DOCSLIB.ORG

Ontario Great Lakes Erosion Monitoring Programme Final Report 1973-1980

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ontario Great Lakes Erosion Monitoring Programme Final Report 1973-1980 Governrnent of Ca anernd. i.Cana' Ocej REPORT SERIES No.12 1* Fisheries and au ANUSCRIPT 11111111 IIIII III 111111 12058371 - CANADA/ ONTARIO GREAT LAKES EROSION MONITORING PROGRAMME FINAL REPORT 1973-1980 G. L. BOYD AND OCEANS ET OCÉANS o LJ jj OCEANOGRAPHIC GB 651 OCEAN SCIENCE AND SURVEYS M36I LILAYFIELD LABORATORY FOR c.1 MARINE SCIENCE AND SURVEYS BURLINGTON, ONTARIO CANADA/ONTARIO GREAT LAKES EROSION MONITORING PROGRAMME CANADA/ONTARIO GREAT LAKES EROSION MONITORING PROGRAMME 1973-1980 FINAL REPORT This is an internal technical report which has received only limited circulation. On citing this report, the reference should be followed by the words "UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT." The text of this report is, with minor editorial corrections, similar to a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for an M.A. at the Department of Geography, University of Waterloo. Gary Lee Boyd Bayfield Laboratory for Marine Science and Surveys Ocean Science and Surveys Department of Fisheries and Oceans P.O. Box 5050 Burlington, Ontario L7R 4A6 DECEMBER 1981 OVERVIEW This report documents the results of a joint study undertaken by the Government of Canada and the Province of Ontario to monitor and assess erosion on the Great Lakes Canadian shoreline. At 162 sites, intended to represent the entire erodible shore from Port Severn on Georgian Bay to Kingston on Lake Ontario, onshore and offshore measure- ments were taken annually for the period 1973 to 1980. The investi- gation was initiated due to extensive shore damage previously documented (Canada/Ontario Great Lakes Shore Damage Survey, 1975), which indicated that a broader understanding of shore processes was necessary to miti- gate future damage and to assist shore management and planning. The report tends toward a scientific document since it deals with the elements involved in the geomorphology of the shore. In this vein the relevant glacial history and a great deal of the specialized literature concerning the Great Lakes are examined. In addition, a new classification of the beach zone is presented and incorporated into a regional analysis of shore patterns and process. For more straight- forward uses, rates of shoreline retreat are tabulated and the major reasons for this erosion discussed. To aid those concerned with only certain sectors of the shore the various reaches are discussed sepa- rately, and to aid those concerned with only bluff or beach change, these too are presented separately (although they are intimately related) until the final chapter where all elements are brought together to show the regional perspective. The results should be of interest to specialists working in the coastal zone and to avid laymen concerned about shore erosion of their property or in their jurisdiction. (ii) SOMMAIRE Ce rapport présente les résultats d'une étude conjointe entre- prise par le gouvernement du Canada et le gouvernement de la province de l'Ontario pour surveiller et mesurer l'érosion du littoral des Grands lacs canadiens. A 162 sites représentatifs du littoral pouvant s'éroder, de Port Severn sur la Baie Géorgienne àKingston sur le Lac Ontario, des mesures ont été relevées àterre et au large annuellement pour la période commençant en 1973 et se terminant en 1980. Cette enquête a été entreprise àla suite des importants dégâts survenus au littoral et ayant déjàfait l'objet d'un rapport (Canada/Ontario Great Lakes Shore Damage Survey, 1975). Ce rapport indiquait qu'il était nécessaire de mieux comprendre les transformations du littoral afin de limiter les dommages ultérieurs et d'aider la planification et la gestion du littoral. Ce rapport présente une explication scientifique puisqu'il traite des éléments de