Magnitude and Extent of Contaminated Sediment and Toxicity in Chesapeake Bay

INTRODUCTION: This report summarizes the results of NOAA's sediment toxicity, chemistry, and benthic community studies in the Chesapeake Bay estuary. As part of the National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program, NOAA has conducted studies to determine the spatial extent and severity of chemical contamination and associated adverse biological effects in coastal bays and estuaries of the United States since 1991. Sediment contamination in U.S. coastal areas is a major environmental issue because of its potential toxic effects on biological resources and often, indirectly, on human health. Thus, characterizing and delineating areas of sediment contamination and toxicity and demonstrating their effect(s) on benthic living resources are viewed as important goals of coastal resource management. Benthic community studies have a history of use in regional estuarine monitoring programs and have been shown to be an effective indicator for describing the extent and magnitude of pollution impacts in estuarine ecosystems, as well as for assessing the effectiveness of management actions. Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuarine system in the United States. Including tidal tributaries, the Bay has approximately 18,694 km of shoreline (more than the entire US West Coast). The watershed is over 165,000 km2 (64,000 miles2), and includes portions of six states (Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia) and the District of Columbia. The population of the watershed exceeds 15 million people. There are 150 rivers and streams in the Chesapeake drainage basin. Within the watershed, five major rivers - the Susquehanna, Potomac, Rappahannock, York and James - provide almost 90% of the freshwater to the Bay. The Bay receives an equal volume of water from the Atlantic Ocean. In the upper Bay and tributaries, sediments are fine-grained silts and clays. Sediments in the middle Bay are mostly made of silts and clays derived from shoreline erosion. In the lower Bay, by contrast, the sediments are sandy. These particles come from shore erosion and inputs from the Atlantic Ocean. The introduction of European-style agriculture and large scale clearing of the watershed produced massive shifts in sediment dynamics of the Bay watershed. As early as the mid 1700s, some navigable rivers were filled in by sediment and sedimentation caused several colonial seaports to become landlocked. Toxic contaminants enter the Bay via atmospheric deposition, dissolved and particulate runoff from the watershed or direct discharge. While contaminants enter the Bay from several sources, sediments accumulate many toxic contaminants and thus reveal the status of input for these constituents. In the watershed, loading estimates indicate that the major sources of contaminants are point sources, stormwater runoff, atmospheric deposition, and spills. Point sources and urban runoff in the Bay proper contribute large quantities of contaminants. Pesticide inputs to the Bay have not been quantified. Baltimore Harbor and the Elizabeth River remain among the most contaminated areas in the Unites States. In the mainstem, deep sediment core analyses indicate that sediment accumulation rates are 2-10 times higher in the northern Bay than in the middle and lower Bay, and that sedimentation rates are 2-10 times higher than before European settlement throughout the Bay (NOAA 1998). The core samples show a decline in selected PAH compounds over the past several decades, but absolute concentrations are still 1 to 2 orders of magnitude above 'pristine' conditions. Core data also indicate that concentrations of PAHs, PCBs and, organochlorine pesticides do not demonstrate consistent trends over 25 years, but remain 10 times lower than sediments in the tributaries. In contrast, tri-butyl-tin (TBT) concentrations in the deep cores have declined significantly since it=s use was severely restricted. (PDF contains 241 pages)

Seagrass and Aquatic Habitat Assessment Workshop Summary

Seagrass communities are among the richest and most productive, photoautotrophic coastal systems in the world. They protect and improve water quality, provide shoreline stabilization, and are important habitats for an array of fish, birds, and other wildlife. Hence, much can be gained by protecting and restoring these important living resources. Human’s impact on these vital resources from population growth, pollution, and physical damage from boating and other activities can disrupt the growth of these seagrasses communities and have devastating effects on their health and vitality. Inventory and monitoring are required to determine the dynamics of seagrasses and devise better protection and restoration for these rich resources. The purpose of this seagrass workshop, sponsored by NOAA’s CSC , USGS, and FMRI, was to move toward greater objectivity and accuracy in seagrass mapping and monitoring. This workshop helped foster interaction and communication among seagrass professionals. In order to begin the process of determining the best uniform mapping process for the biological research community. Increasing such awareness among the seagrass and management communities, it is hoped that an improved understanding of the monitoring and mapping process will lead to more effective and efficient preservation os submerged aquatic vegetation. (PDF contains 20 pages)

