Best Management Practices for Coastal Inlets

Home , Avulsion (river), Coastal management

ASBPA WHITE PAPER: Best management practices for coastal inlets

Nicole Elko,1 Kimberley McKenna,2 Tiffany Roberts Briggs,3 Nicholas Brown,3 Michael Walther,4 and Dawn York5 1) ASBPA, P.O. Box 1451, Folly Beach, SC 29439; [email protected] 2) Stockton University Coastal Research Center, 30 Wilson Avenue, Port Republic, NJ 08241 3) Florida Atlantic University, Department of Geosciences, 777 Glades Road, SE43, Boca Raton, FL 33431 4) Coastal Tech–G.E.C. Inc., 3625 20th Street, Vero Beach, FL, 32960 5) Moffatt & Nichol, 272 North Front Street, Suite 204, Wilmington, NC 28401

ABSTRACT Coastal inlets separate individual barrier islands or barrier spits merical modeling, and other science-based methods, demon- and adjacent headlands (Hayes and Fitzgerald 2013). Inlets strate that BMPs improve management of sand resources and modify longshore transport and store sediment in flood and reduce impacts associated with tidal inlet dredging. For some ebb shoals leading to dynamic adjacent shorelines. For example, inlet conditions, BMPs include use of inlet sediment sinks as 80% to 85% of the beach erosion in Florida can be attributed to cost-effective and eco-friendly sand sources for beach nourish- inlets (Dean 1991). In some cases, structured inlets are designed ment projects located close to the inlet. to trap sand in a preferred location to minimize interference For optimal coastal inlet management, the ASBPA Science with navigation and facilitate its removal through dredging. and Technology Committee recommends the following BMPs Sound coastal engineering practice requires that this sand be and conservation measures: placed on adjacent eroding beaches (NRC 1995) to protect • Limit frequency and duration of impacts, coastal resources. • Follow environmental windows, This paper provides a brief overview of coastal inlet man- • Implement regional sediment management, agement and identifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) • Use beach-compatible sand, intended to balance human needs for inlet navigation with the • Conduct pre-, during-, and post-dredging monitoring, natural systems adjacent to tidal inlets. Today’s conservation • Modify dredging equipment/practices, and measures, which are a result of considerable monitoring, nu- • Design rechargeable, low-impact inlet borrow sites.

ur nation’s inlets and water- resulted in serious beach erosion impacts ways play important ecologic, KEYWORDS: Tidal inlet, conserva- at some coastal inlets (Charleston Harbor, economic and national security tion measures, beach nourishment, SC; Cape Canaveral, FL; Ocean City Inlet, dredging, Coastal Barrier Resource Oroles by providing entrances to estuarine MD). A better management practice is to Act. nursery grounds and cycling nutrients place dredged sands on adjacent beaches as well as sustaining international and to mitigate beach erosion that may have domestic trade and providing harborage. governments, as well as local beach com- been exacerbated by the navigation chan- Coastal inlets interact with the natural munities, commonly support periodic nel; however, implementing this BMP has alongshore drift of sand but also provide placement of sand on eroding beaches been a coastal management policy chal- critical hydrodynamic linkages of ocean — a process called beach nourishment. lenge. A difficult and time-consuming and estuarine waters that sustain coastal USACE beach nourishment projects are challenge for some USACE Districts has ecosystems and communities. A key typically designed to (a) provide upland been proving that beach placement is agency mission of the U.S. Army Corps protection in the potential future event of a cost-effective and sound engineering of Engineers (USACE) is the maintenance a 10-year to 25-year return interval storm, practice to avoid downdrift impacts. of navigable waterways. Optimal inlet and and (b) be maintained over a lifespan of Local governments may fund the cost waterway management is vital to sustain 50 years as authorized and funded by difference between offshore placement the coastal ecosystem and to support Congress. State and local beach nourish- and a type of placement closer to shore commercial and recreational uses of inlet ment projects are commonly designed that is beneficial to eroding beaches such resources. for differing criteria without USACE as beach nourishment or placement in funding. a nearshore feeder berm (South Padre Adjacent to coastal inlets, the beach Island, TX). and dune system provide important Over the last century, many coastal national infrastructure that reduces risk inlets have been jettied and routinely For many inlets, beach and inlet main- from coastal flooding while enhancing dredged to facilitate navigation. The tenance expenditures can be reduced by opportunities for tourism and critical dredged sediment was often placed in a combining a navigation and beach nour- habitat restoration. To maintain this cheap, offshore disposal area. This remov- ishment project. For example, the USACE critical infrastructure, federal and state al of sediment from the littoral system has Jacksonville District has identified the

Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 Page 75 potential value to the nation of over $100 million across the southeastern United States by managing sediments across projects and business lines, and opti- mizing regional dredging activities and schedules (USACE RSM RCX 2019). This concept has such potential to reduce Figure 1 (right). Basic wasteful federal expenditures that a US- geomorphic features of ACE “systems approach” called Regional coastal inlets. Sediment Management (RSM) was cre- Figure 2 (below). Channel ated. The USACE RSM program receives avulsion model modified several million dollars of funding annu- from Hubbard 1977, ally to study and encourage projects that courtesy of Coastal Science save money, treat sediment as a resource, and Engineering Inc. and enhance ecological benefits (USACE RSM 2019a). Similar cost savings can be realized at state and local beach nourishment projects that utilize inlet and waterway sand sources. Sand used for beach nourishment is ideally as similar as is practically possible to the native sand in terms of composition (carbonate vs quartz), grain size distribution, and color. The sand source can be offshore, nearshore (inlet shoals or navigation channels) or from upland sand mines. Sand sources, which are commonly referred to as “borrow areas,” are carefully selected and undergo extensive study for not only sediment quality, but also for avoidance and minimization of ecological impacts. Each year, the USACE oversees the dredging of over 140 million cubic yards (Mcy) of sediment along the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Great Lakes, and Puerto Rico coasts from about 360 inlets and segments of the Intracoastal Waterway (USACE RSM 2019b). Approximately 100 of these inlets are located at least partially within units established by the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) enacted in 1982. Of the 140 Mcy of federally dredged sediment in this region, about 7 Mcy of sand is dredged from federal navigation channels and placed on proximate beaches every year. Other beneficial use of finer sediments include placement elsewhere in the littoral system such as nearshore berms or to restore marsh habitat (USACE RSM 2019a). COASTAL INLETS 101 Coastal (tidal) inlets occur at breaks in the shoreline and provide for the ex- change of water between the inner shelf and back-barrier environments (Figure 1). Inlets are found within all tidal ranges worldwide. General geomorphological characteristics (Figure 1) include a main

