Maine's coastal sand beaches recreation and conservation

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

MAINE'S COASTAL SAND BEACHES:

RECREATION AND CONSERVATION

Prepared for the
Bureau of Parks & Recreation
:r Department of Conservation
State of Maine

James A, St. Pierre

GB
459.5
'M2
S35
1978

June, 19-78

MAINE'S COASTAL SAI-D BEACHES:

RECREATION AND CONSERVATION

Prepared for the
Bureau of Parks & Recreation
Department of Conservation
State of Maine

James A. St. Pierre

Work for this project has been conducted as part
of the Maine Coastal Program, Maine Bureau of Parks
and Recreation and Maine State Planning Office co-
operating. Financial assistance was provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, administered
by the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

June 19T8

1
us or
NOAA C@=al S LUMM7
2234 South Hobson Avenue
-A- SC 2940549M j

CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I

2.0 THE NATURAL RESOURCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.1 Beach Defined . . . . 7

2.2 Geology , 0 1 f . P 1 8

2.3 Botanical Features 9

2.4 Common and Special Characteristics 10

2.5 Beach Extent

2.6 Threats to the Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.61 Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.62 Recreational Use . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.63 Vehicular Use . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.64 Erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2.65 Private Ownership . . . . . . . 14

2.66 Property Taxes . . . 14

3.0 OWNERSHIP AND USE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.1 Ownership . . . . . . . . . 17

3.2 Recreational Use & Preferences . . . . . . . . 20

3.3 Use Impacts . . . . . . I . . . I . I . I . 22

4.0 CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4.1 Federal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

4.11 Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

4.12 Coastal Zone Management . . . . . . . 28

4.13 Policy . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Page

4,2 State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

4,21 Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

4,22 Natural & Critical Areas . . . . . . 34

4,23 Statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

4,24 Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

4.3 Local . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

4.31 Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

4.32 Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

4.33 Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

4.4 Private . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

4.41 Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

4.42 Easements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

4.43 Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

5.0 EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

5.1 Beaches of State Level Significance . . . . . . . . . . 41

5,2 Proposed Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

5.21 Moritorium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

5.22 Amend Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

5.23 Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

5.24 Program Review . . . . . . . . . . . 44

5.25 Seawalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

5.26 Acquisition and Relocation . . . . . 45

5.27 Open Beaches Act & Public Rights
of Ways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

5.28 Critical Area Registration . . . . . . . 46

5.29 Education Program . . . . . . . . . 46

5.30 Offroad Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . 46

5.31 Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Page

6,0 SOUTHERN BEACHES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

6.1 Ownexship and Access 51

6,2 Visitatton. 51

6,3 Facilities 52

6.4 Evaluation t 53

7.0 NORTHERN BEACRES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

7.1 Ownership . . . . 57

7.2 Visitation 0 57

7. 3 Facilities * 57

7.4 Evaluation 1 57

8.0 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

8.1 Program Recommendations 61

8.2 Site Recommendations . . . . . . . 63

9.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

APPENDIX EXHIBITS

There is a quiet secluded beach wedged in
between, and hence ptotected by, two jutting
stretches of land. Like other small beaches
scattered here and there along the coast of
Maine, its beauty is one of contrasts, and
its significance lies in the analogy of life
that these contrasts suggest.

--Faith Johnson,
"A Beach of Life,"
Maine Life, January, 1977

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In September 1976, the Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreationin
cooperation with the State Planning Office, initiated a study
to identify sites of outstanding significance in Maine"s coastal
area. Sites were sought which would be suitable for one or more
forms of outdoor recreation and which could be considered worthy
of protection because of the importance of their natural features.

Early in the project it became clear that due to their many unique
characteristics, Maine's coastal beaches would be best treated
apart from other sites,

This document is a working paper summarizing efforts undertaken
during 1977-78 to outline beach recreation and conservation con,-
siderations from a state level perspective. It is background in-
formation for a larger report, The Maine Coast; Recreation and
Open Space, prepared for the Department of Conservation and the
Committee on Coastal Development and Conservation.

No analysis of outdoor recreation and conservation opportunities in
Maine would be adequate without a special discussion of seaside
beaches, because beaches are such an important recreational feature
and open space resource, particularly in southern coastal Maine.
Every year millions of residents and out of staters use the beaches
for all types of recreational activities,

On January 9 and February 6-7,1978 two storms of record struck with
full force the coastal beaches of southwestern Maine, The storms
caused property damages in Maine estimated at more than $47 million.
They were both a personal tragedy for many individuals and a
societal debit where public beach resources were degraded. But
inasmuch as they heightened public awareness, the storms may have,
in some sense, been beneficial. Certainly they taught a lucid
lesson for the future: be careful about building at the edge of
the sea and about what uses are made of coastal beaches.

There are clear, objective scientific reasons why coastal erosion
occurs, will continue from natural causes,, and will be aggravated
by human intervention. Marine geologists know very well, for
example, that seawalls, in some locations, can accelerate shore-
line erosion and ultimately debase those beach areas which are a
public resource. At the same time, inappropriate building con-
tinues on coastal wetlands, including beach areas, in Maine.
That much of this development will suffer expensive (personal and
public) property loss from future flooding and erosion is entire-
ly predictable. It is also avoidable.

As the importance, particularly the recreational importance@ of
our coastal beaches continues to grow, it behooves us to learn to

treat these fragile resources with the long term management res"
pect the7 command, In the end any loss will be borne by all of
us, while benefits retained can accrue to us collectively as a
society,

A clear State policy, rooted in protecting the public's safety,
welfare and long term recreation and conservation interests, re-
garding the prevention and restitution of shoreland property
losses, needs to be formulated. This implies public acquisition
of some sites, relocation of some houses and businesses, re-
striction of shoreline development with strict setbacks, and
serious review of incremental and cumulative impacts of coastal
land use and growth.

If we are to continue to enjoy coastal beaches, steps must be
taken to insure their protection for recreational use and resource
conservation. This report presents information which should be
helpful in defining the issues at hand and in suggesting solutions
to those problems

Briefly stated the objectives of the report are;

- to compile and present in an understandable format information
on the recreation/conservation activities relating to Maine's
coastal beaches;

- to make this information available to public and private agencies
and individuals concerned with the use and protection of coastal
beaches; and

- to suggest proposals, based on information gathered, for the
management of coastal beaches for conservation and recreational
use.

Every grain of sand on a New England beach
has a long and eventful history. Before it
was sand, it was rock-- splintered by the
chizels of the frost, crushed under advancing
glaciers and carried forward with the ice in
its slow advance, then ground and polished in
the mill of the surf.... Now in this particular
moment of its history, it belongs to the sea's
edge--swept up and down the beaches with the
tides or drifted alongshore with the currents,
continuouly sifted and sorted, packed down,
washed out, or set adrift again, as always
and endlessly the waves work over the sands.

--Rachel Carson,
The Edge of the Sea, 1955

2.0 THE NATURAL RESOURCE

2.1 Beach Defined

Beaches may be defined in a variety of ways depending on one's ob-
jectives. The Maine courts have had a difficult time defining the
beach and the shore in legal terms. The study Maine Law Affecting
Marine Resources included the following definitions from cases of
shore:l

What is the sea shore must first be defined. The sea
shore must be understood to be the margin of the sea
in its usual and ordinary state. Thus, when the tide
is out, the low water mark is the margin of the sea,
and when the sea is full, the margin is high water
mark, The sea shore is therefore all ground between
high water mark and low water mark (Storer v. Freeman,
6 Mass 435, p. 439; Laysesk v. Bango@ Bank, 8 Me. 85 pg.
90 (1831).

By beach, it is to be understood the shore or strand;
and it has been decided, that the seashore is the space
between high and low water mark (Coltis v. Hussey, 15 Me,
237, 241 (1839).

The word beach, must be deemed to designate land washed
by the sea and its waves; and to be synonymous with
shore (Littlefield v. Littlefield, 28 Me. 180, 181 (1848),

The "shore" is the ground between ordinary high and low
water mark, the flats, and a well defined monument
(Montgomery v. Reed, 69 Me. 510, 514 (1879); Morrison
v. Bank, 88 Me. 155, 160, 33 A. 782 (1895).

The word [shore] strictly means that space which is
alternately covered and exposed by the flow and ebb of
the tide, the flats between ordinary high and low water
mark (Morrison, supra).

