Policy analysis of shoreline restoration options on private shorelines of Puget Sound

Puget Sound shorelines have historically provided a diversity of habitats that support a variety of aquatic resources throughout the region. These valued natural resources are iconic to the region and remain central to both the economic vitality and community appreciation of Puget Sound. Deterioration of upland and nearshore shoreline habitats, have placed severe stress on many aquatic resources within the region (PSAT, 2007). Since a majority of Washington State shorelines are privately owned, regulatory authority to legislate restoration on private property is limited in scope and frequency. Washington States’ Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) requires local jurisdictions to plan for appropriate future shoreline uses. Under the Act, future development can be regulated to protect existing ecological functions, but lost functions cannot be restored without purchase or compensation of restored areas. Therefore, questions remains as to the ecological resilience of the region when considering cumulative effect of existing/ongoing shoreline development constrained by limited shoreline restoration opportunities. In light of these questions, this analysis will explore opportunities to promote restoration on privately owned shorelines within Puget Sound. These efforts are intended to promote more efficient ecosystem management and improve ecosystem-wide ecological functions. From an economics perspective, results of past shoreline management can generally be characterized as both market and government failure in effectively protecting the publics’ interest in maintaining healthy shoreline resources. Therefore coastal development has proceeded in spite of negative externalities and market imbalances resulting in inefficient resource management driven by the individual ambitions of private shoreline property owners to develop their property to their highest and best use. Federally derived property rights will protect continuation of existing uses along privately owned shorelines; therefore, a fundamental challenge remains in sustainable management of existing shoreline resources while also restoring ecological functions lost to past mistakes in an effort to increase the ecologic resiliency within the region. (PDF contains 5 pages)

San Francisco Bay regional sediment management strategy development

The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), in continued partnership with the San Francisco Bay Long Term Management Strategies (LTMS) Agencies, is undertaking the development of a Regional Sediment Management Plan for the San Francisco Bay estuary and its watershed (estuary). Regional sediment management (RSM) is the integrated management of littoral, estuarine, and riverine sediments to achieve balanced and sustainable solutions to sediment related needs. Regional sediment management recognizes sediment as a resource. Sediment processes are important components of coastal and riverine systems that are integral to environmental and economic vitality. It relies on the context of the sediment system and forecasting the long-range effects of management actions when making local project decisions. In the San Francisco Bay estuary, the sediment system includes the Sacramento and San Joaquin delta, the bay, its local tributaries and the near shore coastal littoral cell. Sediment flows from the top of the watershed, much like water, to the coast, passing through rivers, marshes, and embayments on its way to the ocean. Like water, sediment is vital to these habitats and their inhabitants, providing nutrients and the building material for the habitat itself. When sediment erodes excessively or is impounded behind structures, the sediment system becomes imbalanced, and rivers become clogged or conversely, shorelines, wetlands and subtidal habitats erode. The sediment system continues to change in response both to natural processes and human activities such as climate change and shoreline development. Human activities that influence the sediment system include flood protection programs, watershed management, navigational dredging, aggregate mining, shoreline development, terrestrial, riverine, wetland, and subtidal habitat restoration, and beach nourishment. As observed by recent scientific analysis, the San Francisco Bay estuary system is changing from one that was sediment rich to one that is erosional. Such changes, in conjunction with increasing sea level rise due to climate change, require that the estuary sediment and sediment transport system be managed as a single unit. To better manage the system, its components, and human uses of the system, additional research and knowledge of the system is needed. Fortunately, new sediment science and modeling tools provide opportunities for a vastly improved understanding of the sediment system, predictive capabilities and analysis of potential individual and cumulative impacts of projects. As science informs management decisions, human activities and management strategies may need to be modified to protect and provide for existing and future infrastructure and ecosystem needs. (PDF contains 3 pages)

Sea-level rise in Hawaii: Implications for future shoreline locations and Hawaii coastal management