Page 76 Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 inlet channel with marginal side (flood) shoal bypassing involves channel avul- the maintenance dredging of harbors, channels, and sand bodies on both the sion (Figure 2), which occurs when the inlets, and waterways along, or seaward flood (landward) and ebb (seaward) main channel migrates in the direction of of, the adjacent oceanfront shorelines ends. These flood- and ebb- tidal deltas littoral drift and begins to infill (Sexton of barrier islands. This practice helps to (also called shoals) act as ephemeral and Hayes 1983). Meanwhile, a second- maintain healthy beaches and littoral sediment sinks by temporarily retaining ary channel forms in the outer ebb delta sediment resources in the sand-sharing sands delivered via longshore and cross- which is oriented in-line with the inlet barrier-inlet system (Beck 2019). This is shore transport processes. Inlets with throat (Traynum and Kaczkowski 2015). a common operating procedure when the jetties commonly include an additional At some point, the main channel closes lowest cost disposal area is the adjacent sediment sink in the form of an updrift and its sand shoals migrate onshore. beach (e.g. Folly River, SC; St. Mary’s King fillet — sand impounded against the The secondary channel takes over as the Bay, FL; Tampa Harbor, FL) or nearshore updrift jetty. Significant weather events dominant channel. Coastal inlets have placement areas (e.g. Barnegat Inlet, NJ; commonly alter the forcing mechanisms displayed similar, dynamic sediment Burns Harbor, IN). to reshape the tidal deltas, channels, and transport processes throughout geologic Inlets or waterways are also dredged to fillets. Sediment infilling of the channel history (Hein et al. 2016). provide a sufficient volume of sediment can impede navigation and is the primary In some cases, this channel avulsion (on the order of 1 Mcy) for a large-scale reason jetty structures are used — to re- process is forced anthropogenically by beach nourishment project. In some duce infilling and dredging needs. dredging a shore-perpendicular channel cases, the navigation channel is included Beaches and dunes adjacent to inlets, through inlet shoals (e.g. Kana 1989; Er- within the inlet borrow area. This practice as well as the inlet shoals themselves, ickson et al. 2003). This is known as inlet allows for the combination of projects can serve as important habitats for nest- realignment and is discussed in more (navigation dredging and beach nourish- ing and foraging shore birds, sea turtles, detail under the BMPs section following. ment) to reduce overall costs of maintain- benthic invertebrates, and numerous ing beaches and navigation projects. For BEACH NOURISHMENT listed species. In unstructured, natural example, projects of this nature occur in WITH INLET OR WATERWAY inlet systems, these habitats are gener- the U.S. southeast in Florida (John’s Pass, SAND SOURCES ally more vulnerable to changes brought St. Augustine Inlet, Palm Beach Harbor, Tidal inlets are dredged for both 1) on by coastal storms and associated inlet Ft. Pierce Inlet, St. Lucie Inlet, Ponce maintenance of federal navigation chan- migration. Often, the dynamic nature of Inlet, and various Intracoastal Waterway nels and 2) as borrow areas for full-scale natural inlet shoals is beneficial in habitat projects), North and South Carolina beach nourishment projects. The use of creation. For example, storms sometimes (Carolina Beach, NC; Folly River, SC), sediment from navigation channel dredg- result in the overwash of a flood tidal and New Jersey (Hereford Inlet, NJ). ing will be discussed first. delta, which may create wide sand flats The sand volume obtained from that are a favorite habitat of shorebirds. Following National Environmental typical navigation channel dredging and Policy Act guidance, cost-effective and Natural inlet sediment bypassing is a placed on an adjacent eroding beach is ecologically considerate uses for dredged “quasi-steady” process (Bruun and Ger- usually not sufficient to offset inlet im- sediment have been implemented (Bridg- ritsen 1959) that transports sand around pacts and maintain the beach. As depicted es et al. 2010) and have been character- the inlet. Sediment is transported across in Figure 1, inlets commonly have other ized as Natural and Nature-Based Fea- the ebb tidal delta in the direction of sediment sinks beyond the maintained tures (Bridges et al. 2015). Recognizing longshore sediment transport and sup- inlet channel. However, navigation dredg- sand as a finite resource, the USACE RSM plies the downdrift beach. The pathways, ing footprints are commonly widened or program and state programs (e.g. CSMW frequency, and reliability of natural inlet otherwise expanded to provide additional 2019) encourage dredged sediments to be sand bypassing depend on many fac- sand needed for beach nourishment. selectively placed for the most beneficial tors such as rate of longshore sediment outcome. Such projects are often referred The combination of navigation chan- transport, channel depth, seasonal vari- to as Beneficial Use of Dredged Material nel maintenance, dredging, and beach ability, storm processes, tidal vs. wave (BUDM) projects. nourishment can provide significant cost dominance, and anthropogenic factors. saving benefits. Consider the scenario of Due to the variability in natural bypassing The Florida Statutes (a) cite “it is in two proximal, yet independent, projects. processes, adjacent beaches often exhibit the public interest to replicate the natu- In the first, dredged sediment from a high erosion and accretion rates (i.e. are ral drift of sand which is interrupted or coastal harbor is placed in an offshore highly dynamic). To mitigate these highly altered by inlets to be replaced” and (b) disposal area where sand may be lost variable shoreline fluctuations, inlets are require at least “reasonable effort to place from the littoral system. In the second, sometimes structured with jetties. beach-quality sand from construction nourished sand for the eroding beach and maintenance dredging and port-de- FitzGerald et al. (2000) summarized downdrift of this harbor is dredged from velopment projects on adjacent eroding nine models by which sand bypasses an offshore borrow area. A more sustain- beaches” (Section 161.142, Declaration inlets. For example, sand bypassing can able approach could be combining these of public policy relating to improved occur via natural shoal bypassing which two projects such that beach-quality navigation inlets). involves the episodic release of sand bars sand dredged from the harbor is placed from ebb tidal deltas to the downdrift These federal and state programs on or near an eroding downdrift beach. beaches (Kana 2002). One method of encourage planners to place sand from Considerable cost savings are typically

Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 Page 77 realized when the projects are combined: Environmental impacts comparison avoid and minimize impacts to ecological 1) mobilization costs are reduced, 2) at A borrow area located in an active resources when the design engineers have least some of the project cost is covered ebb-tidal shoal will likely be in-filled by knowledge of resources and potential by navigational funding (to maintain the longshore sediment transport, while an impacts. channel), and 3) some of the project cost inactive, offshore area located outside Limit frequency and is covered by the proximal storm damage the littoral zone will not (Rosov et al. reduction project (beach nourishment) 2016). As described above, dredging/ duration of impacts funding. beach nourishment projects that utilize Numerous studies recommend that offshore borrow areas typically have a to minimize ecological impacts, the At some U.S. inlets, management longer construction duration due to the frequency and duration of nourishment programs use fixed sand bypassing equip- distance between the beach and borrow projects should be limited (Rosov et al. ment to reduce the effects of structures area, as well as the increased risk. Projects 2016). For example, a comparison of inlet (e.g. Indian River Inlet, Delaware; Lake with a shorter construction duration have and offshore borrow areas for Wrights- Worth Inlet, Florida) where sediments fewer environmental impacts (less impact ville Beach, NC, found that the inlet are transferred from the accreting up- to fisheries, recreation, and aesthetics; borrow area would require about 45 days drift side to the shoreline downdrift of fewer air emissions, noise, endangered of dredging for one cutterhead dredge; the inlets. species vessel strikes and entrainment) whereas the offshore borrow area would likely use two hopper dredges working COMPARISON OF INLET AND (USACE 2019a). Table 1 compares the concurrently for 54 days each (USACE OFFSHORE BORROW AREAS FOR broad impacts associated with use of 2019b). This study cited environmental BEACH NOURISHMENT an inlet borrow area versus an offshore benefits for using inlet sand rather than The use of inlet borrow areas for beach borrow area. offshore sand including nourishment generally results in lower BEST MANAGEMENT immediate costs and shorter duration PRACTICES (BMPS) Fewer dredging days with a cutterhead dredging projects than use of borrow Since the passage of the National En- dredge as opposed to two hopper dredges. areas located farther offshore. One of vironmental Policy Act in 1969, federal This reduces air emissions, noise, endan- the most significant cost factors in a resource agencies have provided technical gered species vessel strikes and entrain- dredging/beach nourishment project is assistance to the USACE for dredging ac- ment, recreation, and aesthetics; and fuel consumption by the vessels used to tivities. Agencies such as NOAA National pump sand from the borrow area to the Smaller acreage of benthic and water Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the beach (e.g. USACE 2019a; 2019b). Thus, quality alterations and in the same, previ- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) the farther a borrow area is located from ously dredged area as opposed to larger work with the USACE and dredging in- the beach placement site, the higher the and new impacts each with dredging dustry to identify numerous conservation project cost. Another significant cost event. measures and Best Management Practices factor is salary and insurance for crew (BMPs) to minimize dredging impacts. It was concluded that the inlet borrow members. Offshore borrow areas gener- State-level policies have also been imple- area was environmentally preferable to ally require additional vessels, pumps, mented to ensure regional interests are the offshore sand source (USACE 2019b). and crew members to manage equipment considered. and sand transport between the borrow Follow environmental windows area and the beach. Inlet borrow areas For optimal coastal inlet management, One example of a relatively routine generally require fewer vessels/crew and the ASBPA Science and Technology conservation measure developed by less pumping power (fuel). Committee recommends the following USACE, the National Marine Fisheries conservation measures and BMPs: Service (NMFS), the U.S. Fish and Wild- Offshore borrow areas have the dis- • Limit frequency and duration of life Service (USFWS), and the dredging advantage that they are not protected impacts, industry is environmental windows. from deep ocean wave energy, thereby • Follow environmental windows, Environmental windows are time periods increasing safety hazards (risk) as well • Implement regional sediment man- during which dredging is less likely to as the likelihood of increased down time agement, result in physical disturbance of nesting or “weather days.” Both factors result • Use beach-compatible sand, shorebirds or turtles, and spawning fish in lower productivity, longer project • Conduct pre-, during-, and post- via habitat destruction, detrimental effects duration, and higher cost. Inlet borrow dredging monitoring, of suspended sediments, turbidity, sedi- areas are generally more protected from • Modify dredging equipment/prac- mentation, and hydraulic entrainment open-ocean processes because they are tices, and (Suedel et al. 2008). Dredging is restricted sheltered from deep ocean wave energy • Design rechargeable, low-impact during critical time windows when at-risk due to shoreline orientation. Inlet bor- inlet borrow sites. environmental resources are present. row areas are often located “inside” inlet shoals which dissipate wave energy before A detailed discussion of each of these An example of an environmental it reaches the channel. Use of inlet bor- recommendations follows. We also sug- window is for hopper dredging in the row areas results in increased dredging gest early and frequent consultation with southeastern United States, which is gen- production, reduced project duration, state and federal resource and regulatory erally allowed during the winter months and decreased cost compared to offshore agencies. Borrow area design and other of December through March, when sea borrow areas. project elements can often be modified to turtle abundances are known to be low in inshore waters; while turtles are abun-