Science-based restoration monitoring of coastal habitats, Volume One: A framework for monitoring plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000 (Public Law 160-457)

Executive Summary: The Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 (ERA), Title I of the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, was created to promote the restoration of habitats along the coast of the United States (including the US protectorates and the Great Lakes). The NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science was charged with the development of a guidance manual for monitoring plans under this Act. This guidance manual, titled Science-Based Restoration Monitoring of Coastal Habitats, is written in two volumes. It provides technical assistance, outlines necessary steps, and provides useful tools for the development and implementation of sound scientific monitoring of coastal restoration efforts. In addition, this manual offers a means to detect early warnings that the restoration is on track or not, to gauge how well a restoration site is functioning, to coordinate projects and efforts for consistent and successful restoration, and to evaluate the ecological health of specific coastal habitats both before and after project completion (Galatowitsch et al. 1998). The following habitats have been selected for discussion in this manual: water column, rock bottom, coral reefs, oyster reefs, soft bottom, kelp and other macroalgae, rocky shoreline, soft shoreline, submerged aquatic vegetation, marshes, mangrove swamps, deepwater swamps, and riverine forests. The classification of habitats used in this document is generally based on that of Cowardin et al. (1979) in their Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, as called for in the ERA Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy. This manual is not intended to be a restoration monitoring “cookbook” that provides templates of monitoring plans for specific habitats. The interdependence of a large number of site-specific factors causes habitat types to vary in physical and biological structure within and between regions and geographic locations (Kusler and Kentula 1990). Monitoring approaches used should be tailored to these differences. However, even with the diversity of habitats that may need to be restored and the extreme geographic range across which these habitats occur, there are consistent principles and approaches that form a common basis for effective monitoring. Volume One, titled A Framework for Monitoring Plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, begins with definitions and background information. Topics such as restoration, restoration monitoring, estuaries, and the role of socioeconomics in restoration are discussed. In addition, the habitats selected for discussion in this manual are briefly described. (PDF contains 116 pages)

The impacts of coastal protection structures in California’s Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

This report outlines the potential impacts of coastal protection structures on the resources of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. At least 15 miles of the Sanctuary’s 300-mile shoreline are currently armored with seawalls and riprap revetments. Most of these coastal protection structures are placed above the mean high tide line, the official boundary of the Sanctuary, yet some influences of armoring impinge on the marine realm and on recreational use. In addition, continued sea level rise and accompanying coastal retreat will force many of these structures below the high tide line over time. The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary staff has recognized the significance of coastal armoring, identifying it as a critical issue in the Coastal Armoring Action Plan of the draft Joint Management Plan. This summary is intended to provide general background information for Sanctuary policies on coastal armoring. The impacts discussed include: aesthetic depreciation, beach loss due to placement, access restriction, loss of sand supply from eroding cliffs, passive erosion, and active erosion. In addition, the potential biological impacts are explored. Finally, an appraisal of how differing armor types compare in relation to impacts, expense and engineering is presented. While the literature cited in this report focus predominantly on the California coast, the framework for this discussion could have implications for other actively eroding coastlines. (PDF contains 26 pages.)

A Floristic and ecological survey of Assateague Island, Virgina-Maryland

Assateague Island is an offshore bar comprising the south-eastern coast of Maryland and the northeastern coast of Virgina. It is part of the system of discontinuous barrier reefs or bars which occupy most of the Atlantic shoreline from Florida to Massachusetts. These are unstable bars, continuously influenced by storm winds and tides which provide a distinct and rigorous habitat for the vegetation there. General floras of the Delmarva Peninusla do not mention Assateague Island specifically. The objective is to prepare a catalog of the vascular plants of Assateague Island and to describe the communities in which they are found, in the hope it will add to the knowledge of barrier reef vegetation.