Management of coastal development in Hawaii is based on the location of the certified shoreline, which is representative of the upper limit of marine inundation within the last several years. Though the certified shoreline location is significantly more variable than long-term erosion indicators, its migration will still follow the coastline's general trend. The long-term migration of Hawaii’s coasts will be significantly controlled by rising sea level. However, land use decisions adjacent to the shoreline and the shape and nature of the nearshore environment are also important controls to coastal migration. Though each of the islands has experienced local sea-level rise over the course of the last century, there are still locations across the islands of Kauai, Oahu, and Maui, which show long- term accretion or anomalously high erosion rates relative to their regions. As a result, engineering rules of thumb such as the Brunn rule do not always predict coastal migration and beach profile equilibrium in Hawaii. With coastlines facing all points of the compass rose, anthropogenic alteration of the coasts, complex coastal environments such as coral reefs, and the limited capacity to predict coastal change, Hawaii will require a more robust suite of proactive coastal management policies to weather future changes to its coastline. Continuing to use the current certified shoreline, adopting more stringent coastal setback rules similar to Kauai County, adding realistic sea-level rise components for all types of coastal planning, and developing regional beach management plans are some of the recommended adaptation strategies for Hawaii. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Reforming state-level coastal management and development policies: strategic retreat as an innovative, proactive and equitable coastal environmental management strategy

Atlantic and Gulf Coast shorelines include some of the most unique and biologically rich ecosystems in the United States that provide immeasurable aesthetic, habitat and economic benefits. Natural coastal ecosystems, however, are under increasing threat from rampant and irresponsible growth and development. Once a boon to local economies, complex natural forces – enhanced by global climate change and sea level rise - are now considered hazards and eroding the very foundation upon which coastal development is based. For nearly a century, beach restoration and erosion control structures have been used to artificially stabilize shorelines in an effort to protect structures and infrastructure. Beach restoration, the import and emplacement of sand on an eroding beach, is expensive, unpredictable, inefficient and may result in long-term environmental impacts. The detrimental environmental impacts of erosion control structures such as sea walls, groins, bulkheads and revetments include sediment deficits, accelerated erosion and beach loss. These and other traditional responses to coastal erosion and storm impacts- along with archaic federal and state policies, subsidies and development incentives - are costly, encourage risky development, artificially increase property values of high-risk or environmentally sensitive properties, reduce the post-storm resilience of shorelines, damage coastal ecosystems and are becoming increasingly unsustainable. Although communities, coastal managers and property owners face increasingly complex and difficult challenges, there is an emerging public, social and political awareness that, without meaningful policy reforms, coastal ecosystems and economies are in jeopardy. Strategic retreat is a sustainable, interdisciplinary management strategy that supports the proactive, planned removal of vulnerable coastal development; reduces risk; increases shoreline resiliency and ensures long term protection of coastal systems. Public policies and management strategies that can overcome common economic misperceptions and promote the removal of vulnerable development will provide state and local policy makers and coastal managers with an effective management tool that concomitantly addresses the economic, environmental, legal and political issues along developed shorelines. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Reforming state-level coastal management and development policies: strategic retreat as an innovative, proactive and equitable coastal environmental management strategy