Page 78 Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 dant during the summer nesting season. Seabergh and Kraus (2003) summa- gies to best manage sand resources, in- NMFS also encourages wintertime dredg- rize management practices for natural cluding bypassing activities for placement ing to protect Essential Fish Habitat (ESF) and engineered inlet bypassing. These of beach quality sand on adjacent eroding allowing benthic community recovery (6 authors maintain that engineered bypass- beaches of the inlet. The intent of the months-1 year) by the time peak fish use ing could work to harmonize the human IMP strategies is to maintain the inlet for for foraging resumes in the surf zone. requirements of maintaining channels for navigation or flood control while concur- navigation with the natural, or historical, rently replicating the natural drift of sand Environmental dredging windows are sediment-sharing requirements between to “address the beach erosion caused by designated during the state and federal inlets and beaches. However, sand ob- inlets” by maximizing inlet sand bypass- permitting process (e.g. via a regional tained from inlet navigation channel ing, balancing the inlet sediment budget NMFS Biological Opinion) after consid- dredging alone is rarely sufficient to offset consistent with the Florida Statutes (Sec- ering the available biological and dredg- inlet-induced beach erosion, which must tion 161.142, Declaration of public policy ing data (SARBO 1997; GRBO 2003). be supplemented by placement of sand relating to improved navigation inlets). Environmental windows are generally obtained from other sources to maintain included as conditions of a permit that the beach. Use beach-compatible sand is issued to the project applicant. When sediment is placed on a beach, The USACE and its partners recognize the character of the placed sand (i.e. bor- Environmental windows are challeng- that sediment is a valuable resource and row sediment) ideally matches the natural ing because restricting dredging to winter implement RSM measures to balance or native beach sand. Sand characteristics months complicates dredging schedules the need for navigation with protec- include grain size, composition, and and causes safety issues for dredge crews tion of coastlines and natural resources. color. Grain size is an important factor in typically working under severe winter Dredging and management decisions are the slope of the beach, compaction, and sea conditions (Dickerson et al. 2007) guided by numerous factors, such as cost sediment transport pathways (on- and thereby increasing costs, particularly for as mentioned above, but perhaps most offshore as well as alongshore), the extent offshore borrow areas (Childs 2015). Ad- importantly, the local sediment budget of fine sediments is the primary factor as- ditionally, various species’ windows may and science-based metrics for best use sociated with turbidity during dredging overlap allowing only narrow windows of the sediment. Shoreline impacts are and storms after sand placement. NMFS of opportunity or insufficient time for a minimized through a systemwide under- recommends using beach compatible dredging project to occur. standing of sediment dynamics of the area sand to limit turbidity at the borrow area Implement Regional (Garel et al. 2014). and avoid Essential Fish Habitat impacts in the nearshore associated with burrow- Sediment Management The USACE St. Augustine Inlet, St. ing organisms and associated feeding by Until the 1970s, inlet management John’s County, Florida, project is an fish (J. Daly, personal communication practice included offshore disposal of example of a federal navigation project 2013). Composition and color are im- dredged material, which interrupted nat- located within a CBRA unit and a USACE portant for reflectivity, which influences ural bypassing and reduced sand supply coastal storm damage reduction (beach the temperature of the sediment and to downdrift beaches (Dabees and Moore nourishment) project located downdrift substrate. Temperature regulates the sex 2011). Today, best management practices of the navigable channel. This project has of sea turtle hatchlings (Mrosovsky 1994). are changing to beneficially use dredged implemented a science-based sediment sediment, but many states continue to management strategy to beneficially use Exact requirements for beach compat- dispose of nearshore sediments in ocean dredged material, coordinate dredg- ible sediments approved for placement disposal management areas (USACE ing schedules for navigation and storm often vary by project type and state. RSM 2019a). Cost-effective and ecologi- damage reduction projects, maintain For example, Florida’s “Sand Rule” is cally considerate management practices channels, investigate alternatives to prescribed by Section 62B-41.007(j) of now recommend mitigating the erosion better stabilize beaches, and coordinate Florida Administrative Code, which cites of beaches adjacent to inlets (Beck 2019) improvements to the state’s inlet manage- that beach-compatible sand (a) “shall be via bypassing dredged sediment to those ment plan (Schrader et al. 2016). BMPs similar in color and grain size distribution adjacent beaches. developed for this project are applicable …to the native beach sediment, and (b) A sand-sharing system such as that of to other regions with multiple projects is limited to sediment with a mean grain coastal inlets and adjacent beaches has a and sediment-related needs. size between 0.062 mm and 4.76 mm, and may not contain more than 5% fine delicate balance that is easily disrupted by Considerable numerical modeling and “gravel” — (4.75 mm) or fine-sized (0.063 removal of littoral sands from any part of science-based methods have been under- mm) material by weight. In North Caro- the system (Beck 2019). Because the rela- taken to determine BMPs that improve lina, sand obtained from a navigational tionship between excessive sand removal management of sand resources of coastal channel is permitted to contain up to of shoal volume to beach erosion has inlets and reduce dredging impacts (e.g. 10% fine sediment. The State of California been well-described (Dean 1991; Trud- Kraus 2000; Dabees and Moore 2011). nack 1997; Finkl 2012; Garel et al. 2014) uses a “80/20” coarse-to-fines ratio when numerous studies have examined best State-level RSM policies have also been determining whether sand will be permit- management practices toward sustain- implemented. For example, the state of ted for beach placement. ing a positive interconnectivity between Florida encourages that all dredged inlets Additional study and consultation are beaches and inlets (Walther and Douglas have a state-approved Inlet Management needed to refine some state sediment reg- 1993; Mehta et al. 1996). Plan (IMP). These plans establish strate-

Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 Page 79 ulations for beach and nearshore placement permit to Charleston County Park ment is required during mobilization ment to optimize the balance between and Recreation Commission 2013). For and demobilization to avoid impacts or reduced turbidity at the dredging site, the example, Florida’s inlet management physical damage to habitats (e.g. live/hard final composition of the placed sediment, plans set forth a long-term physical bottom, corals, sandy bottom, marsh/ and other environmental factors (Maglio monitoring protocol for the inlet and seagrass vegetation) from the anchor, et al. 2015). We recommend additional adjacent beaches to determine how target pipeline, and cables. research to consider whether regulations bypassing quantities and placement areas Design rechargeable, low-impact should consider fine percentages on the may need to adapt over time (R. Clark, constructed beach rather than, or in ad- personal communication, 6 December inlet borrow areas dition to, the borrow area. 2019). New technologies, such as Light Inlet channels and ebb-tidal deltas Detection And Ranging (LIDAR) has have historically been, and continue to be, Conduct pre-, during-, and shown some promise for the collection utilized as sand sources for beach nour- post-dredging monitoring of less expensive, more frequent surveys; ishment due to their proximal location Both physical and biological multi- however, turbidity conditions at inlets to eroding beaches and their renewable year monitoring programs are commonly and the need to combine multiple moni- nature. Finkl et al. (2007) suggested that required by state and federal regulatory toring efforts to realize the cost savings large, tidally dominated inlets are opti- agencies to document project perfor- often make LIDAR more of a logisti- mal sediment resources as their size and mance, potential impacts to ecological cal challenge for local communities as proximity to the shore reduce effects on resources, borrow area infilling rates, and compared to traditional hydrographic sediment bypassing and wave sheltering to provide a basis for understanding sedi- surveying techniques. on adjacent beaches; this is particularly ment processes. In addition to physical valid for inlets that are very much tid- monitoring (e.g. bathymetric surveys), In many cases, the state-of-the-art of ally dominated, with massive historically a common permit condition for dredg- numerical modeling has not sufficiently expanding shoals and relatively minimal ing projects is the long-term monitoring advanced to provide high certainty in natural bypassing. Borrow area design and recovery of benthic invertebrates, the characterization of coastal sediment (depth, location) plays an important role coral, seagrass, shorebirds, sea turtles, transport and associated geomorphology in the infilling rates and subsequent (a) and other coastal species. Some of these — particularly surrounding inlets and the physical and biological recovery of inlet biological monitoring efforts continue use of ebb shoals as a borrow area. This borrow areas, and (b) subsequent erosion for 10 or more years after construction is primarily due to the high cost and ab- rate of downdrift beaches. As discussed (USACE 2018). sence of sufficient field measurements to above, inlet borrow areas are located calibrate and verify the models. However, within the littoral system — the zone During dredging, many states require fundamental conservation of mass prin- of active sediment transport along the that turbidity levels are monitored at the ciples can be reasonably employed with coast — and can serve as renewable sand dredging site in the borrow area, along the historical survey data to assess impacts sources when managed appropriately. By transit path between the borrow area and via formulation of an inlet sediment bud- contrast, offshore borrow areas are gener- the beach, and at the beach nourishment get under existing conditions and with ally not renewable/rechargeable and result site. In addition, real-time dredge posi- potential modifications. Use of an ebb in new biological impacts for each dredg- tion monitoring is a common require- shoal as a borrow area is likely to at least ing event (see Table 1). By implementing ment on both federal and non-federal temporarily reduce natural bypassing BMPs frequently including supplemental dredging projects. The USACE National across the ebb shoal as the borrow area beach nourishment, coastal inlet manage- Dredging Quality Management Program refills. Post-construction monitoring of ment can balance the sediment budget to is dedicated to providing web-based tools the ebb shoal and adjacent beaches can the benefit of both the inlet and the adja- for the dredging manager to monitor provide a basis to (a) assess the ebb shoal cent beaches (Dabees and Moore 2011). dredge position remotely (https://dqm. borrow area infilling rate and associated usace.army.mil/). This is intended to as- impacts upon downdrift beaches due to In general, when the post-dredging sure avoidance of adverse impacts upon use of ebb shoal as a borrow area, and (b) physical conditions resemble the pre- ecological and physical resources during formulate potential future projects using dredging conditions, repopulation of dredging operations. the ebb shoal as a borrow area. biota can be expected (Rosov et al. 2016). Potential long-term physical and bio- A technical challenge to inlet man- Modify dredging equipment logical impacts could occur if dredging agement is the high cost of obtaining and practices significantly changes the physiography frequent hydrographic survey data over To minimize entrainment of fisheries of shoals — as commonly occurs for an an entire inlet system including the ebb during the dredging process, contractors offshore borrow area. Sediment removal and flood shoals. State permits typically may be required to modify equipment has the potential to alter seabed topog- require such high-resolution spatial and or the dredging intake process (USACE raphy, particularly if sediment removal temporal hydrographic monitoring of 2018). For example, special permit condi- in the borrow area results in a deep hole. inlet borrow areas, which are used to tions may dictate that suction of sediment Numerical modeling of morphological calculate infilling rates and determine may not occur until after the dredge is at changes associated with dredging has changes in shoal positions (e.g. unpub- the bottom of the waterway and must be been used to show borrow area location lished South Carolina Department of turned off while in the water column. In can reasonably predict whether infilling Health and Environmental Control Office addition, careful placement of the dredge, of an excavated area will occur (CSA of Ocean and Coastal Resource Manage- anchors, lighting, and supporting equip- International et al. 2009).