Mechanical control of floating aquatic weed: Kainji Lake experience

The paper describes the uniqueness and invasiveness of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) on Lake Kainji (Nigeria). The mechanical blocking device design concept based on the Kainji Lake flooding regime is also highlighted. Water hyacinth coverage, that was over 23% at high water in level in 1994, was reduced to 0.75% in the same period in 2000. Although this feat cannot be wholly ascribed to mechanical control effort alone, the first year of the device's full operation more than 1.04 million kg of fresh weight of water hyacinth were trapped, collected and deposited in two separate dumping pits, each at about 1 km off the shoreline of either side of the Lake. On further analysis over a period of one year of uncleared inflow of water hyacinth indicated the effectiveness of the bloom. Recommendations are advanced for the use of such local but highly technical knowledge to control floating water hyacinth that is vastly taking over the intricate network of Nigerian water systems and within the West African sub-region

Regulation in Uganda's Lake Victoria fishery: historical and contemporary conditions

This paper sets out to explore how Uganda's lake Victoria fishery has been managed. It explores the management of the fishery during the protectorate period, and argues that the apparent success of regulation during this time may be attributed to the very heightened controls arising from Sleeping Sickness Controls. Once these were removed, entry into the fishery was rapid and uncontrolled, and the resultant impact on fish stocks was quickly felt. With its huge area, considerable shoreline, and innumerable islands, the lake Victoria fisheries service was quickly overwhelmed and disbanded as a result. In the early independence years, the Republic's government focused on developing the fishery, plans thwarted by turmoil of, and following, Idi Amin's reign. More recently, the fishery has prospered from Uganda's entry into the Nile perch fillet export market, which ahs adversely affected stocks. We present and comment on recently collected data that considers fishers' impressions of the status of the fishery, regulations and future managerial possibilities, and comment on these in the light of recent changes to Uganda's fisheries administration

Frame survey of Kainji Lake, northern Nigeria, 1996

Since 1993, annual frame surveys have been conducted by the Nigerian-German Kainji Lake Fisheries Promotion Project to determine the distribution and number of fishing localities, fishing canoes and fishing gears around Kainji Lake, Nigeria. The total number of fishing localities has increased from 221 in 1993 to 286 in 1996. The fishing localities included 245 permanent fishing villages, 29 permanent fishing camps, 8 temporary fishing camps (with fishermen from Kainji Lake) and 4 temporary fishing camps (with fishermen from outside Kainji Lake area). There was an increase in the total number of fishing entrepreneurs, fishing assistants and fishing canoes over the years. A total number of 5,499 fishing entrepreneurs, 12,449 fishing assistants and 9,278 fishing canoes were recorded during the 1996 frame survey. From 1995 there was a decrease in the number of shoreline fisherfolk and a decrease in the number of transport canoes, the number of engines remained the same. During the 1996 survey, a total number of 18,655 gill nets, 1,560 drift nets, 753 beach seines, 5,548 cast nets, 7,400 longlines and 36,979 traps were recorded. The concentration of the gears (number per km shoreline) was highest in substrata 06 and 08. The total number of gill nets increased from 17,680 in 1995 to 18,655 in 1996. For the remaining 5 gear types a decrease in number was observed. Despite increasing numbers of gears on the lake, of concern is the decline recorded in all the fishing methods of the number of gears owned by individual entrepreneurs. This was most notable in the gill net and longline fisheries. These two fisheries have the lowest daily catch values and coupled with the problem of gear theft on the lake, ownership in future, may be expected to fall further. The number of larger fishing units also declined as did the number of gears new entrants enter the fishery with. The decline is particularly worrying for the beach seine fishery where diversification into other fishing methods would be beneficial in light of the present ban on seines. The group of not active fishing entrepreneurs (those who do not themselves participate in fishing activities) had the highest ownership of gears whilst the new entrants into the fishery had the lowest. There was evidence that these new entrants into the fishery were using cast nets which is worrying given the trend of using smaller mesh size of this gearSince 1993, annual frame surveys have been conducted by the Nigerian-German Kainji Lake Fisheries Promotion Project to determine the distribution and number of fishing localities, fishing canoes and fishing gears around Kainji Lake, Nigeria. The total number of fishing localities has increased from 221 in 1993 to 286 in 1996. The fishing localities included 245 permanent fishing villages, 29 permanent fishing camps, 8 temporary fishing camps (with fishermen from Kainji Lake) and 4 temporary fishing camps (with fishermen from outside Kainji Lake area). There was an increase in the total number of fishing entrepreneurs, fishing assistants and fishing canoes over the years. A total number of 5,499 fishing entrepreneurs, 12,449 fishing assistants and 9,278 fishing canoes were recorded during the 1996 frame survey. From 1995 there was a decrease in the number of shoreline fisherfolk and a decrease in the number of transport canoes, the number of engines remained the same. During the 1996 survey, a total number of 18,655 gill nets, 1,560 drift nets, 753 beach seines, 5,548 cast nets, 7,400 longlines and 36,979 traps were recorded. The concentration of the gears (number per km shoreline) was highest in substrata 06 and 08. The total number of gill nets increased from 17,680 in 1995 to 18,655 in 1996. For the remaining 5 gear types a decrease in number was observed. Despite increasing numbers of gears on the lake, of concern is the decline recorded in all the fishing methods of the number of gears owned by individual entrepreneurs. This was most notable in the gill net and longline fisheries. These two fisheries have the lowest daily catch values and coupled with the problem of gear theft on the lake, ownership in future, may be expected to fall further. The number of larger fishing units also declined as did the number of gears new entrants enter the fishery with. The decline is particularly worrying for the beach seine fishery where diversification into other fishing methods would be beneficial in light of the present ban on seines. The group of not active fishing entrepreneurs (those who do not themselves participate in fishing activities) had the highest ownership of gears whilst the new entrants into the fishery had the lowest. There was evidence that these new entrants into the fishery were using cast nets which is worrying given the trend of using smaller mesh size of this gear. (PDF contains 44 pages)