The term intertidal zone also refers to the area between high and
low water, the area over which the ordinary tides flow daily.

lHarriet P. Henry, et. al, Maine Law Affecting Marine Resources,
(Prepared under the joint sponsorship of the School of Law of
the University of Maine and the National Science Foundation,
1969-70)

Maine beaches can roughly be characterized as sand, gravel, cobble
or a mixture of these depending on sediment size. For the purposes
of this discussion, the sand beach shall be defined as the zone of
unconsolidated material (particles approximately 0.0625 mm to 2mm in
size) that extends from the maximum low water line landward to in-
clude those supratidal formations which have a substrate of sand
and associated floral communities as well as salt marshes. This
definition incorporates a holistic ecosystem approach, It encom-
passes not merely the beach face but the entire beach system, in-
cluding the intertidal zone, the frontal dune ridge, the back
dune area and the transitional salt marsh-estuary area, It is
important, particularly in managing sand beaches, to treat the
total beach ecological system as an integral unit.

2.2 Beach Geology

Nelson & Fink have organized a four group classification scheme
for Maine's coastal beaches according to response forms and geo,:-
morphic features. This scheme categorizes beach response forms
by (1) major wave or (2) wind depositional forms, (3) minor wave
depositional-erosional forms and (4) sedimentary structures.
Generally speaking, in southern Maine, the most extensive and most
important recreational beaches are large fringing beaches such as
Old orchard, Crescent and Fortunes Rocks Beaches. Along many of
these beaches the entire dune field, from the frontal dune ridge
through the aeolian flat, has been developed resulting in a inter"
ruption of the natural beach dynamics. A few large beaches do remain
in a relatively natural state. Scarborough Beach, for instance, is
a closed barrier beach with low relief parabolic dunes and healthy
stands of wormwood, beach heather and pitch pine.

East of Georgetown are a large number of small pocket beaches.
Pemaquid Beach, for example, is a mid-bay pocket beach with an un-
broken strandline fronting a salt marsh. Many beaches along this
part of the coast are located on offshore islands. Sand Cove Beach
on Marshall Island is a pocket beach with a storm berm barrier pro-
tecting a fresh water marsh.

Nelson & Fink report that there are four principal sediment sources
of sand supplying Maine's coastal beaches: (1) the erosion of
distant glacial drift deposits located along rivers, (2) the re-
working of local glacial deposits by wave erosion, (3) the erosion
of nearby headland bedrock, and (4) the transport of degraded
skeletons and shells from adjacent shallow marine waters,

From its source sand is transported to and deposited at the limit
of wave action on the beach, There it is acted on by a variety of
natural physical forces. A dynamic, action-reaction equilibrium
is established as the beach material and physical forces interact.
Once an equilibrium is established it is normally only a matter of
time before the effect of an unbalancing force (e.g,p a coastal
storm) is compensated for by a feedback response, In this manner,
a give and take process-response mechanism is established.

As part of the process-response equilibrium,beaches exhibit
seasonal changes largely due to varying amounts of wave action,
During winter months they tend to be erosional with a steepened
beach face. In the spring, summer and fall they are usually, in
net, accretional, forming berms on the upper face and ridges on
the lower. At all times beaches normally have a steeper slope and
so are better drained than intertidal flats.

2.3 Beach Botanical Features

The zones of a beach ecosystem of botanical importance occur princi-
pally landward from the frontal dune ridge where there is a clear
line of vegetation growth, On the beachface itself the diversity
of lifeforms is limited by the continual shifting of the sand
grains and the flooding-dessication cycle of the tides'. In fact,
these forces allow virtually no microalgae development.

The flora of the frontal dune ridge includes dune grasses of the
highest salt, sun and temperature tolerance. To survive in this
harsh environment these plants must also thrive (1) in soils lack-
ing humus, (2) in an unstable substrate subject to extreme sand
movement, and (3) in a substrate with a widely varying supply of
moisture.

In a complex, undisturbed beach system, there is a clear zonation
of plant community types from the frontal dune ridge to the salt
marsh. Nelson & Fink have described these communities for Maine
beach-dune systems through the forest community. The foredune is
divided into the saltworts and sea rockets of the seasonal berm and
the beach grass, beach peas and dusty millers of the perennial berm.
American beachgrass is the dominant plant type of the next zone which
stretches from the frontal dune ridge to the zone of heath or shrub
growth.

The third zone, the dry dune slack community, is characterized by
beach heather and other plants which grow where salt spray and
sand burial rates are lower than for more seaward communities. An
abundance of lichens in the backdune area of certain beaches is said
to be peculiar to Maine and is the result of the high incidence of
coastal fog.

The fourth zone is the shrub community, dominated by bayberry,
Virginian rose, meadow sweet, raspberry, gooseberry and poison ivy.

The dune forest community is the most inland dry dune floral as-
sociation. Pitch pines are usually dominant where salt spray
stress is greatest. Other woody species include red maple,
Northern red oak, white birch, serviceberry and quaking aspen.
In low, moist backdune areas the dominant vegetational types are
alder, poplar, winterberry and serviceberry.

In the most complex beach systems the dunes are backed by some type
of wetland - a salt marsh, estuary, brackish pond or tidal bay.

Where a saline wetland is present, this zone is usually broken down
into the transitional marsh, the high marsh, the low marsh and the
water or flats. In the transitional zone are found salt marsh asters
and sedges. High marsh plants are subject to inundation only during
fortnightlyspring tides and other periods of high tidal action, The
dominant plant is Spartina patens. In the low marsh Spartina alter-
niflora.predominates. The low marsh is subject to inundation during
all tides.

Where there is an estuary embayment there is an invaluable biological
resource, for estuaries are one of the most nutrient rich, high
productivity environments on earth. The beach, the dunes and the
seaward salt marsh all help to protect the estuary or backdune wet-
land. Each should be treated not disparately but as part of the
whole system,

Maine beaches are the northern coastal range of a number of plant
species. It is unfortunate from an ecological point of view that
most of the major dune fields in Maine have been heavily developed
or altered by foot traffic erosion and dike construction, Develop-
ment on many beaches has precluded the detailed study of range dis-
tribution of a number of species, Those dune fields which remain
undisturbed are important for the preservation of natural diversity,
for they can provide opportunities for scientific research and
education of future generations about the natural heritage. Of
course, they are important too for the protection of the beach as a
recreational resource, and of the coastal wetlands as habitat for a
variety of marine organisms as well as a natural vessel of flood
water storage.

2.4 Common and Special Characteristics

Despite their differences, it is generally agreed that virtually all
of the beaches of the Maine coast have several things in common:

- they are recent geological formations, in evolution over the last
6000-7000 years during which time sea level has been slowly rising
relative to the land;

-they are dynamic boundaries changing position to establish an
equilibrium between interacting materials and forces;

-they are subject to some of the highest tides in the world and
generally exhibit.expansive intertidal zones;

-most are now sediment starved which implies either a diminishing
supply of sand from offshore deposits or such a rapid landward
retreat that the current supply rate is inadequate;

-they are changing (mostly eroding) at various rates in response
to an accelerated rise in sealevel; and

-they are collectively one of the state's most important recrea-
tional and economic resources.

In addition, some geologists believe that the beaches of the Maine
coast are set apart from beaches elsewhere because:

- most erosion and accretion on Maine@s small beaches result from
movements of sand primarily in an onshore-offshore direction
rather than from alongshore transport;l and

- Maine's parabolic dunes may be of national significance because
they are formed by northwest offshore winds rather than by on-
shore winds and are only infrequently obliterated by washovers
during major storms.2

2.5 Beach Extent

In assessing the recreational potential of coastal beaches, it is
most useful to look at the size of the beachface and berm, that
is, generally the foreshore and the backshore or the area between
low tide and the line of vegetation, This area, unlike the dunes
and salt marsh, is one part of the beach system most tolerant to
onsite use. But the beachface and berm are changeable and not
susceptible to precise definition by fixed measurement, though a
range of beach area can be estimated on the basis of seasonal pro-
files, A single dimensional measure, lineal extent, is often used
as an approximation of available beachfront area.

Of the approximately 3,500 miles (5630 km) of mainland and island
tidal shoreland in Maine, only a little over 70 linear miles are
sand beaches. Roughly 40% of this beach length is accounted for
by the beaches south of Casco Bay. Nonetheless, in terms of re-
creational importance the southern coastal sand beaches are far
more significant, for they accommodate the great bulk of recrea-
tional use and as a group are the most intensively used beaches in
Maine,

2.6 Threats to the Resource

Maine's coastal beaches, taken as a whole, are a scarce resource of
statewide significance, one which should be protected from degrada-
tion to maximize its utility. There are a number of impending
threats to the resource, both natural and human induced.