la géomorphologie du littoral. C'est pourquoi l'histoire des glaciers correspondante et le besoin de littérature spé- cialisée sur les Grands lacs y sont examinés. De plus, une nouvelle classification des plages est présentée et incorporée dans une analyse régionale des tendances de transformation du littoral. Pour permettre un emploi plus direct du rapport, les taux de retrait du littoral y sont calculés et les principales raisons de cette érosion mentionées. Les personnes intéressées par certains secteurs du littoral seulement trou- veront des explications distinctes sur diverses bordées; il en va de même pour les promontoires ou changements de plage, qui sont aussi pré- sentés séparément (bien qu'ils sont liés de près) jusqu'au dernier cha- pitre oùtous les éléments sont regroupés pour donner une perspective régionale. Les résultats devraient intéresser les spécialistes qui tra- vaillent dans les régions c8tières et les profanes soucieux de l'érosion du littoral de leur propriété et dans leur juridiction. (iii) ACKNOWI7EDGEMENTS The Great Lakes, a special ecosystem containing one-fifth of the world's freshwater, is an international treasure and to visit or live on its shores is a meaningful, personal experience for millions of Canadians. However, with increasing population pressure and shore development and with man's ability to precipitate large scale change to the lake system in the last century, conflicts between users have resulted and shore damages have increased. The value of the Great Lakes as an inland navigational corri- dor and as a hydroelectric resource encouraged expansion of the St. Lawrence Seaway in the 1950s resulting in a need for an International Great Lakes Levels Study in the 1960s. The shoreline data collected by this study was updated by the federal government so that when severe phore damage and high lake level occurred in the early 1970s it was possible to assess and report on the extent of the damages sustained. Subsequently the Canada/Ontario Great Lakes Shore Damage Survey Technical Report and the Coastal Zone Atlas were published which are still considered the most extensive evaluation of erosion and shore damage on the Canadian shores of the Great Lakes. Due to the value and time period of the information available and with history as a guide, the Shore Damage Survey report recommended that "shoreline processes continue to be monitored and the Great Lakes shoreline inventory continue to be updated to ensure maintenance of current information on shoreline characteristics." This Shore Erosion Monitoring study responds to that part of the recommendation which requires monitoring of shoreline processes. It is under the umbrella of a federal-provincial task force which includes other programmes such as public awareness and shoreland planning and management aspects. Membership on the Canada/Ontario Great Lakes Shore Damage Survey Follow-up Programmes Task Force has included T.D.W. McCulloch and N.G. Freeman of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans; D.R. Cuthbert, (iv) R. Beauchemin, D.M. Foulds of Environment Canada; and R..B. Chang, T.M. Kurtz, S.B. Panting of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. The working group committee included W.S. Haras, J.R. Shaw of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans; R.J. Moulton, D.W. Brown of Environment Canada; and D.L. Strelchuk, T.M. Kurtz of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. The Canada/Ontario Shore Monitoring Programme Survey team included R.K. Weaver, D.P. Sosnoski, E.A. Boyd, D. Canning and S. Hanville. Analysis of the soil samples was completed by G. Duncan; and helpful discussions were held with N.A. Rukavina, A. Zeman, J. Coakley and D. St. Jacques of Environment Canada; and also with C.H. Carter of the Ohio Geological Survey, J.S. Gardner and A.B. Kesik at the University of Waterloo. The author wishes to acknowledge the dedication and con- tribution of these