into trends and projections. Perhaps coastal areas need to consider a quasi-systematic procedure for updating erosion and shoreline change data that blends together recent episodic events with longer-term historic trends. The loss of 30-50 feet of coastal bluff in Pacifica does not start a new 15-25 feet per day erosion rate but it calls into question whether the 2 feet per year erosion rate remains appropriate for Pacifica. This question is especially important to other properties in the city that are experiences episodic erosion during the 2015-2016 El Niño season. Traveling from one coast to another, I am encouraged by Tim Kana’s optimism that some of our efforts at coastal management are working well. I hope he and others will con- tinue to encourage current and future coastal professionals to continue chipping away at important coastal issues.

Page 28 Shore & Beach  Vol. 84, No. 1  Winter 2016