2.61 Development - Already many of the beaches have been drastical-
ly altered by development, Seaside'homes, walls, piers, groins and
jetties all have an effect on the ability of the beach-dune systems
to adjust to seasonal as well as long term changes. Development can
be particularly troublesome where it inhibits the natural washover

lBruce W. Nelson and L. Kenneth Fink, Geological and Botanical
Features of Sand Beach SystepE,in Maine (draft report prepared
for the Maine Critical Areas Program, 1978), p. 12
21bid, p. 54,

process, Over time, washover allows the landward migration of the
barrier beach, system - a process necessary for survival of the beach
under stress from an accelerating rise in sea level,

There is abundant evidence from other East coast systems that wash-
over is the dominant process by which beaches respond to storms and
rising sea level. At least one marine geologist feels that wash-
over processes are rapidly overtaking wind processes as the dominant
forces in the dynamics of many coastal beaches in Maine, As this
occurs, undeveloped beaches can be expected to migrate landward;
developed beaches will become more severely erosional. Though we
have a better understanding of beach dynamics than in the past and
despite recent legislation to control shoreland development,
structures continue to be built along beaches in Wells, Scarborough
and in many other coastal towns.

2.62 Recreational Use - Recreational use of beach areas may have an
adverse effect on ecosystem integrity too, The beachface is the
zone most tolerant to usual beach uses, including swimming, sun
bathing and fishing. The dune areas backing up the beach are much
less tolerant, The frontal dune ridge, for instance, is highly
susceptible to abuse. Many marine geologists and land managers say
it should not be used for any sort of development except boardwalks,
or preferably elevated crosswalks. From the viewpoint of optimum,
long term conservation of the resource, the frontal dune ridge
should never be artificially breached.

It has been suggested that there are three primary considerations
which delimit specific criteria by which the recreational carrying
capacity of Mainels coastal beaches can individually
be determined.1

1. The direct impact of parking lots and accompanying user facilities
on the vegetated portions of a beach ecosystem (viz., the dunes),

2. The impact of pedestrian traffic on the vegetated areas between
the beach and inlying parking lots and user facilities,

3. The social and managerial limits of the beachface and berm areas
which are the more use tolerant recreational portions of a
beach system.

Certainly the impact of parking lots and walkways can be minimized
through sensitive design, construction, management and an under-
standing of beach systems. Determining the carrying capacity
range of a beach may be more difficult, In any case, costs must
be reconciled against benefits, both tangible and intangible.

1L. K. Fink, "Considerations for Determining Carrying Capacity of
Mainels Coastal Beaches for Recreational Use," (unpublished),
March 1977.

2,63 Vehicular Use - Maine, unlike some areas, has not had a
serious problem with beach misuse by offroad vehicleso all terrain
vehicles, snowmobiles, airmobiles, trailbikes, dune buggies, etc.
The threat of these is always present, however, at least on private
beach properties.

2.64 Erosion - Erosion of sand on Maine's coastal beaches results
from both natural and artificial causes. Some degree of erosion is
as much a part of the natural dynamics of beach systems as is ac-
cretion.1 Nevertheless,- the most significant threat toMaine's
coastal beaches today is that of human induced erosion. The 1971
National Shoreline Study estimated that at the time there were "about
20 miles of shorefront experiencing critical erosion ... mainly in the
recreational beach areas of southern Maine where serious offshore
losses experienced during frequent storms have lowered and reduced the
beach width to below protective and recreational use requirements,,,2
The study principally addressed erosion exacerbated by beachfront de-
velopment,

In 1977, the Maine Bureau of Geology undertook an inventory of Maine
shoreline erosion, It was found that "most natural sand beaches in
Maine exhibit erosion to some degree or another,"3 Annual recession
rates at sites where repetitive observations are available range
from a fraction of a foot to more than 85 feet (26 meters). Some
of this erosion is natural, the response to stresses such as an
accelerated rise in sea level, However the loss of sand offshore
and to back beach estuaries has been enhanced by dredging, river
damming and other projects. Coastal engineering works, in particular
the construction of seawalls, is one of the most serious causes of
induced erosion on Maine's coastal sand beaches,

1 A change occurs in the location of real property lines where
water boundaries shift gradually by erosion, accretion, or re-
liction. "When the line between land and water is changed due
to the gradual deposit of soil (accretion) or by the imperceptible
recession of the water (reliction), the owner becomes entitled to
the new land, Conversely, if land bordering on water is gradually
and imperceptibly worn away by the natural elements (erosion), or
the water gradually encroaches, the owner looses such land. How-
ever, sudden or perceptible changes (avulsion) have'no effect on
the location of such boundary lines." Paul G. Creteau, Principles
of Real Estate Law (Portland, Maine: Castle Publishing Company,
1977), p. 212 n 30,
2 US Army Corps of Engineers, National Shoreline Study, (Washington,
D.C.: GPO, 1971).
3 Barry S. Timson and Donald Kale. Maine Shoreline Erosion Inventory
(unpublished, prepared for the Maine State Planning Office, 1977)
p, 50.

The consequence of building on the frontal dune ridge or back dunes
is often the destruction of personal property and the degradation
of a recreational resource important to the public at large, When
beaches are no longer capable of providing natural protection from
erosion to the backshore and, in fact, are under natural stresses
to erode further, they often become covered with gravel or exposed
to their rocky substratum terraces. The result is a diminution
of recreational appeal, The effects of historic and recent winter
storms indicate the folly and economic catastrophe of beachfront
development. There are ways, including nonstructural methods,
of mitigating erosion. Those techniques which have demonstrated
the most success at the lowest cost with the least long term,
adverse impacts on the surrounding physical environment should be
encouraged.

That shoreline erosion has become a problem of far reaching national
proportions was recognized in the National Shoreline Study.

Probably the most significant and important with respect
to erosion is the loss of beach recreation area, a valuable
natural resource. Counts of users of good beaches less
than one-half mile long show hundreds of thousands of
visitors each year, Considering all the beaches of the
United States, there are many hundred million beach visits
each year ... Obviously, beach losses affect a considerable
percentage of our population, The population expansion
and increased leisure time cause rapidly increasing demands
for beach areas, Because the quantity of beaches is limited,
continued loss of beach areas will increase in importance and
economic value.1

2.65 Private Ownership - The fact that Maine beaches are taken to
be privately owned to low water is becoming a source of trouble
for beach protection programs. As an example, in the town of Wells
a struggle has been ensuing for some time over the pumping of sand
onto nearby eroded beaches when the town harbor is dredged. Some
beach front property owners are struggling to have the sand deposited
on their depleted beaches. Others are fighting the action. The
result has been local indecision and delay of projects which could
nourish badly eroded beaches. Were the intertidal area publicly
owned, such problems might be avoided,

2.66 Property Taxes - Soaring coastal property values in recent
years have acted as a disincentive to beach conservation. As
beaches have been subdivided and sold to those willing to pay prices
heretofore associated with property in more urbanized states, tax
assessments have increased tremendously. These effects could be
the basis of tax reform proposals to encourage, rather than dis-
courage, beach conservation.

I 'US Army Corps of Engineers, National Shoreline Stud (Washington,
D.C.: GPO@ 1971), p. 13.

"People who live on a beach should be
able to live on the beach and to build,
a sea wall."

--Cam Ellis resident, news item
Maine Times, June 16, 1978

3.0 OWNERSHIP AND USE

3.1 Ownershi2

Coastal ownership patterns vary from state to state, In many states
beaches, at least from mean high tide seaward, are considered part
of the public domain. In Maine, except in a very few cases, pri-
vate ownership extends to low tide or 100 rods (503 meters) from
high tide whichever is less.1 However, many beaches in this state,
while technically privately owned, have for years been used as pub-
lic common lands. In several instances coastal communities have
budgeted funds for beach maintenance (e,g., Scarborough, Wells, York,
Saco). In some towns officials have authorized projects, such as
beach cleaning, which threaten the very resource they sought to
enhance (e.g., Old Orchard Beach, Kennebunk, Scarborough), In one
or two towns recent research has suggested that beaches heretofore
thought to be private may actually be publicly owned (e.g., Kittery).

Hence, there are no definitive figures on beach ownership for the
entire Maine coast. The.Army Corps of Engineers in its National
Shoreline Study, issued in 1971, estimated that only one-half of
one percent of the Maine coast was in public recreational use
though 3,2% was in local, state or federal public ownership2 (not
all of which is available for public use), A report on Coastal
Conservation Priorities prepared for the State Planning Office in
1973 estimated totat coastal federal ownership to be 1.2%, state
ownership 1 3%, and local ownership 0.5% of the shoreline of the
Maine coast .