individuals while of course retaining responsibility for the accuracy of this report. Personally, I would like to thank Mr. T.D.W. McCulloch, Director General, Bayfield Laboratory for Marine Science and Surveys, Department of Fisheries and Oceans; Mr. N.G. Freeman, Chief, Oceanographic Division; and Mr. W.S. Haras, Head, Shore Properties Studies Section, for allowing me to conduct this research as part of my work at the Bayfield Lab. I would also like to extend my appreciation to fellow staff of the Oceanographic Division, including Mr. J.R. Shaw for his valuable sug- gestions during innumerable discussions; Dr. S.J. Prinsenberg, Dr. L.R. Muir, Dr. W.P. Budgell and Dr. E.B. Bennett for their assistance; and Mrs. J. Fiddes for the proofreading of the manuscript. Finally, thanks Bill, John, Dave, Keith, Rick and Don for the encouragement, comradeship and shared enjoyment of studying and working on the shore. G.L. Boyd (v) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page OVERVIEW . .. ii SOMMAIRE . i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .. .. .. iv LIST OF PHOTOS . ix LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . .. .. ... x LIST OF TABLES . xi LIST OF APPENDICES . .. xii 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Statement of the Problem . .. 1 1.2 Objectives of this Study . .. 1 1.3 Format of this Report . 2 1.4 Previous Related Works . .. 3 2. METHODOLOGY 2.1 Formulation of the Programme . 4 2.2 Field Surveys . 4 2.2.1 Type of Survey . 4 2.2.2 Location of Survey Sites . 4 2.2.3 Dates of Surveys . 5 2.3 Supplementary Information . 5 2.3.1 Soil Samples . 5 2.3.2 Photography . ... 6 2.3.2.a High Altitude Photography .... 6 2.3.2.b Oblique Aerial Photography ... 6 2.3.2.c Station Photographs . 6 2.3.3 Water Levels . 7 2.3.4 Vegetation at the Sites . 8 2.4 Data Compilation . .. .. 9 2.4.1 Data Reduction and Methodology ...... 9 2.4.2 Products . 9 2.4.3 Checks of Accuracy . 10 2.5 Method of Regional Analysis . 11 3. ANALYSIS OF BLUFF EROSION 3.1 Bluff Erosion Processes . 12 3.2 Reaches . 14 3.3 Erosion Assessment at the Survey Sites ...... 15 3.3.1 Top of Bank Change . 15 3.3.2 Volume Change for Bluff .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evolution of Glacial & Coastal Landforms
    1 GEOMORPHOLOGY 201 READER PART IV : EVOLUTION OF GLACIAL & COASTAL LANDFORMS A landform is a small to medium tract or parcel of the earth’s surface. After weathering processes have had their actions on the earth materials making up the surface of the earth, the geomorphic agents like running water, ground water, wind, glaciers, waves perform erosion. The previous sections covered the erosion and deposition and hence landforms caused by running water (fluvial geomorphology) and by wind (aeolian geomorphology). Erosion causes changes on the surface of the earth and is followed by deposition, which likewise causes changes to occur on the surface of the earth. Several related landforms together make up landscapes, thereby forming large tracts of the surface of the earth. Each landform has its own physical shape, size, materials and is a result of the action of certain geomorphic processes and agents. Actions of most of the geomorphic processes and agents are slow, and hence the results take a long time to take shape. Every landform has a beginning. Landforms once formed may change their shape, size and nature slowly or fast due to continued action of geomorphic processes and agents. Due to changes in climatic conditions and vertical or horizontal movements of landmasses, either the intensity of processes or the processes themselves might change leading to new modifications in the landforms. Evolution here implies stages of transformation of either a part of the earth’s surface from one landform into another or transformation of individual landforms after they are once formed. That means, each and every landform has a history of development and changes through time.