Assessing societal vulnerability of U.S. Pacific Northwest communities to storm induced coastal change

Progressive increases in storm intensities and extreme wave heights have been documented along the U.S. West Coast. Paired with global sea level rise and the potential for an increase in El Niño occurrences, these trends have substantial implications for the vulnerability of coastal communities to natural coastal hazards. Community vulnerability to hazards is characterized by the exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of human-environmental systems that influence potential impacts. To demonstrate how societal vulnerability to coastal hazards varies with both physical and social factors, we compared community exposure and sensitivity to storm-induced coastal change scenarios in Tillamook (Oregon) and Pacific (Washington) Counties. While both are backed by low-lying coastal dunes, communities in these two counties have experienced different shoreline change histories and have chosen to use the adjacent land in different ways. Therefore, community vulnerability varies significantly between the two counties. Identifying the reasons for this variability can help land-use managers make decisions to increase community resilience and reduce vulnerability in spite of a changing climate. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Deepwater shorelines

Research has proven that Shoreline Erosion is caused by excess water contained within the shore face. This Research presents an opportunity to control erosion by managing the near shore water table. Our Research on Bogue Banks North Carolina suggests that our buildings and other impervious surfaces collect and concentrate water from storm rain runoff into the surface water table and within the critical beach front water exit point. Presently our Potable Fresh Water is supplied from deep wells located beneath an impervious layer of Marl. After our use, the Waste water is drained into the Surface Aquifer, the combined waste and storm rain water raises the Surface Aquifer water table and produces Erosion. The Deep Aquifers presently supplying our Potable Water have an unknown recharge rate, with increasing reports of Salt Water intrusion. We believe our Vital Fresh water supply system should be modified to supply Reverse Osmosis treatment plants from shallow wells. This will lower the Surface Water Table. These Shallow wells, either horizontal or vertical, might be located within the beach front, adjacent to high erosion risk properties. Beach Drains and Reverse Osmosis Water systems are new and proven technologies. By combining these technologies we can reduce or reverse Shore Erosion, ensure a safe Potable Water supply, reduce requirements for periodic beach nourishment, reduce taxes and protect our property well into the Future. (PDF contains 5 pages)

Climate change adaptation and planning: An example from Kailua Beach, Oahu, Hawaii

The University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program (UHSG) in partnership with the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) is developing a beach and dune management plan for Kailua Beach on the eastern shoreline of Oahu. The objective of the plan is to develop a comprehensive beach management and land use development plan for Kailua Beach that reflects the state of scientific understanding of beach processes in Kailua Bay and abutting shoreline areas and is intended to provide long-term recommendations to adapting to climate change including potential coastal hazards such as sea level rise. The development of the plan has lead to wider recognition of the significance of projected sea level rise to the region and provides the rational behind some of the land use conservation strategies. The plan takes on a critical light given global predictions for continued, possibly accelerated, sea-level rise and the ongoing focus of intense development along the Hawaiian shoreline. Hawaii’s coastal resource managers are faced with the daunting prospect of managing the effects of erosion while simultaneously monitoring and regulating high-risk coastal development that often impacts the shoreline. The beach and dune preservation plan is the first step in a more comprehensive effort prepare for and adapt to sea level rise and ensure the preservation of the beach and dune ecosystem for the benefit of present and future generations. The Kailua Beach and Dune Management plan is intended to be the first in a series of regional plans in Hawaii to address climate change adaptation through land use planning. (PDF contains 3 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)

