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 On citing this report, the reference should be followed by the words "UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT."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 .