    [Show full text]
  • An International Journal Published by the Marine Environmental Alabama Sciences Consortium Of
    An International Journal Evolution of the Florida State University Coastal and Marine Laboratory MICHAEL J. GREENBERG,WILLIAM F. HERRNKIND, AND FELICIA C. COLEMAN Published by the Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium of Alabama Gulf of Mexico Science, 2010(1–2), pp. 149–163 Evolution of the Florida State University Coastal and Marine Laboratory MICHAEL J. GREENBERG,WILLIAM F. HERRNKIND, AND FELICIA C. COLEMAN SIXTY YEARS OF HISTORY and the toponym Turkey Point Laboratory or, more often, the FSU Marine Laboratory n 1949, just 2 yr after the Florida State College (FSUML) stuck for more than 4 decades. I for Women was transformed into a coeduca- In 2006, Felicia Coleman became the 13th tional institution—The Florida State University director of the Laboratory. She is the first (FSU)—marine science gained a permanent director whose primary workplace is at the foothold on the Tallahassee campus with the laboratory, and the first with an on-site faculty formation of The Oceanographic Institute (OI). to manage. And the laboratory became the FSU This institute—within the College of Arts and Coastal and Marine Laboratory (FSUCML). Sciences—was meant to train graduate students The history of these two laboratories, which in marine science, to provide marine research follows, is narrated primarily by three of the 13 facilities for faculty and students and visiting directors. We have divided the narrative into four investigators, to conduct interdisciplinary basic distinct periods: The Genesis, 15 yr at Alligator research in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, and Harbor; The Great Move from Alligator Harbor also to conduct applied research directed toward to Turkey Point, 7 yr of change; The Long improving Florida’s fishing industry and devel- Struggle at Turkey Point, 34 yr of intermittent, oping other marine resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Oce1001, Introduction to Oceanography, Fall, 2005
    OCE1001, INTRODUCTION TO OCEANOGRAPHY, Fall, 2018 THIRD MID-TERM EXAMINATION Test No. 0001 Name: __________________________ READ THIS!!!! Put your name in the blank above. Read all questions carefully, and answer only the question which is asked. You may find the following equations useful: C = (gL/2) = 1.25 L (m/s) Where: C = speed of a wave and: g = gravity = 9.8 m/s2 C = (gD) = 3.1 D (m/s) L = wavelength of a wave C = 1.56 T (m/s) D = water depth C = L/T T = period of a wave PLEASE WRITE NEATLY. Matching: The Beaches Are Moving (8 pts) Do not put these on the scantron sheet. ____ neap ____ hook A. worldwide change in sea level. B. structure intended to widen a beach. ____ jetty ____ groin C. wall intended to keep a channel open. D. two high and two low tides per day. ____ eustatic E. current parallel to the shore caused by waves. ____ semidiurnal F. twice monthly tide that with a smaller than average range. ____ marine terrace G. bend in end of a spit caused by wave refraction. ____ longshore current H. region eroded flat by waves, elevated above sea level. ____ longitudinal I. disturbance of wave is parallel to wave movement Multiple Choice: (2 pts each) Put the answers to these questions on the scantron sheet. 1. In Figure 1, the features labeled 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are, respectively: a. spit, barrier island, baymouth bar, hook, tombolo. b. hook, spit, baymouth bar, barrier island, tombolo. c. tombolo, spit, baymouth bar, barrier island, hook.
    [Show full text]
  • 174 Coastal Processes and Hazards I. WATER, WAVES and COASTAL
    Coastal Processes and Hazards I. WATER, WAVES AND COASTAL DYNAMICS A. Beach and coastal areas represent sites of dynamic sedimentation, erosion and re- working of river-borne sediments as they reach coastal regions 1. Dynamic interaction between wind, waves, sedimentation and erosion 2. Coastal areas noted for extremely variable meteorologic conditions 3. Hurricanes and storms profoundly influence coastal morphology a. Wave energy and wind energy during coastal storms exhibit great capability to do work in the form of erosion and transportation of sediment (1) Eg. storm wash-over processes (2) storm surges (3) changes in coastal morphology via erosion and sedimentation 4. Gross coastal configuration primarily a function of plate tectonic history, however relentless wave processes modify coast through erosion and sedimentation B. The