Habitat enhancing marine structures: Creating habitat in urban waters

Although maritime regions support a large portion of the world’s human population, their value as habitat for other species is overlooked. Urban structures that are built in the marine environment are not designed or managed for the habitat they provide, and are built without considering the communities of marine organisms that could colonize them (Clynick et al., 2008). However, the urban waterfront may be capable of supporting a significant proportion of regional aquatic biodiversity (Duffy-Anderson et al., 2003). While urban shorelines will never return to their original condition, some scientists think that the habitat quality of urban waterfronts could be significantly improved through further research and some design modifications, and that many opportunities exist to make these modifications (Russel et al., 1983, Goff, 2008). Habitat enhancing marine structures (or HEMS) are a potentially promising approach to address the impact of cities on marine organisms including habitat fragmentation and degradation. HEMS are a type of habitat improvement project that are ecologically engineered to improve the habitat quality of urban marine structures such as bulkheads and docks for marine organisms. More specifically, HEMS attempt to improve or enhance the physical habitat that organisms depend on for survival in the inter- and sub-tidal waterfronts of densely populated areas. HEMS projects are targeted at areas where human-made structures cannot be significantly altered or removed. While these techniques can be used in suburban or rural areas restoration or removal is preferred in these settings, and HEMS are resorted to only if removal of the human-made structure is not an option. Recent research supports the use of HEMS projects. Researchers have examined the communities found on urban structures including docks, bulkheads, and breakwaters. Complete community shifts have been observed where the natural shoreline was sandy, silty, or muddy. There is also evidence of declines in community composition, ecosystem functioning, and increases in non-native species abundances in assemblages on urban marine structures. Researchers have identified two key differences between these substrates including the slope (seawalls are vertical; rocky shores contain multiple slopes) and microhabitat availability (seawalls have very little; rocky shores contain many different types). In response, researchers have suggested designing and building seawalls with gentler slopes or a combination of horizontal and vertical surfaces. Researchers have also suggested incorporating microhabitat, including cavities designed to retain water during low tide, crevices, and other analogous features (Chapman, 2003; Moreira et al., 2006) (PDF contains 4 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)

Adapting to climate change: Combining economics and geomorphology in coastal policy

How is climate change affecting our coastal environment? How can coastal communities adapt to sea level rise and increased storm risk? These questions have garnered tremendous interest from scientists and policy makers alike, as the dynamic coastal environment is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Over half the world population lives and works in a coastal zone less than 120 miles wide, thereby being continuously affected by the changes in the coastal environment [6]. Housing markets are directly influenced by the physical processes that govern coastal systems. Beach towns like Oak Island in North Carolina (NC) face severe erosion, and the tax assesed value of one coastal property fell by 93% in 2007 [9]. With almost ninety percent of the sandy beaches in the US facing moderate to severe erosion [8], coastal communities often intervene to stabilize the shoreline and hold back the sea in order to protect coastal property and infrastructure. Beach nourishment, which is the process of rebuilding a beach by periodically replacing an eroding section of the beach with sand dredged from another location, is a policy for erosion control in many parts of the US Atlantic and Pacific coasts [3]. Beach nourishment projects in the United States are primarily federally funded and implemented by the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) after a benefit-cost analysis. Benefits from beach nourishment include reduction in storm damage and recreational benefits from a wider beach. Costs would include the expected cost of construction, present value of periodic maintenance, and any external cost such as the environmental cost associated with a nourishment project (NOAA). Federal appropriations for nourishment totaled $787 million from 1995 to 2002 [10]. Human interventions to stabilize shorelines and physical coastal dynamics are strongly coupled. The value of the beach, in the form of storm protection and recreation amenities, is at least partly capitalized into property values. These beach values ultimately influence the benefit-cost analysis in support of shoreline stabilization policy, which, in turn, affects the shoreline dynamics. This paper explores the policy implications of this circularity. With a better understanding of the physical-economic feedbacks, policy makers can more effectively design climate change adaptation strategies. (PDF contains 4 pages)