For the purposes of this discussion coastal linear sand beach
ownership in Maine is estimated in Table 1.

lTo quote the 1814 Edition of Ancient Charters and Laws of the
Colony and Province of Massachusetts Bay, p. 148 (better known as
the Colony Ordinance of 1641-47): "Sec. 3. It is declared, that
in all creeks, coves, and other places about and upon salt water,
where the sea ebbs and flows, the proprietor, or the land ad.join-
ing, shall have propriety to the low water mark, where the sea
doth not ebb above a hundred rods, and not more wheresoever it
ebbs further."
2U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Shoreline Study, North
Atlantic Region (Washington, D.C.: G,PO, 1971), p. 103.
3Reed and D'Andrea, Coastal Conservation Priorities Plan (South
Gardiner, Maine, 1973) p. 1-6.

Table 1

ESTIMATES OF COASTAL LINEAR SAND BEACH OWNERSHIP IN MAINE

Jurisdiction Miles (Km) % of Coast % of Beach

Federal Beaches 0.2 0.3) 0,3

State Beaches 6,3 (10.1) 0.2 8.5

Local Beaches 9,2 (14.9) 0.3 12.5

Private Beaches 58.2 (93,7) 1,7 78,6

TOTAL** 73.9 (119.2) 2.1 10010

*Less than 0.01%
**Columns are not necessarily additive due to rounding

Federal coastal beach ownership in Maine, unlike many states, is
minimal. Only one beach of any significance, Sand Beach in Acadia
National Park, is under federal jurisdiction. Other than this,
there are some beach associated wetlands held by the Fish and Wild-
life Service. Most of these - such as the Webhannet marsh, part
o.f the Wells Beach ecosystem or the Goosfare Brook marsh, part of
the Saco Bay Beach system - are located in southern Maine,

At the State level the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife
owns portions of beach related marshes and tidal wetlands. However,
only the Bureau of Parks and Recreation holds beachface areas as-
sociated with the tra'ditional beach recreation activities. The
Bureau's beach parcels are listed in Table 2.

A number of sand beaches in Maine, such as Ogunquit and Old Orchard
Beaches, are clearly in municipal ownership, Nevertheless, many
beaches popularly thought to be locally owned are actually in
private ownership.

In short, roughly four-fifths of the beaches on the Maine coast
are outside the public domain. Regardless of the statistics, owner-
ship does not tell the entire story. Some private beaches along
the Maine coast are used as if they were public and some publicly
owned beaches remain unavailable because they are inaccessible or
ESTI JNE@

undeveloped,

To add to this complex situation the public has certain rights
along spec-ific parts of the beach irrespective of ownership (except

(n kli tri n td > t)d
n 0 (D 0 @-4 03 03 m 03 t1l Fl. ;j rxj
o) .0 P. 10 rt 0 El En M CL >
Fl 0 CL ::r rt rL 0 rt 0 CO 0 ?1 M
0 a, m @-A ;:I' H- M 0 0 (D
H 0 (D 0 ;j < (D :4
> t)d H m (D :J U)
t-4 0 H rt 0
0 H.
OQ (D :j
1-h 4) P@ rt
U) (D (D
03 rt
rt
F@
m (D

X DEVELO

>4 >1 >4 UNDEVE

cn t-I In 1-3 cl
0 0 m m w 43 et CD 0 C-1
P3 0 H BI 0 m 10 @-A H !4
rt F" 0 0 M m (n rt 1--i
.09 0 m
0 (D &0 A5 0
H rt a, :j rt F@
0 0 C: 0@ rr H. CL >
r. H - N
OQ @-h UQ
)-3

tj
tj (7% LO H

F- X-- CD i rl.) co 1.0 -r- Ull -t- CT% %.D
a% 0 C) Ul (.@ 0 @P. @o CD Ln C) w m
--j C) C:) C) C) 0 CD 0 C@ CD CD CD @-q > >

@lj 0

00 @2t 0 F-I
m L4 @g
00 F@ H @-3 >
w C) -P, 00 .01 Ln Lo 00 00 tij > @-9
C) 0 I'D C) C) CD PU 0 m
%-, 1-1 M

perhaps on federal military lands)j Anyone canp for example, moor
or rest a boat on tidal flats, sail over the flats, cross the
flats to go to or from onels boat, take on or discharge passengers
or cargo, fish, dig clams and worms, and hunt for wildfowl below
the high water Mark.

These rights are stated in the Colony Ordinance of 1641 as amended
in 1647, which it is generally assumed forms the basis for public
shore rights in Maine. The Colony Ordinance was enacted in
Massachusetts and Maine was previously a territory of that Common-
wealth. Notably absent from the list of permitted uses of the
intertidal area is mention of recreational activities, Judicial
interpretation of the application of the Colony Ordinance in Maine
suggests that recreational bathing, walking and so on may be per-
mitted shore uses, although the point has never been clearly tested.
In any case,it is certain that the right of trespass across private
lands to the seashore as applied to Great Ponds is not in force.
The inability to get to the intertidal zone across private property
from inland points makes public recreational rights for most people
a moot advantage.1

Under our existing body of law it is likely that if public opporr
tunities for beach recreation are to be extended to new areas,
property rights affording access to the beach will have to be
acquired. Improvement of facilities servicing existing beaches
could also help satisfy demand.

Amendments to the federal Coastal Zone Management Act passed in
1976 specifically authorize "the Secretary of Commerce to make
50% grants to any coastal State to acquire lands to provide access
to public beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental,
recreational, historical, aesthetic, ecological, or cultural
value and to preserve islands." For those states which have met
the federal requirements, it is expected that funds will be made
available for improving access to and protecting public beach
areas.

3.2 Recreational Use and Preferences

Though in the past Maine's beaches have been used as sources of
sand and sites of commerce, recreation is now the most important
use. They have been the location of swimming, sunbathing; and
other recreational activities for decades. During the 19th century

1 It does not appear either that a public easement to the public sub-
merged lands or to public shorefrontage would be implied by neces-
sity. Where land borders on the ocean no right of way by necessity
for the beneficial use of the land exists across the remaining land
of a grantor, although access by water may not be as convenient as
access by land. On the other hand, "where such access by water is
rendered virtually impassable due to a perilous surf or other reason,
a way of necessity will usually be implied." (P.G. Creteau,
Principles of Real Estate Law, Portland, Maine: Castle Publishing
Company, 1977, p. 139).

many of the summer colonies, in the state grew up around the
beaches, particularly of southern Maine. In this century, the
mobility of the automobile has made the coast more easily reached
by even larger numbers,

In the 1977 Maine Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan swimming
needs were calculated on a district basis. While the peak day
demand capacity analysis did not address coastal beach use alone,
it did give an idea of regional facility needs, The calculations
revealed current deficiencies in the Cumerland and Mid-Coast Dis-
tricts. As the report pointed out, swimming is one of the hardest
activities to analyze because of the difficulty (1) in accounting
for the demand satisfied at personal pools and beaches, (2) in
measuring the capacity of existing beach areas, and (3) in assess-
ing the volume of use at coastal beaches from nonresidents,

In the spring of 1977, a leisure time use and preference telephone
survey was conducted for the Bureau of Parks and Recreation. The
survey showed that 32% of the respondents statewide participate in
ocean swimming, each spending an average of 13.5 days at the beach
each summer. Not surprisingly, both the proportion and number of
participation days were higher for coastal respondents than those
who live inland. Participation in ocean beaching was also higher
for city dwellers than for nonurbanites. One-quarter of the
respondents said they do their beaching at state parks - a larger
proportion than at any other specified location. There is also a
clear relationship between beach use and length of residence in
Maine: the longer respondents had lived in Maine the less likely
they were to participate in ocean swimming. Correspondingly, a
larger percentage of younger respondents said they participate
than older, though the average number of days per person was not
very different. Finally, when asked if the State should or should
not spend more money on developing swimming areas on the coast,
three-quarters of those interviewed supported additional expendi-
tures.

This last question of preference spending is supported by earlier
surveys. A 1973 opinion survey found that coastal beaches and
scenic areas were the top priority when respondents across the
state were asked what type of recreation facilities should be
developed "if the State had additional funds." In the York and
Cumberland Districts coastal beaches were favored by 61-70% of
the respondents.1 Similarly, in a 1975 survey of coastal residents,
over 70% of those questioned supported more State spending for
public coastal beaches.2

lNortheast Markets, Inc., Maine, An Appraisal by the People (pre-
pared for the Maine State Planning Office, 1973), p.30.

2Social Science Research Institute, Citizen Evaluation of Public
Policy in the Coastal Zone (prepared for the Maine State Planning
Office, 1975), p.95.