Ocean and Wave Activity 1. Beach/coastal sand/sediment profoundly influenced by wave action a. waves provide motion/energy for transportation and erosion of sediment 2. Waves generated by wind shear blowing across ocean surface for long distances a. shear creates orbital rotation of water to form water waves (1) orbital motion = circular to and fro motion, diminishing in intensity at depth from surface (2) Although the wave is passed through the water as a medium; actual water molecules are NOT displaced as the wave is propagated b. Wave form controlled by: (1) wind velocity (2) duration of wind (3) fetch- distance over which wind blows (length across water) (> fetch, > wave amplitude) 3. Wave Morphology a. Wave crest: high upper peak of wave train b. Wave trough: low separating two crests c. Wave Height: vertical distance between crest and trough (1) Avg.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreline Changes in the Isles Dernieres Barrier Island Arc: 1887-1996 Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana
    SHORELINE CHANGES IN THE ISLES DERNIERES BARRIER ISLAND ARC: 1887-1996 TERREBONNE PARISH, LOUISIANA Shea Penland11, Chris Zganjar22, Karen A. Westphal2, Paul Connor1 Jeff List3 and S. Jeffress Williams3 INTRODUCTION The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Coastal Research Laboratory in the Department of Geology and Geophysics at the University of New Orleans (UNO) and the Center for Coastal Energy and Environmental Resources at Louisiana State University (LSU), is investigating the processes of coastal erosion and wetland loss in Louisiana (Sallenger and others, 1987; Sallenger and Williams 1989; Penland and others, 1992). Building on the USGS Louisiana Barrier Island Study (Williams and others, 1992) and the USGS Hurricane Andrew impact assessment (Penland and others, 1998), this USGS Open-File Report depicts shoreline changes between 1887 and 1996, which provides an 8-year update of McBride and others (1992). The Isles Dernieres are located about 120 km southwest of New Orleans (Figure 1). This barrier island shoreline is 32 km long and extends from Caillou Bayou east to Wine Island Pass. The Isles Dernieres represent a barrier island arc developed from the reworking and erosion of an abandoned distributary of the Lafourche delta complex within the Mississippi River delta plain (Penland and others, 1988). Previous work by McBride and others (1992) documented a long-term (1887-1988) gulfside erosion rate of -11.1 m/yr and a short-term (1978-1988) gulfside erosion rate of -19.2 m/yr. The long- term bayside (1906-1988) erosion rate was measured at -0.6 m/yr and the short-term (1978-1988) bayside erosion rate was measured at -5.2 m/yr.
    [Show full text]
  • Deposition Sites Erosional and Depositional Ar1n Counties
    U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Prepared in cooperation with the DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Deposition Sites Erosional and Depositional ar1n• Counties, California 1974 Pamphlet to accompany Miscellaneous Fi~ld Studies Map MF-625 Jointly supported by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Department of Housing and Urban Development as part of a program to develop earth-science information in a form applicable to land-use planning and decision making. Pamphlet text to accompany MF-625 SEDIMENT SOURCE AND DEPOSITION SITES AND EROSIONAL AND DEPOSITIONAL PROVINCES MARIN AND SONOMA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA By William M. Brown III and Lionel E. Jackson, Jr. INTRODUCTION The land surface of Marin and Sonoma Counties is a precise recorder of the natural and artificial factors that have shaped it. It is also an excellent predictor of the forms it will probably have in the future, given an estimate of the human and natural factors expected to act upon it. Studying the land surface for clues about its past and future, therefore, is a necessary aspect of thorough land-use planning and decisionmaking about land-use designs. This report is intended to aid the planner and decisionmaker in studying the land surface of Marin and Sonoma Counties. It is primarily concerned w~th the erosion, transportation, and deposition of sediment as a process that alters the land surface. It attempts to explain what sediment is, where sediment comes from, and where sediment goes. This report also describes how and why sediment moves from one point to another and for areas where data are available describes rates and quantities of sediment movement.