Page 80 Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 The location of a borrow area in an Table 1. active inlet shoal allows, via the process Comparison of inlets vs. offshore borrow areas (modified from USACE 2019a; of natural sand bypassing, for ebb tidal 2019b) deltas to be self-replenishing (Kana et al. Inlet Offshore 2014). When the updrift edge of an ebb Close proximity to beach = Fewer Long distance between borrow area delta is dredged, new sand will naturally vessels/crew & pumping and beach = More vessels/crew & infill the dredged area due to local forc- requirements = Lower cost pumping requirements = Higher cost ing conditions. Dredging sand from the portion of the shoal facing the predomi- Often leverage navigation dredging Do not leverage navigation dredging nant longshore current direction (i.e. the funds to reduce project cost share funds leading or updrift edge of the shoal) will Typically more protected from Typically less protected from ocean facilitate a relatively rapid recovery of the ocean wave energy, therefore wave energy, therefore more down physical condition of the shoal feature fewer down weather days for weather days for dredging and via interruption and trapping of natural dredging and shorter project longer project duration bypassing, and also will increase the rate duration of recovery of the benthic infaunal com- Shorter construction duration = Longer construction duration = munity (CSA International et al. 2009). less impact to fisheries, recreation, more impact to fisheries, recreation, This is due primarily to the physical conditions that would lead to a net long-term and aesthetics; fewer air and aesthetics; greater air deposition and faster infilling rates of emissions, noise, endangered emissions, noise, endangered these dredged areas. The second most de- species vessel strikes and species vessel strikes and sirable location for dredging would be the entrainment entrainment shoal crest, followed by the trailing edge Renewable sand source — via Finite sand resource (Johnson and Nelson 1985). Bergquist capture of longshore transport (2008) recommends locating nearshore Repeatable dredging footprint New dredging footprint for each borrow areas at the downdrift ends of (predictable impacts) event (new impacts) barrier islands where beach-compatible sands tend to accumulate. Potentially smaller acreage of Potentially larger acreage of benthic benthic and water quality impacts and water quality impacts The configuration and depth of the borrow site is also important. Bergquist Projects are designed and Projects are designed and permitted (2008) offered several recommenda- permitted to avoid “starving” to avoid adversely altering the tions for borrow areas designed in South (reducing amount of sand available nearshore bathymetry and wave Carolina: dredge to less than 3 m below to) downdrift beaches temporarily patterns grade; avoid creating deep pits at borrow by managing sediment as a site; and design borrow area with shallow regional resource dredge cuts to encourage rapid recovery Faster benthic recovery rates Offshore borrow areas tend to infill (shallowly dredged borrow sites tend with finer sediments (more silt/clay, to re-fill rapidly with beach compatible less carbonate) following dredging sand). Other commonly implemented making benthic recovery time slower BMPs include: remove a low volume of (Coen 1995) sediment relative to the total ebb shoal volume; and observe buffer areas around Recycles beach sediment Add “new” sand to littoral systems historic properties such as shipwrecks in littoral system or other anthropogenic objects such as Navigation use benefits No navigational use benefits pipelines or cables. Limited water quality impacts to No water quality impacts to Inlet realignment nearshore marine resources nearshore marine resources As described above, inlet shoal bypassing is a natural process that allows for the Welsh and Cleary (2007) reviewed substantially, while reducing the prism episodic release of sand bars from ebb the results of a realigned, unstructured at adjacent inlets connected through tidal deltas to the downdrift beaches. inlet in North Carolina and found that the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. Ad- Occasionally, the natural shoal bypassing maintenance dredging is helpful in ditionally, relic ebb-tidal delta sand was process is forced anthropogenically by maintaining the requisite tidal prism and noted as having migrated onshore, pro- dredging a shore-perpendicular channel flushing capacity to attain equilibrium viding substantial nourishment for years through inlet shoals. This is a less intru- (i.e. maintains inlet’s hydrodynamic to decades thereafter. sive inlet management practice than jetty “health”). Cleary and FitzGerald (2003) SUMMARY construction, and it is well understood analyzed dredging-induced tidal prism This paper provides a brief overview after many decades of study (e.g. Kana changes and resultant sedimentation of multiple studies and governmental et al. 2013). Forced shoal bypassing has at Mason Inlet, North Carolina, and collaborations that have provided for the benefits for navigation and for the down- found that inlet realignment and basin maintenance of navigable inlets while drift beaches. dredging increased the inlet’s tidal prism

Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 Page 81 protecting valuable coastal resources over REFERENCES inlets in southwest Florida, USA.” Proc. 32nd the last several decades. Best Manage- Beck, T.M., 2019. “Review of Coastal Tidal Inlet Conference on Coastal Engineering, Shanghai, China, 2010. 1(32), 89. DOI: https://doi. ment Practices (BMPs) are followed today Morphodynamics in the Context of Barrier- Inlet Sustainability.” U.S. Army Corps of org/10.9753/icce.v32.sediment.89 to harmonize human needs for naviga- Engineers, Engineer Research and Develop- Dean, R.G., 1991. “Impacts of global change: engi- tion at coastal inlets with the associated ment Center report, ERDC/CHL SR-19-6, neering solutions.” In: Our Changing Planet: natural systems. Considerable numerical August 2019, 61. Joining Forces for a Better Environment. Proc. modeling and science-based methods — Bergquist, D.C., 2008. “Change and recovery of of Symposium on the Commemoration of the 20th Anniversary of the Graduate College as cited in the references below — have physical and biological characteristics at beach and borrow areas impacted by the 2005 Folly of Marine Studies, University of Delaware, been undertaken to determine BMPs that Beach renourishment project.” South Carolina Newark, Delaware, 13-17. improve management of sand resources State Documents Depository. Dickerson, D., Theriot, C., Wolters, M., Slay, C., of coastal inlets and reduce environ- Bridges, T.S., Wagner, P.W., Burks-Copes, K.A., M.E. Bargo, T., and W. Parks, 2007. “Effectiveness mental impacts of dredging and inlet Bates, Collier, Z.A., Fischenich, J.C., Gailiani, of relocation trawling during hopper dredging J., Leuck, L., Piercy, C.D., and J.D. Rosati, 2015. for reducing incidental take of sea turtles.” management. “Use of natural and nature-based features 2007 World Dredging Conference. 509-530. The USACE Dredging Operations (NNBF) for coastal resilience.” U.S. Army Erickson, K.M., Kraus, N.C., and E.E. Carr, 2003. Engineer Research and Development Cen- “Circulation change and ebb shoal develop- and Environmental Research Program ter, Environmental Laboratory, Coastal and ment following relocation of Mason Inlet, (https://doer.el.erdc.dren.mil/) investi- Hydraulics Laboratory, ERDC SR-15-1, 479. North Carolina.” Proc. Coastal Sediments gates and documents the details of many Bridges, T.S., Gustavson, K.E., Schroeder, P., Ells, 2003, World Scientific Publishing and East of the dredging BMPs described above. S.J., Hayes, D., Nadeau, S.C., Palermo, M.R., Meets West Productions, Corpus Christi, TX ISBN-981-238-422-7, 13p. The program was created to balance the and C. Patmont, 2010. “Dredging processes and remedy effectiveness: Relationship to the Finkl, C.W. 2012. “Pitfalls of ebb-shoal mining.” economic, engineering and environmen- 4 Rs of environmental dredging.” Integrated In Cooper, J.A., and O.H. Pilkey, Pitfalls of tal needs of USACE dredging projects. Environ. Assessment and Management, 6(4), Shoreline Stabilization: Selected Case Studies, The program has developed a database 619-630. 37-52. Springer Science and Business Media. of over 3,000 peer reviewed papers and Bruun, P., and F. Gerritsen. 1959. “Natural bypass- Finkl, C.W., Benedet, L., Andrews, J.L., Suthard, B., and S.D. Locker, 2007. “Sediment ridges on reports (grey literature) that have inves- ing of sand at coastal inlets.” J. the Waterways and Harbors Division, ASCE, 85(4), 75-107. the west Florida inner continental shelf: Sand tigated potential environmental impacts Childs, J.L., 2015. “Dredged material management resources for beach nourishment.” J. Coastal and benefits of dredging (https://dots. categories for tracking beneficial use.” U.S. Research, 143-159. el.erdc.dren.mil/databases5.html). We Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research FitzGerald, D.M., Kraus, N.C., and E.B. Hands, encourage those interested in specific and Development Center report, ERDC-TN- 2000. “Natural Mechanisms of Sediment DOER-R22, 10p. Bypassing at Tidal Inlets.” Vicksburg: USACE topic areas to explore this database. Cleary, W.J., and D.M. FitzGerald, 2003. “Tidal inlet Research and Development Center, 12p. response to natural sedimentation processes Florida Statute 161.142 “Declaration of public and dredging-induced tidal prism changes: policy relating to improved navigation Mason Inlet, North Carolina.” J. Coastal Re- inlets.” https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Stat- search, 1018-1025. utes/2018/161.142 accessed 22 February 2020. Coen, L.D., 1995. “A review of the potential impacts Garel, E., Sousa, C., Ferreira, O., and J.A. Morales, of mechanical harvesting on subtidal and 2014. “Decadal morphological response of intertidal shellfish resources.” Charleston, an ebb-tidal delta and down-drift beach to SC: South Carolina Department of Natural artificial breaching and inlet stabilisation.” Resources, Marine Resources Research In- Geomorphology, 216, 13-25. stitute, 46p. GRBO, 2003. Dredging of Gulf of Mexico Naviga- CSA International, 2009. “Analysis of Potential Bio- tion Channels and Sand Mining (Borrow) logical and Physical Impacts of Dredging on Areas Using Hopper Dredges by COE Galves- Offshore Ridge and Shoal Features.” Prepared ton, New Orleans, Mobile, and Jacksonville in cooperation with Applied Coastal Research Districts. Gulf Area Regional Biological and Engineering Inc., Barry A. Vittor & As- Opinion (GRBO) issued to USACE South sociates Inc., C.F. Bean LLC, and the Florida Atlantic, Mississippi Valley, and Southwest Institute of Technology for the U.S. Depart- Divisions by National Marine Fisheries Ser- ment of the Interior, Minerals Management vice, St. Petersburg, Florida. Service, Leasing Division, Marine Minerals Hayes, M.O., and D. FitzGerald, 2013. “Origin, Branch, Herndon, VA. OCS Study MMS evolution, and classification of tidal inlets.” J. 2010-010. 160p. + apps. Coastal Research, Special Issue 69 - Proceed- CSMW, 2019. California Division of Boating and ings, Symposium in Applied Coastal Geo- Waterways, Coastal Sediment Management morphology to Honor Miles O. Hayes, 14-33. Workgroup (CSMW), https://dbw.parks. Hein, C.J., Fitzsimons, G.G., FitzGerald, D.M., and ca.gov/?page_id=29239, accessed 16 Decem- A.R. Fallon, 2016. “Records of migration and ber 2019. ebb-delta breaching at historic and ancient Dabees, M.A., and B.D. Moore, 2011. “Evaluation tidal inlets along a river-fed paraglacial bar- of inlet management practices at navigation rier island.” In: Vila-Concejo, A., Bruce, E.,