There are a myriad of obstacles restricting public use of many
of our coastal beaches. Cold seawater temperature and dangerous
currents scare away some. Crowds and offensive social behavior
deter others. In some locations a lack of physical access pre-
cludes use. Even at beaches with access ways inadequate parking
facilities may limit use. Inadequate backlands for the develop-
ment of ancillary facilities is one of the most important ob-
stacles; this coupled with public reluctance to walk any dis"
tance or use shuttle transportation. A few State owned beaches
for which development lands and funds are available sit unimproved
and inaccessible for want of ongoing operations money.

3.3 Use Impacts

Maine's salt water beaches every year draw millions of recreati&nists
to the coast, both residents and nonresidents. People are attracted
in particular to the large southern beaches during the summer.
This beach related tourism offers both positive and negative economic,
social and environmental impacts.

In 1972-73 a study was undertaken to assess these impacts as well
as those of other tourism activities. The study report, Tourism in
Maine: Analysis and Recommendations, issued in May 1974, quantified
the impacts of salt water beaching in Maine. The economic impact
summary sheet for this activity is presented on page 23.

While it was found that saltwater beaching is among the most ex-
pensive of tourist activities for local and state governments (at
least in southern Maine) the relative importance of coastal beach-
ing to the total state tourist economy is obvious. The cash flow
economic spinoffs from nonresident beachgoers ranked a notable
second behind skiing.1

At the same time, the social and environmental impacts of saltwater
beaching were judged to be average among tourist activities. Con-
gestion and effect on shoreline uOe were the greatest impacts. Fuel
consumption, property damage/danger and pollution were the least
serious impacts. It should be pointed out that the study dealt only
with the short lived impacts of tourism (defined as "the activity
of journeying into, within or through the State for purposes of re-
creation, pleasure, culture or business"). The long term social and
environmental consequences, for example, of building homes and
accommodations for transients on the beach were not evaluated. What
the study did clearly do is demonstrate the disproportionate
significance of coastal beach recreation and related tourism.in
Maine to the towns and the state as a whole.

1A.D. Little, Inc. et al. Tourism in Maine (prepared for the Maine
Vacation Travel Analysis Committee, 1974), IV B.

IMPACT SUMMARY FOR SALT-WATER BEACHING

Overall. .Non'Kesident Resident

Number of Tourist Days: Fall 197,316 70,458 126,850
Winter 11,434 11,434 -----
Spring 75,456 26,509 48,947
Summer 1,173,183 571,606 601,577
TOTAL 1,457,389 680,007 777,382
AVERAGE Expenditure Per Day: $9.34 $17.46 $2.32
SALES Per 1,000 Tourist Days: $16,583 $31,151 $3,840
SALES Per Total Tourist Days: $24,168,010 $21,182,627 $2,985,383
INCOME Per 1,000 Tourist Days: $3,766 $7,145 $809
INCOME Per Total Tourist Days: $5,487,849 $4,858,410 $629,439
EMPLOYMENT Per 1,000 Tourist Days: 9.37 17.88 1.93
EMPLOYMENT Per Total Tourist Days: 13,660 12,157 1,503
TAX REVENUE Per 1,000 Tourist Days: $863 $1,586 $230
TAX REVENUE Per Total Tourist Days: $1,257,587 $1,078,711 $178,876
STATE EXPENDITURES Per 1,000 Tourist Days: $340 $230
CASH FLOW Ratio (Revenue/Exp.): 4.64 1.02

COMMENTS

Salt-WateV, Beaching ranks sixth among all activities in terms of
total tourist days. The majority of Salt-Water Beachers come to Maine
in the Summer--a full 80% of all Salt-Water Beaching tourist days in
1972/1973. The total was divided about equally between Residents and
Non-Residents. As is true with most tourist activities, the Non-Resident
spends considerably more per day ($17.46 vs. $2.32) and, consequently,
has a more significant impact. Non-Resident expenditure is clustered
into hotels, motels, and tourist courts; restaurants and food stores,
and miscellaneous retail purchases. Because the Non-Resident Salt-Water
Beacher spends so much more, he generates much more in terms of State
tax revenue than the Resident. However, the Non-Resident spends more time on
the highway and, therefore, costs more in terms of State expenditures.
Nevertheless, the cash-flow ratio is much higher for the Non-Resident
than for the Resident (4.6 vs. 1.0).

In terms of seasonal impact, the Non-Resident who comes in the
Spring spends the most per day and the Non-Resident in the Fall spends
the least among Non-Residents.

All figures in 1972 dollars, except employment which is expressed in
man-months.

MR. TWEEDY by Ned Riddle

6-3

7@:

46L

NO 01pote
"I HOPE YOUR MU5CLE5 ARE TONED OP.
T915 PAST WINTER DID 5OME RATHER,,
FREAKY THIN66 TO OUR SEACA CABIN.
ID @9

4.0 CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES

4.1 Federal

4.11 Studies - Numerous federal studies over the last quarter cen-
tury have reiterated the importance of coastal beaches to the social
and economic well being of Americans nationwide. In 1954 the National
Park Service was directed to identify remaining places on the eastern
and southern coasts of the United States with valuable recreational
qualities as well as areas desirable as sanctuaries for unique or
rare plant and animal communities, The report issued by the Park
Service in 1955, Seashore Recreation Survey of the Atlantic and
Gulf Coasts,, identified two high priority beach areas in Maine*
the Popham-Seawall Beach region in Phippsburg and the Crescent-Ram
Island Farm Beach region in Cape Elizabeth, Portions of both
regions have since been placed under public or private conservation
management for recreation use and resource protection,

The 1962 report of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Com-
mission listed no particular Maine beaches for protection. How-
ever, the ORRRC report Shoreline Recreation Resources of the
United States tagged beaches as "by far the most popular kind of
shoreline in present patterns of outdoor recreation activities."
The report pointed out that the important shore areas were those
which are both accessible (especially those near metropolitan
areas serving as day use beaches) and available (notably public
beaches with adequate parking),

Four other major reports issued between 1968 and 1971 also identi-
fied beaches, particularly beach areas near urban centers, as one
of the most significant shoreline recreation resources in the
country.

From Sea to Shining Sea, A Report on the American
Environment - Our Natural Heritage. President's
Council on Recreation and Natural Beauty, 1968.

Our Nation and the Sea. Commission on Marine Science,
Engineering and Resources, 1969.

The National Shoreline Study. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
1971.

"Papers on,National Land Use Policy Issues." U.S. Senate
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, 1971,

Aside from the 1954 Park Service study mentioned above, several
federal studies have dealt specifically with coastal beaches in
Maine. The Army Corps of Engineers, for instance, has issued
study reports on beach erosion control on three York County beaches:

Saco (1957), Short Sands (1970) and Long Sands (1971) in York,
More recently the Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI) has sponsored
a study detailing an Ecological Characterization of Coastal Maine
(1978) including information on sand, gravel and cobble beach
fauna. Additionally, the Time & Tide Resource Conservation and
Development Area in midcoastal Maine, a project of the Soil Con-
servation Service (USDA), has assisted in dune stabilization
projects At public beaches and helped fund one study of oceanic
processes,

Between 1937 and 1975, ten national seashores were established across
the country, At one point portions of and the 'Maine coast in its
entirety were proposed for inclusion in the National Seashore Pro-
gram. However, with the enactment of the 1972 Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Act, the emphasis on beach protection has shifted to the
state and local levels,

4.12 Coast Zone Management - In 1976, Congress passed several
amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act. One of these dealt
specifically with beach access and protection. The intent of the
amendment was clearly stated in the discussion in the House report:

"Access to public beaches and other attractions in public
ownership in the coasts has come to be identified as one
of the critical problems facing local and state govern-
ments....The Committee position is that action is needed
now to help provide the needed access, especially in
urban areas, and that to wait will only mean additional
expense to the taxpayers, The key again is that the
purchase of such access ... be tied to a comprehensive
plan. That is the intent of this new requirement under
305 program development - that all such purchases fit into
an overall program for each state."l

With the passage of the CZMA amendments Congress did not sanction
the acquisition of new public beaches. Rather it made it a re-
quirement that state coastal programs provide for an assessment
of the adequacy of access to existing public shorelands. At the
same time, funds were authorized (up to $2.5 million annually
for fiscal years 1977-1980) for the acquisition of "lands to
provide for access to public beaches and other public coastal
areas of environmental, recreational, historic, esthetic, eco-
logical, or cultural value, and for the preservation of islands."
To date, nevertheless, no money has been appropriated for the
program.

One requirement of the shorefront access amendment is that states
define the term "beach". As suggested by the discussion in

1 U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Report No. 94-878 (94th
Congress, 2nd session, March 4, 1976).

section 2.1, in Maine defining beach@ at least in a legal sensep
is no simple task, For the purposes of meeting the requirements
of the federal statute it may be necessary to define beach in a
different manner than that suggested here.