    [Show full text]
  • A Data Compilation and Assessment of Coastal Wetlands of Wisconsin's Great Lakes Final Report
    A Data Compilation and Assessment of Coastal Wetlands of Wisconsin’s Great Lakes Final Report Authors Eric Epstein, Elizabeth Spencer, Drew Feldkirchner Contributors Craig Anderson, Julie Bleser, Andy Clark, Emmet Judziewicz, Nicole Merryfield, Andy Paulios, Bill Smith Natural Heritage Inventory Program Bureau of Endangered Resources Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 7921 Madison WI 53707-7921 PUBL ER-803 2002 Copies of this report can be obtained by writing to the Bureau of Endangered Resources at the above address. This publication is available in alternative format (large print, Braille, audiotape, etc) upon request. Please call (608-266-7012) for more information. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources provides equal opportunity in its employment, programs, services, and functions under an Affirmative Action Plan. If you have any questions, please write to Equal Opportunity Office, Department of Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Funding for this project was provided by the Wisconsin Coastal Zone Management Program. This support is gratefully acknowledged with special thanks to Travis Olson, Department of Administration. A number of individuals conducted inventory work and provided support to complete this project. We would like to extend our thanks to those persons listed below for their assistance. We would also like to extend our appreciation to the private landowners who granted us permission to work on or cross their properties. Data Management/GIS/Graphics Development: Julie Bleser, Natural
    [Show full text]
  • Great Lakes Shore Fen (Global Rank NA; State Rank S2)
    Great Lakes Shore Fen (Global Rank NA; State Rank S2) Overview: Distribution, Abundance, !( !( !(!( !( !( Environmental Setting, Ecological Processes !( The Great Lakes Shore Fen is a circumneutral, moderately minerotrophic, open peatland community of intermediate richness that is an integral part of the diverse vegetation mosaics of estuaries and lagoons at sites along Lake Superior in northwestern Wisconsin and at several protected Lake Michigan embayments on the margins of the Door Peninsula. On Lake Superior, the Great Lakes Shore Fens are often !( partially protected from wind, wave, and ice disturbance by a sandspit. On Lake Michigan, horizontal exposures of dolo- mite bedrock, which sometimes extend well out into the lake, may serve a similar function. Many of the documented occurrences are within estuarine wetland complexes that develop at drowned river mouths, especially along Lake Superior’s southwestern shore. Other examples occur in the complex community mosaics associ- ated with Great Lakes coastal lagoons, such as those on Stock- ton, Outer, and Michigan islands in the Apostles Archipelago. Along Lake Superior’s southwestern shore, drowned river mouths are common features because of the geological phe- nomenon referred to as differential isostatic rebound (Lee and Southan 1994). Wetlands along eastern Lake Superior are Locations of Great Lakes Shore Fen in Wisconsin. The deeper hues becoming more separated from the lake as the land rebounds shading the ecological landscape polygons indicate geographic areas of greatest abundance. An absence of color indicates that the from the historical weight of the glacial ice, while lands on the community has not (yet) been documented in that ecological land- western end of the lake—including the coastal wetlands—are scape.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of Free–Living Nematode Species in the Transitional Environment of Lake Varano (Southern Italy)
    Arxius de Miscel·lània Zoològica, 13 (2015): 32–46 SemprucciISSN: 1698& Balsamo–0476 Checklist of free–living nematode species in the transitional environment of Lake Varano (Southern Italy) F. Semprucci & M. Balsamo Semprucci, F. & Balsamo, M., 2015. Chec�������list o� ����������������������������������������ree–living nematode species in the tran� sitional environment o� La�e Varano (Southern Italy). Arxius de Miscel·lània Zoològica, 13: 32–46. Abstract Checklist of free–living nematode species in the transitional environment of Lake Varano (Southern Italy).— This study documents �or the first time the taxonomic composition �o the nematode community and the number o� �ree–living nematode species in La�e Varano, Southern Adriatic Sea, Italy. The nematode community was mainly composed o� species typical o� fine sediments that usually prevail in transitional environments (TEs). An overall high number o� nematode species was recorded (55), belonging to 36 genera in 17 �amilies. These values are highly comparable to those reported �or other Italian TEs, but appear lower than those recorded in other European brac�ish–water systems, probably in relation to the low salinity range o� La�e Varano. Forty taxa were identified up to species level, thus increasing the number �o the nematode marine species �nown �or the Italian coasts �rom 443 to 463, �or the Adriatic basin �rom 310 to 313, and �or the Southern Adriatic sector �rom 37 to 77. Considering the impor� tance o� this phylum in the assessment o� ecological quality and the great vulnerability o� the Adriatic Sea ecosystems, an intensification �o sampling efforts should be planned, especially in the Central–Southern part o� the basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve LAKE SUPERIOR NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