Atlantic and Gulf Coast shorelines include some of the most unique and biologically rich ecosystems in the United States that provide immeasurable aesthetic, habitat and economic benefits. Natural coastal ecosystems, however, are under increasing threat from rampant and irresponsible growth and development. Once a boon to local economies, complex natural forces – enhanced by global climate change and sea level rise - are now considered hazards and eroding the very foundation upon which coastal development is based. For nearly a century, beach restoration and erosion control structures have been used to artificially stabilize shorelines in an effort to protect structures and infrastructure. Beach restoration, the import and emplacement of sand on an eroding beach, is expensive, unpredictable, inefficient and may result in long-term environmental impacts. The detrimental environmental impacts of erosion control structures such as sea walls, groins, bulkheads and revetments include sediment deficits, accelerated erosion and beach loss. These and other traditional responses to coastal erosion and storm impacts- along with archaic federal and state policies, subsidies and development incentives - are costly, encourage risky development, artificially increase property values of high-risk or environmentally sensitive properties, reduce the post-storm resilience of shorelines, damage coastal ecosystems and are becoming increasingly unsustainable. Although communities, coastal managers and property owners face increasingly complex and difficult challenges, there is an emerging public, social and political awareness that, without meaningful policy reforms, coastal ecosystems and economies are in jeopardy. Strategic retreat is a sustainable, interdisciplinary management strategy that supports the proactive, planned removal of vulnerable coastal development; reduces risk; increases shoreline resiliency and ensures long term protection of coastal systems. Public policies and management strategies that can overcome common economic misperceptions and promote the removal of vulnerable development will provide state and local policy makers and coastal managers with an effective management tool that concomitantly addresses the economic, environmental, legal and political issues along developed shorelines. (PDF contains 4 pages)

The island of Kauai, Hawaii's progressive shoreline setback and coastal protection ordinance

Approximately two-thirds of coastal and Great Lakes states have some type of shoreline construction setback or construction control line requiring development to be a certain distance from the shoreline or other coastal feature (OCRM, 2008). Nineteen of 30 coastal states currently use erosion rates for new construction close to the shoreline. Seven states established setback distances based on expected years from the shoreline: the remainder specify a fixed setback distance (Heinz Report, 2000). Following public hearings by the County of Kauai Planning Commission and Kauai County Council, the ‘Shoreline Setback and Coastal Protection Ordinance’ was signed by the Mayor of Kauai on January 25, 2008. After a year of experience implementing this progressive, balanced shoreline setback ordinance several amendments were recently incorporated into the Ordinance (#887; Bill #2319 Draft 3). The Kauai Planning Department is presently drafting several more amendments to improve the effectiveness of the Ordinance. The intent of shoreline setbacks is to establish a buffer zone to protect shorefront development from loss due to coastal erosion - for a period of time; to provide protection from storm waves; to allow the natural dynamic cycles of erosion and accretion of beaches and dunes to occur; to maintain beach and dune habitat; and, to maintain lateral beach access and open space for the enjoyment of the natural shoreline environment. In addition, a primary goal of the Kauai setback ordinance is to avoid armoring or hardening of the shore which along eroding coasts has been documented to ultimately eliminate the fronting beach. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Developing alternative shoreline armoring strategies: the living shoreline approach in North Carolina

This paper reviews the scientific data on the ecosystem services provided by shoreline habitats, the evidence for adverse impacts from bulkheading on those habitats and services, and describes alternative approaches to shoreline stabilization, which minimize adverse impacts to the shoreline ecosystem. Alternative shoreline stabilization structures that incorporate natural habitats, also known as living shorelines, have been popularized by environmental groups and state regulatory agencies in the mid-Atlantic. Recent data on living shoreline projects in North Carolina that include a stone sill demonstrate that the sills increase sedimentation rates, that after 3 years marshes behind the sills have slightly reduced biomass, and that the living shoreline projects exhibit similar rates of fishery utilization as nearby natural fringing marshes. Although the current emphasis on shoreline armoring in Puget Sound is on steeper, higher-energy shorelines, armoring of lower-energy shorelines may become an issue in the future with expansion of residential development and projected rates of sea level rise. The implementation of regulatory policy on estuarine shoreline stabilization in North Carolina and elsewhere is presented. The regulatory and public education issues experienced in North Carolina, which have made changes in estuarine shoreline stabilization policy difficult, may inform efforts to adopt a sustainable shoreline armoring strategy in Puget Sound. A necessary foundation for regulatory change in shoreline armoring policy, and public support for that change, is rigorous scientific assessment of the variety of services that natural shoreline habitats provide both to the ecosystem and to coastal communities, and evidence demonstrating that shoreline armoring can adversely impact the provision of those services.