The CZMA amendments also require the identification of existing
public beach areas requiring further access and/or protection
as a part of the State's coastal management program, This work is
in progress. -By September 30, 1978 the State must have an approv-
ed planning process for assessing public access needs to, or pro-
tection of, beaches and other valuable coastal areas in order to
receive funds for program implementation and management.

4.13 Policy - Although still somewhat confused, in recent years a
national policy on beach dynamics has been emerging. The National
Dark Service, for instance, has officially announced that it will
no longer attempt to prevent beach erosion on its shorelands.

At the same time, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the past
a proponent of structural means to mitigate shore changes, is
moving away from beach structures. The Corps now favors non-
structural methods for preventing the erosion of sand beaches
such as planning, zoning and dune grass planting, where practical.
Two years ago the Corps issued a report on the feasibility of build-
ing a stone revetment at Camp Ellis in Saco. According to the re-
port the revetment would not be cost effective. In years past
the Corps would have welcomed the opportunity to construct a
structure at Camp Ellis.

There are indications that the Soil Conservation Service, too,
may be moving away from beach structures, though it has steadfast-
ly refused to remove a dike on Ogunquit Beach built to replace a
damaged natural dune. Many citizens feel the dike was improper-
ly constructed and has caused more damage than benefit,

Additionally, the 1976 amendments to the Coastal Zone Management
Act require that to receive CZM funds states must develop a plan-
ning process to assess the effects of shoreline erosion. This
process is to include an articulation of appropriate state
management policies, be they structural, nonstructural or a policy
of noncontrol.

There are a number of other federal laws which also allow for the
implementation of alternative management solutions, including:

7 The 1936 Flood Control Act which provides for use of
nonstructural solutions;

- Section 3 of the Rivers & Harbors Act of 1968 which pro-
vides for assistance in evacuating or relocating proper-
ties from high hazard areas in lieu of structural flood
reduction solutions;

- The Land & Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 which
allows for open space acquisition in flood plains for
recreational purposes;

- Section 1362 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968
which would, if funded, provide assistance to state and
local governments for acquiring severely damaged properties
in high flood hazard areas;

Section 73 of the Water Resources.Development Act which
requires federal agencies to consider nonstructural 'as
well as structural alternatives in flood protection;
and

The supplemental block grants to states to implement
nonstructural flood protection programs,

Nevertheless, the federal government continues to subsidize private
beachfront development through the Federal Flood Insurance Program,
low interest Small Business Administration loans and federal
disaster assistance grants. These programs are intended to mitigate
the impact of coastal beach losses and storm damages. But at the
same time they work at crosspurposes with efforts to move away
from coastal flood plain development and so undermine the develop-
ment of a consistent national policy of peaceful coexistence with
shoreline dynamics.

The President's 1977 Executive Orders on flood plain management
and wetlands protection suggested an eight step process to guide
federal flood plain activities. Agencies were requested to
present their plans for compliance with the orders by May 24, 1978.

4.2 State

4.21 Studies - The first known comprehensive study of Maine's
coastal beaches for recreation was undertaken in 1934 by the State
Planning Board. Since that time a number of studies related to
beach recreational use and conservation in Maine have been con-
ducted by or for state level agencies. Tables 3 and 4 summarize
these by source.

Additionally, there are several ongoing studies concerned with
the sand beaches of the Maine coast, one report on "Shoreline
Changes at Popham Beach" is being prepared by Bruce Nelson of the
University of Maine's Dept, of Oceanography, A separate atlas of
Maine Is major coastal beaches is being completed by Dr. L. Kenneth
Fink and Bruce Nelson of the Ira C. Darling Center. The atlas
will include management recommendations for all of the beach
systems studied,

On March 9, 1978, in the aftermath of a pair of devastating coastal
storms, Governor James Longley directed the Committee on Coastal
Development and Conservation (CCDC) to address the issue of coastal
flood plain management in Maine, The Committee is to prepare by
January 1, 1979 a policy report for mitigating coastal flood damages

Table 3

STATE LEVEL STUDIES PERTAINING TO RECREATIONAL USE OF
MAINE COASTAL BEACHES

AGENCY TITLE YEAR COMMENT

Maine State "Field Survey of 1934 First comprehensive
Planning Board Beaches Kittery to survey.
Portland"

J'Proposed Major Park 1935 In Maine State Plan-
System in Maine" ning Board Report;
mentions Popham, Old
Orchard, Roque Bluffs
& Higgins Beaches.

Maine State "Report of the Com- 1933 Recommended the estab-
Legislature mittee on Natural lishment of state
Beauty & Historic parks with salt water
spots" frontage.

"Report of the Recess 1939 Popham, Crescent
Committee on Feasi- Bea-ches proposed as
bility of Acquiring parks.
Property for the Es-
tablishment of Public
Bathing Beaches..."

Maine Develop- Postwar Planning for 1944 Popham & Crescent
ment Commission the State of Maine Beach State Park pro-
posals reiterated.

Maine State Preliminary Report of 1940 Popham & Crescent
Park Commission the Maine Park and Re- Beach parks proposed.
creation Area Study

Preliminary Report on 1952 Suggested potential
State Park and Related state park sites in-
Recreational Planning cluded Kennebunk Beach
region.

A Recreation Plan for 1956 Proposed beach parks
Maine included Crescent Surf
Crescent, Popham
Beaches and Roque Is-
land.

Maine State Park Outdoor Recreation in 1965 Prepared by University
& Recreation Com- Maine of Maine.
mission

Maine Bureau of Statewide Comprehensive 1972, Analyzed supply &
Parks and Re- Outdoor Recreation 1977 demand use of swim
creation Plan facilities.

"Summary Data Concern- 1974 Unpublished paper on
ing Use at Reid State park user character-
Park...During August istics.
1970"

"Southern Maine Coastal 1975 Unpublished memo
Beach Research-Initial documenting beaching
Report" facilities.

"Visitor use Survey: Day 1975 Paper on beach and
Use State Parks and park user character-
Coastal Municipal istics.
Beaches from Portland to
Kittery"

"Coastal Beach Analysis- 1975 Unpublished paper on
Kittery to Portland" beaching supply &
demand.

"Recreation in Maine, 1976 Use and preferen 'ce
Utilization and Need" panel survey by
Social Science Re-
search Institute.

"Maine Resident Out- 1977 Use and preference
door Recreation Parti- survey by Northeast
cipation & Preferences" Markets, Inc.

Maine State Maine, An Appraisal by 1973 Preference survey by
Planning Office the People Northeast Markets,
Inc..with questions
on beach acquisition.

Citizen Evaluation of 1975 Survey by Social
Public Policy in the Science Research
Coastal Zone Institute with
questions on beach
use and shore acqui-
sition.

Vacation Travel Tourism in Maine: 1974 Included data on
Analysis Com- Analysis & Recom- economic, social &
mittee mendations environmental im-
pacts of beach use.
r
P
c . Jon

Table 4

STATE LEVEL STUDIES PERTAINING TO CONSERVATION OF
MAINE COASTAL BEACHES

AGENCY TITLE YEAR. COMMENT

Maine Geological "Erosion Studies of 1970 In Marine Erosion
Survey/Bureau of Wells and Popham Studies on the Sand
Geology Beaches" Beaches of Maine,
Progress Report, by
B. S, Timson,

"Observations on the 1970 In Shorter Contri-
Origin & Development butions to Maine
of the Wells Beach Geology, MGS Bull 23,
Area, Maine" pp. 58-68, by A. M.
Hussey.

"Studies of Processes .1971 Open file report by
Controlling Beach Mor- B. S. Timson,
phology Systems of
the Wells Area, Maine"

"Historical Changes of 1976 Unpublished repor@ by
the Webhannet River In- B. S. Timson and D.
let, Wells, Maine" Kale.

A Handbook of Coastal 1977 Draft report by B. S.
Marine Geologic Envir- Timson with 112 maps.
onments of the Maine
Coast

Maine Depart- Beach Vegetation & 1977 Prepared cooperative-
ment of Con- Oceanic Processes Study ly with Time & Tide
servation of Popham State Park RC&D by P. Trudeau,
Beach, Reid State et al.
Park Beach, and Small
Point Beach

Maine State Maine Shoreline 1977 Draft report by the
Planning Office Erosion Inventory Maine Bureau of
Geology.

Geological & Botani- 1978 Draft report for the
cal Features of Sand State Critical Areas
Beach Systems in Program.
Maine
[A I

with appropriate recommendations for executive, legislative, local
and federal cooperation. The State Land and Water Resources Council
will conduct the study and transmit the study report to the CCDC.