    ManageMent Plan 2010 - 2015 Lake Superior National estuarine research reserve LAKE SUPERIOR NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010-2015 Prepared by: University of Wisconsin-Extension September 2010 Prepared for: U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Estuarine Reserves Division 1305 East West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 University of Wisconsin - Extension 432 North Lake Street Madison, WI 53706 This Management Plan has been developed in accordance with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) regulations, including all provisions for public involvement. It is consistent with the congressional intent of Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, and the provisions of the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program. This publication is funded, in part, through a grant agreement with the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management under the Coastal Zone Management Act, Grant # NA08NOS4200405. Cover photography by: Michael K. Anderson Interior photography by: Amy Elliot, Becky Sapper, Michael K. Anderson, Patrick Robinson, Lynelle Hanson and Frank Koshere - WDNR Graphic Design by: Amy B. Torrey - UW Extension Lake Superior NatioNaL EstuariNe RESEARCH RESERVe 2010-2015 i | Table of Contents Table of Contents LIST OF APPENDICES iii LIST OF FIGURES iv LIST OF MAPS iv LIST OF TABLES iv LIST OF ACRONYMS v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 INTRODUCTION 6 Purpose and Scope of the Lake Superior NERR Management Plan. 6 Description of the Lake Superior NERR. 7 Great Lakes Freshwater Estuaries. 7 Lake Superior NERR Key Attributes and Setting.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreline Processes: Overview of Waves the Ocean's Surfa
    page - Laboratory Exercise #5 – Shoreline Processes Section A – Shoreline Processes: Overview of Waves The ocean’s surface is influenced by three types of motion (waves, tides and surface currents). Shorelines dominated by wave action comprise approximately 80% of the coastlines on earth and will be the focus of today’s laboratory exercise. Tidal action is dominant in 17% of the earth’s shorelines with surface ocean currents (such as the Gulf Stream) dominating only 3% of shorelines. The anatomy of a wave includes the crest or highest point on a wave and the trough, which is the lowest point on a wave (Figure 1). The vertical distance between the crest and trough is referred to as the wave height. Additional important concepts include the wavelength, which is the distance between two successive crests. The wave base is the water depth below which no energy is felt by the passage of a wave. Note that the orbitals reflecting the movement below a wave are circular. Also, these orbitals become progressively smaller with greater depths until they disappear. The depth at which the orbitals disappear and where the water is no longer being moved by the wave is the wave base. There is a simple mathematical relationship that defines wave base. Wave base = 1 / 2 of wavelength For example, a typical fair weather wave has a wavelength of 60 feet. This wave will have a wave base of 30 feet. The shape of the orbitals below the wave in Figure 1 is circular. This type of wave is a wave of oscillation and occurs offshore.
    [Show full text]
  • Physical Geology Shorelines
    Physical Geology Shorelines Multiple Guess: (You know the drill – 2 points each) 1. The path of movement of a water particle in a wave at sea is 1. circular 2. horizontal 3. vertical 4. elliptical 5. none of these answers 2. Waves of oscillation transport 1. water 2. energy 3. floating matter 4. sediment 5. All of the above 3. Which of the following statements is NOT a true description of ocean waves? 1. Waves originate by the frictional action of wind on water. 2. Energy is imparted to waves by winds. 3. Water particles in waves move along at the same velocity as the wave. 4. Wave height is the vertical distance between crest and trough. 5. Wave refraction causes irregular distribution of energy along the coast. 4. When waves reach shallow water they become 1. shorter and higher 2. longer and lower 3. longer and higher 4. shorter and lower 5. remain unchanged in form 5. On an irregular shoreline, the energy of a wave is 1. concentrated mostly on the headlands by wave refraction 2. dissipated at the line where the wave first "feels bottom" 3. evenly spread over the entire shoreline 4. usually completely dissipated before reaching the shore 5. concentrated along the beaches by wave refraction 6. Which of the following conditions would generate a longshore current? 1. rip currents 2. a tsunami 3. waves parallel to the shore 4. a spring tide 5. waves striking the beach at an oblique angle 7. Which of the following is the most likely trend in the evolution of coastal features? 1.
    [Show full text]