Page 82 Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 Kennedy, D.M., and R.J. McCarroll (eds.), National Marine Fisheries Service, St. Peters- 211-223. Proceedings of the 14th International Coastal burg, Florida. Welsh, J.M., and W.J. Cleary, 2007. “Evolution Symposium (Sydney, Australia). J. Coastal Re- Schrader, M.H., Douglass, E.C., and L.S. Lillycrop, of a relocated tidal inlet: Mason Inlet, search, Special Issue, No. 75, 228-232. Coconut 2016. “Regional sediment management strate- NC.” In Sixth International Symposium on Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. gies for the vicinity of St. Augustine Inlet, St. Coastal Engineering and Science of Coastal Hubbard, D.K., 1977. “Variations in tidal inlet Johns County, Florida.” U.S. Army Corps of Sediment Process, 13-17 May 2007 , New processes and morphology in the Georgia Engineers, Engineer Research and Develop- Orleans, Louisiana, 1543-1556. https://doi. Embayment.” Tech. Rept 14-CRD, Coastal ment Center report, ERDC-CHL-TR-16-12. org/10.1061/40926(239)119 Research Division, Dept of Geology, Univ of Seabergh, W.C., and N.C. Kraus, 2003. “Progress in USACE, 2018. “Biological Assessment — Port South Carolina, Columbia, 79p. management of sediment bypassing at coastal Everglades Improvement Project.” Prepared Johnson, R.O., and W.G. Nelson, 1985. “Biological inlets: natural bypassing, weir jetties, jetty by the USACE Jacksonville District, 115p. effects of dredging in an offshore borrow spurs, and engineering aids in design.” Coastal USACE, 2019a. “Carolina Beach, NC Beach area.” Florida Scientist, 166-188. Engineering, 45(4), 533-563. Renourishment Evaluation Report.” Wilm- Kana, T.W., Traynum, S.B., and H.L. Kaczkowski, Sexton, W.J., and M.O. Hayes, 1983. “Natural bar ington District USACE, https://www.saw. 2014. “Scales and signatures of episodic sand bypassing of sand at a tidal inlet.” Proc. Coastal usace.army.mil/Missions/Coastal-Storm- bypassing at a tide dominated inlet–Fripp Engineering ‘82, ASCE, New York, NY, pp Risk-Management/Carolina-Beach, accessed Inlet, South Carolina.” Proc. 34th Conference 1479-1495. 022 February 2020. of Coastal Engineering (Seoul, South Korea, Suedel, B.C., Kim, J., Clarke, D.G., and I. Linkov, USACE, 2019b. “Wrightsville Beach, NC Beach ASCE), 10p. 2008. “A risk-informed decision framework Renourishment Validation Study Report.” Kana, T.W., Traynum, S.B., Gaudiano, D., Kaczkows- for setting environmental windows for Wilmington District USACE, https://www. ki, H.L., and T. Hair, 2013. “The physical con- dredging projects.” Science of the total environ- saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Coastal-Storm- dition of South Carolina beaches 1980–2010.” ment, 403(1-3), 1-11. Risk-Management/Wrightsville-Beach, ac- In: Kana, T., Michel, J., and G. Voulgaris (eds.), Trudnack, M.E. 1997. Impacts on the Inlet-Beach cessed 22 February 2020. Proceedings, Symposium in Applied Coastal System of Ebb Tidal Shoal Mining. Master’s USACE RSM, 2019a. National Regional Sediment Geomorphology to Honor Miles O. Hayes, J. Thesis. Gainesville: University of Florida. Management Program, https://rsm.usace. Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 69, 61-82. Traynum, S., and H. Kackowski, , 2015. “Evolution army.mil, accessed 22 February 2020. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. of a large-scale shoal-bypass event at Isle of USACE RSM, 2019b. USACE Navigation Sedi- Kana, T.W., 2002. “Barrier island formation via Palms, SC — Implications for local beach ment Placement: An RSM Program Database channel avulsion and shoal bypassing.” Proc. management and shoreline predictions,” In: (1998-present), https://gim2.aptim.com/ 28th International Conference on Coastal En- Coastal Sediments 2015, Proceedings of the RSM, accessed 22 February 2020. gineering, 3438-3448. 11th International Symposium on Coastal USACE RSM RCX, 2019. South Atlantic Divi- Kana, T.W., 1989. “Erosion and beach preservation Engineering and Science of Coastal Sediment sion Optimization Pilot, USACE Regional at Seabrook Island, South Carolina.” Shore & Processes, San Diego, CA. Sediment Management, Regional Center of Beach, 57(3), 3-18. Walther, M.P., and B.D. Douglas,1993. “Ebb shoal Expertise, https://www.sad.usace.army.mil/ Kraus, N.C., 2000. “Reservoir model of ebb-tidal borrow area recovery.” J. Coastal Research, RSM-RCX, accessed 16 November 2019. shoal evolution and sand bypassing.” J. Wa- terway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Eng., 126(6), Sonu______n From page 74 305-313. the coastal engineering communities of Maglio, C.K., Ousley, J.D., and J.L. Coor, 2015. Multi-year ice: Recognizing their the United States, Japan, and the Repub- “Sediment Engineering Through Dredging With Nature (SETDWN) — Fate of fines importance for the design of Arctic off- lic of Korea. He maintained particularly in the dredging and placement process.” In shore facilities, Choule played a leading close ties with Professors Robert Wiegel Proc. Coastal Sediments 2015. https://doi. role in acquiring field measurements and of the University of California-Berkeley org/10.1142/9789814689977_0117 modeling the dynamics of multi-year ice and Kiyoshi Horikawa of the University Mehta, A.J., Dombrowski, M.R., and P. T. Devine, floes. While participating in one of the of Tokyo. 1996. “Role of waves in inlet ebb delta growth field programs, he was confronted by — and some research needs related to site selec- PASSING THE TORCH and narrowly missed becoming a meal tion for delta mining.” J. Coastal Research, Choule is survived by his wife of 121-136. for — a polar bear. Mrosovsky, N., 1994. “Sex ratios of sea turtles.” J. 60 years, Sunee; his three children, Chris- Experimental Zoology, 270(1), 16-27. Santa Monica breakwater: As principal tina Weiss, Charles Sonu, and Alex Sonu; National Research Council, 1995. Beach Nour- oceanographic consultant for the recon- his son-in-law, Steve Weiss; and four ishment and Protection, Washington, DC: struction of the venerable Santa Monica grandchildren. His professional legacy The National Academies Press. https://doi. of boundless curiosity, hard work, and org/10.17226/4984. Breakwater following the El Niño winter Rosov, B., Bush, S, Briggs, T.R., and N. Elko, 2016. of 1982-83, Choule performed a detailed undying optimism will be carried on “The state of understanding the impacts of assessment of water levels, wave condi- by those who worked with and learned beach nourishment activities on infaunal tions, sediment transport, and historical from him. communities.” Shore & Beach, 84(3), 51. shoreline changes at the project site. SARBO, 1997. “The Continued Hopper Dredg- Craig Leidersdorf is a principal and co- ing of Channels and Borrow Areas in the INTERNATIONAL AMBASSADOR founder of Coastal Frontiers Corpora- Southeastern United States.” South Atlantic Throughout his career, Choule used tion. He shared a professional affinity Regional Biological Opinion (SARBO) issued to USACE South Atlantic Division by his linguistic capabilities and cultural and personal friendship with Dr. Sonu understanding to forge bonds between for 35 years.

Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020 Page 83 ASBPA’s 13th annual photography contest

he editors of Shore & Beach an- SUBMISSION: Participants are to PRIZES: nounce the ASBPA’s 13th annual send electronic files in JPEG, TIFF or Winner in each category will have Tphotography competition. The BMP format to the following e-mail ad- his (her) name and photograph printed purpose of the contest is to highlight the dress: [email protected]. Please send: in either Shore & Beach or the “Coastal beauty and natural wonders of America’s Voice” e-newsletter, or both. The full-size JPEG file as created in magnificent coasts as part of celebrating your camera (note, minimum camera A Grand Prize winner will be selected more than 85 years of continuous publi- resolution of 3 megapixels to allow for from among the category winners to have cation of Shore & Beach. sufficient printing quality for cover art) his or her photograph printed on the cover WHO CAN PARTICIPATE: The or a reduced-size file (800x600 pixels of Shore & Beach and receive a one-year competition is open to all except ASBPA minimum). Winners will have to send annual membership renewal to ASBPA. consultants and/or their immediate fami- the full-size file later. Other entries of outstanding merit may lies (children, spouses, parents). Each participant may submit up to five be printed in “Coastal Voice,” Shore & SUBJECT MATTER AND RULES: (5) photographs total. Photographers may Beach, or on the ASBPA website. (Note: Any photographs depicting the coastal submit all entries in a single category or The editors may contact you for more zone are appropriate. These include, but select different categories as long as the information). are not limited to beaches, bluffs, mari- total does not exceed five photographs. THE FINE PRINT: nas, wetlands, marine life, recreational Do not submit RAW files because LEGAL CONDITIONS: facilities, and engineered projects as long By entering the contest, photographers agree to the there are too many manufacturer-specific as they include the setting in which they following entry rules and conditions. formats. Convert RAW files to JPEG or were built (i.e. no portraits of dredges or Your entry in the contest constitutes your agreement TIFF files. to allow your photographs and your name, occupation, city your favorite armor unit). and state of residence to be published as a selected award Also, please do not submit prints or winner in Shore & Beach, used on websites owned by the Manipulated photographs (color- transparencies of any size. ASBPA sim- ASBPA or otherwise displayed or published in associa- ized, posterized, solarized, etc.) are also tion with ASBPA and its activities. The American Shore ply does not have the facilities to properly welcome if the photographer briefly & Beach Preservation Association retains permission in scan materials and handle the logistics of perpetuity for future use of the photographs in any and all describes the changes or procedure. The ASBPA publications, materials, or activities. physical submissions. original base photograph must have been Your entry in the contest also constitutes your taken by the submitter. In the text of the email, please include agreement that your name, likeness, city, and winning photograph(s) may be used by ASBPA for promotional and the following information: Submissions must be made in one of publication purposes without compensation. 1) Your name the geographic categories listed below. Participant warrants that his or her entry materials are 2) Physical address original, do not infringe on any third party’s rights, and that Winning photographs may be used as 3) Email address the participant has obtained any and all necessary permis- sions and releases from any third party if such third party cover art on Shore & Beach. Therefore, 4) Occupation and place of employ- appears in the photograph. Permission may not be needed VERTICAL-format photographs are ment for persons depicted in photographs taken in public settings such as crowded beaches where the purpose of the pho- highly preferred. Horizontal photographs 5) Photograph title or description tograph is to show the overall setting or the environment. can be submitted, too, but if a horizontal 6) Date taken ASBPA reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to format photograph is a winner in one 7) Category (see list above) disqualify any entry, and/or to not name winners in any of the categories below, the editors of 8) Indicate if submission is full-size category where photos of sufficient quality or quantity have not been received. ASBPA may have to crop some of the original or reduced size file for contest ASBPA reserves the right to alter the photographs scene, at their sole discretion, to fit on purpose. submitted as it sees fit. the cover of Shore & Beach. 9) Other notes if necessary (what is By entering, participants release and hold harmless the happening if it is an unusual scene, why ASBPA and its officers, contractors, , attorneys, agents and Photographs must have been taken you took the photograph, etc.). representatives from any and all liability for any injuries, since 1 January 2019. Photographs can loss, claim, action, demand or damage of any kind arising from or in connection with the contest or any prize won, be full-color, black and white, sepia, or WHEN: Deadline for submitting en- any use of the entry materials by ASBPA. . colorized. tries is 11:59 p.m. EDT on 30 September ASBPA is not responsible for any incorrect or inac- 2020. curate information by any technical or human error that CATEGORIES: may occur in the processing of submissions to the ASBPA, • U.S. East Coast including but not limited to any misprints or typographi- • U.S. Gulf of Mexico Coast cal errors. • Caribbean (Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin ASBPA reserves the right at its sole discretion to cancel, terminate, modify, extend or suspend the contest. Islands) ABBPA will not share or sell your personal information • U.S. Pacific Coast and Alaska to any party, and winners’ full addresses will not be printed. • U.S. Great Lakes All decisions by the ASBPA judges will be final and • Pacific (Hawaiian Islands, Guam, binding. Editors and officers of ASBPA will serve as the etc.) review and judging committee.

Page 84 Shore & Beach  Vol. 88, No. 3  Summer 2020