Three principal research tasks for the study have been outlined:
(1) to identify those beaches in severe danger or of critical im-
portance to coastal ecology and to categorize them for policy
purposes, (2) to inventory existing legislation related to coastal
flooding and determine the legal limits of suggested policy ap-
proaches, (3) to investigate the short and long term impacts of
alternative policy approaches on the state/local economy.

4.22 Natural and Critical Areas - Over 100 coastal beach features
were listed in the 1972 Maine Natural Areas Inventory.1 The Critical
Areas Program of the State Planning Office is currently tak-
ing this information one step further by studying Maine's coastal
sand beaches for possible registration as State designated Critical
Areas. A recently completed report identified thirty beach systems
which met specific geological and biological significance criteria
as critical areas.2 Already a number of beach localities have been
registered as critical bird nesting habitat for least terns and
piping plovers.

Many of these Natural Areas and Critical Areas are vulnerable beach
features which are not tolerant to substantial human use and so
would best be kept in a protected state.

4.23' Statutes - At least three State agencies have authority to
acquire land or regulate activities related to beach recreational
use and/or protection. The Bureau of.Parks and Recreation is
authorized to acquire land "to preserve the natural character and
features of such area.,13 As discussed in section 3.1the Bureau
owns a number of significant beaches. These properties are managed
for recreational use as well as for the long term conservation
of the shorefront resource.

The State Planning Office, as part of the Maine Critical Areas
Program, registers highly unusual natural features or outstanding
examples of common features.4 As discussed above several beach
sites have been registered or are being studied for potential
registration.

I Natural Resources Council of Maine, Maine Natural Areas Inventory,
(Augusta, 1972).
2 Bruce W. Nelson and L. Kenneth Fink, Geological and Botanical
Features of Sand Beach Systems in Maine, report prepared
for the Maine Critical Areas Program, 1978).
3 12 M.R.S.A. 601-602.

4 5 M.R.S.A. 3310-3314.

The Department of Environmental Protectionp under the Oil Dis-
charge Prevention and Pollution Control Law, regulates the load-
ing and transportation of petroleum products along the coast. As
part of the program oil spill prevention and clean up is financed
by a fee on oil brought into Maine ports. The Legislature, in
the findings section of the act, declared it to be the intent
of the State to maintain "The coastal waters, estuaries, tidal
flats, beaches and public lands adjoining the seacoast, in as
close to a pristine condition as possible."l

4.24 Policy - As at the federal level, a state policy on shore-
land changes appears to beevolving, The State, through the De-
partment of Environmental Protection, still allows some shoreland
construction. However, a noteable step was taken when the Board of
Environmental Protection recently adopted a policy opposing the
construction of new seawalls (see 5.25). That the Governor has
directed the Committee on Coastal Development & Conservation to
make recommendations on mitigating coastal flood damages also
illustrates that the State is beginning to come to grips with the
problems of beach development and property loss.

In addition, the State is in the process of finalizing its policy
statement on flood hazard mitigation as required by the Federal
Diaster Assistance Administration.

4.3 Local

4.31 Studies - There appear to have been few beach recreation or
conservation studies undertaken in the past at the local level.
Beach morphology has been monitored at Ogunquit Beach the past
several years and some work has been done at Pemaquid Beach.
However, no comprehensive listing of municipally initiated studies
is available.

Currently at least one local beach study is underway in Maine.
The city of Kittery, funded by a $7,000 Coastal Zone Management
grant, is preparing an environmentally sound management plan for
Sea Point Beach and Fort Foster Park. other projects have been
proposed including a multicommunity beach erosion reconnaissance
study of the beaches in Saco Bay. Projects such as this are ex-
pected to be eligible for funding under the 306 phase of the
State's Coastal Program.

4.32 Maintenance - While there have been few studies, many coastal
towns have undertaken extensive beach clean-up projects both on
public and private beachfronts, The towns of Scarborough, Kenne-
bunk and Old Orchard, for instance, have for years carried out
clean up programs, at public expense, intended to improve the re-
source for recreational use. Ironically while these activities
may have enhanced the beaches for recreational use, they may
have threatened the conservation of the resource by interfering
with the natural dynamics of the beach ecosystem.

1 38 M.R.S,A. � 541.

4,33 Policy - By and large , the policy of coastal communities
toward beach loss has been to support the building of structures
to prevent or mitigate property loss. The justification has been
predominantly economic; towns have not wanted to incur property
tax losses and the expense of rebuilding public facilities such
as shore roads.

This is changing as citizens come to recognize the ultimately
futility of shoreline structures. In Camp Ellis voters in
June 1978 defeated a bond issue to finance the construction of a
revetment proposed for the Saco beaches. Despite the support of
city officials the measure lost by a margin of more than four to
one. Some Saco beachfront owners have used dune grass planting
as an alternative erosion mitigation measure.

While some Popham Beach landowners have fought for the privilege
of building seawalls in front of their own properties, others have
resigned themselves to loosing their shoreland and in many cases
their homes.

At Ogunquit, too, citizens have acted for the conservation of the
beach. They have banded together as the Special Committee to
Restore the Ogunquit Dunes (SCROD) and other groups to try to
force the federal government to remove the dike built on the beach
several years ago.

4.4 Private

4.41 Studies - The private sector has been involved in various beach
studies over the years, usually in conjunction with publicly funded
projects. A partial list follows:

P.E. Raymond and H.C. Stetson, "A Calcareous Beach on the
Coast of Maine," Journal of Sed. Petrology, 2, 1932, pp. 51-62.

S,C, Farrell, "Coastal Processes, Historical Changes, and the
Post-Pleistocene Geologic Record of Saco Bay, Maine," unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Coastal Research Center, University of
Massachusetts, 1972.

D.C. Koons, "Geomorphology and Land Use Decisions in Maine,"
Geol. Soc. Amer, Spec. Paper, No. 174, 1976.

M. Hunter, Maine Ecosystems, South Gardiner, Maine: Center
for Natural Areas, unpublished, 1976.

4.42 Easements - The private sector has also been involved in beach
conservation through the granting of conservation easements. The
most important easement to date covers the entire Seawall Beach
system between the Sprague and Morse Rivers in Phippsburg.

4.43 Polic - A number of private conservation organizations have
urged the establishment of a comprehensive State policy toward the

conservation of sand beaches in Maine, The Natural Resources
Council of Maine in March 1978 issued a resolution urging a
State policy dealing with seawalls and other developments as
well as public education, The Maine Audubon Society took a
public stand in April 1978 against the construction or recon-
,struction of seawalls.

Maines sand beaches form one of the state's
most valuable coastal resources since they
represent most of the public access, inten-
sive recreational use, open space, and salt
marsh boundry portions of the coastline.....
Maine's specific and regional beach problems
can be attributed to development of a natural
resource without an understanding of fundamental
beach ecosystem dynamics.

--Bruce W. Nelson and
L. Kenneth Fink,
Geological and Botanical Features
of Sand Beach Systems in Maine,
1978

5,0 EVALUATION

5.1 Beaches of State Level Significance

Due to their stze, sand texture, kistory of use (or nonuse), or
geographical location certain beaches may be considered to be of
state level recreational significance, The majority of these are
located southwest of Casco Bay due to the concentration of glacial
outwash sediments in that region. On the other hand, there are
many beaches, most of them small or not readily accessible and
located east of Casco Bay which traditionally have been primarily
of local recreational interest. Listed in Table 5 and shown in
Figure 1 are 'those beaches which are regarded as of primary interest.
A comprehensive list of coastal sand beaches follows this dis-
cussion.

5.2 Proposed Actions

In order to protect and restore Maine@s coastal beaches a wide
ranging program of land use regulation, federalrstate-local co-
operation and geologic research may be necessary, The sooner a
systematic effort can be initiated to protect both the public and
private safety and welfare, the better the chance for success, There
are several specific actions which might be undertaken as part of an
ecologically sound program to conserve the beach resources in Maine.

5.21 Moritorium - The State might impose an immediate moritorium on
all major construction in dunes and beach associated wetlands while
some or all of the following actions are implemented. As an interior
measure a moritorium could prevent further alteration of beach eco-
systems and the investment of money in high risk locations where it
is likely that building will be permanently restricted in the near
future.

5,22 Amend Laws - As they stand, both the Coastal Wetlands Alter-
ation Act and the Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Law offer some regu-
lation of land use activities in beach ecosystems. However, neither
can adequately protect fragile dune areas from development. If per-
mits are to be granted for backbeach development, careful review for
long term economic and geologic impacts should be included. The
Coastal Wetlands Act could be amended to bring all wetland areas
including those subject to periods of maximum storm activity into
the permitting process. The beefing up of local shoreland zoning
ordinances could also go a long way toward improving beach con-
servation. Through one or more of these laws all filling of salt,
fresh and intertidal marshes in the coastal area could be prohibited.

5.23 Enforcement - At the same time, the enforcement of existing
controls over seaside development could be improved by increased
technical and financial assistance from the State. Many towns
have demonstrated that they are not sincere about enforcing local

Table 5

MAINE COASTAL RECREATIONAL BEACHES OF STATE LEVEL SIGNIFICANCE
(West to East)

BEACH. MUNICIPALITY OWNERSHIP OPEN TO PUBLIC

1 Long Sands York Municipal Yes
2 Short Sands York Municipal Yes
3 Ogunquit Ogunquit Municipal Yes
4 Moody Wells Private Yes
5 Wells Wells Private Yes
6 Drakes Island Wells Private Yes
7 Laudholm Wells State/Private Yes
8 Crescent Surf Kennebunk Private No
9 Parsons Kennebunk Private Limited
10 Goochs Kennebunk Municipal Yes
11 Goose Rocks Kennebunkport Private Limited
12 Fortune Rocks Biddeford Private/Mun. Limited
13 Hills Biddeford Private No
14 Saco Beaches Saco Private/Ste!te Limited
15 Old Orchard Old Orchard Beach Municipal Yes
16 Pine Point Scarborough Private Yes
17 Ferry Scarborough Municipal Yes
18 Western Scarborough Private Limited
19 Scarborough Scarborough Private/State Limited
20 Higgins Scarborough Private Yes
21 Crescent Cape Elizabeth State Yes
22 Willard So. Portland Municipal Yes
23 Andrews Portland State Yes (Limited)
24 Little Chebeaque Portland State Yes (Limited)
25 Seawall Phippsburg Private Limited
26 Popham-Hunnewell Phippsburg Private/State Yes
27 Reid Georgetown State Yes
28 Pemaquid Bristol Municipal Yes
29 Lincolnville Lincolnville Private/Mun. Yes
30 Pond Island Private Yes (Limited
31 Sand Bar Harbor Federal Yes
32 Sandy River Jonesport Private Limited
33 Roque Island Jonesport Private Yes (Limite
34 Roque Bluffs Roque Bluffs State Yes
d)l

0% do

0
Q@

Figure
24 7 Maine Coastal Recre
a @5 of State Level Signi

shoreland zoning ordinances, Others simply cannot handle the task.
As a result, building continues on the beaches, Development,
particularly in those few beach areas which in recent years have
been accreting, should be prohibited and a strict setback could be
established for all new seaside structures, including public beach
facilities,

5.24 Program Review - A comprehensive review of local, state and
federal laws and regulations dealing with shoreline erosion and
coastal floodplain management in Maine could be undertaken. A web
of laws and regulations has evolved in recent years dealing with
coastal erosion and flooding. At least four state agencies and five
federal agencies have a direct interest in-these issues. Addition-
ally, a number of private sector industry and conservation organi-
zations are affected by the laws concerning flooding and erosion
on the coast. All of these interrelationships should be spelled
out. Such a review should include an evaluation of the objectives
(to see where they are at crosspurposes), the administration, the
enforcement of existing laws and recommendations to streamline the
bureaucratic process of mitigating shoreline losses. The work sug-
gested here would help satisfy federal requirements of the Coastal
Zone Management Act Amendments of 1976.

5.25 Seawalls - Time and again geologists have stated and experience
has shown that the development and construction of seawalls on beach
environments results in accelerated erosion of the beach and de-
gradation of the beach as a recreational resource as well as the
destruction of structures built on the beach. Under certain con-
ditions where existing investments warrant structural methods
(e.g., breakwaters, seawalls and revetments) may be the only ef-
fective means of shoreline protection. Nonetheless, nonstructural
methods, such as the use of. vegetation as a sediment trap, are pre-
ferred over structural methods. They are normally less costly and
more harmonious with natural beach processes than structural methods.
Most important, nonstructural measures are designed to prevent
people from occupying floodplains@ to mitigate existing problems
of floodplain occupation and to maintain the beneficial values of
floodplains.

That seawalls are a significant intrusion on beach systems was re-
cognized by the Board of Environmental Protection when in May 1978,
it approved a policy that hereafter it will normally be unable to
make the necessary favorable findings of fact set forth in the Al-
terations of Coastal Wetlands Law, when an application is made for
new seawalls on sand beaches. By emphasizing the burden of proof
on applicants the Board has clearly acknowledged that the 'construction
of seawalls causes "significant modification to normal patterns of
water movement and the erosion and accretion of sand." When they
acquired property on the beach, private owners simultaneously assumed
the risk which goes with coastal land ownership.

The Board of Environmental Protection could go one step further and
r require that seawall reconstruction permit applications be review-
ed on a case by case basis. Reconstruction of storm damaged sea-
"k-walls would be permitted only when substantial evidence can be pre-
sented that the seawall will not significantly interfere with the

natural processes of the beach system and the long term heath of
the beach.

5.26 Acquisition and Relocation - In some areas it is possible,
at least for the short term, to mitigate property loses due to
coastal erosion. However, development simply should not be allow-
ed on some sites. Two actions could help in such cases: (1) the
Legislature could establish a fund to finance State or municipal
4Z
acquisition of those beach areas prone to chronic and acute
erosion; and (2) rather than being encouraged by government incen-
tive programs to build or rebuild in flood hazard areas, people
could be financially encouraged to build/rebuild, instead, away
from the ocean's reach.

It has been demonstrated that many aspects of the National Flood
Insurance Program are oriented toward the problems of riverine
flooding and are not well suited to coastal flooding. In fact,
financing acts as a strong counterforce to flood plain manage-
ment efforts, and so to the professed goals of the National Flood
Insurance Program. Projected flood insurance claim payouts for
the February 1978 storm which struck southern coastal Maine are
projected to reach $8-10,000 per claim.1 Many shore residents
have indicated that the willingness to rebuild stems in large
part from the availability of federal insurance.

Besides flood insurance there are a number of federal programs
which act as disincentives to relocation out of coastal flood
hazard areas, including Small Business Administration disaster
loans, federal repair grants and storm repair grants for elderly
homeowners. The administration of these programs could be changed
to allow relocation or reconstruction aid only once for each pro-
perty. Structures not yet built would be eligible for no aid if
damaged by future storms or shore erosion,

Until the State has an equitable policy allowing some monetary
consideration for landowners who are not allowed to build/rebuild
where destruction is a certainty, the public will continue to bear
the dual costs of governmental insurance and loan subsidies and
the degradation of an irreplaceable resource of public significance.
Acquisition of highly erosional beach areas and adjacent upland buf-
fer zones could in many cases serve to provide areas for public re-
creation and coastal public access where facilities to service
these uses could be provide@d.

5.27 Open Beaches Act and Public Rights of Way - In addition to
expanding publicly owned beach property, the Legislature could
pass an act to expand the rights of the public in the intertidal
zone of the shore. The extension of private ownership of most
coastal beaches in Maine to low tide is beginning to cause some

lNew England River Basins Commission, "Coastal Flooding: A New
England Perspective on The Great Blizzard of 1978," Regional
Report, 6, No. 1 (June 1978), p.2.

real problems in beach use and management. The clarification of
the public's right of lateral access for recreation on the beach
at least below high tide could eliminate future questions as to
permitted coastal public uses. It could also (1) streamline
efforts to restore those beaches which experience severe degrada-
tion, (2) bring shoreland ownership more into line with the real
estate statutes of most other states, (3) help legitimize local
beach maintenance expenditures, and (4) clarify eligibility for
federal beach protection funds and allow the expanded use of
federal Coastal Zone Management monies for public access im-
provement.

Several states and territories have enacted open shoreline legis-
lation, including Texas, Oregon, the Virgin Islands. In Maine,
in 1974, a legislative committee studying public access to lakes
and other bodies of water recommended to the Legislative Council
that the possibility of adopting a law defining and expanding
the public right of access to ocean beaches between high tide
and low tide receive further study.

To improve beach access, an open beaches act could be combined
with a program of identifying, acquiring, marking and developing
public rights of way to the beachface,

5,28 Critical Area Registration - As has been shown here, beach
systems are important for a variety of reasons, including the
fact that they act as a natural barrier between the ocean and the
upland. Maine's undisturbed coastal beaches suppor *t many species
of unusual flora and fauna. The State could formally recognize
the value of our remaining undeveloped beach systems. Inclusion
on the State's Registry of Critical Areas would be acknowledgement
of the significance of these beaches.

Beach experts at the University of Maine are studying the major
undeveloped sand beach systems to suggest geological management
recommendations for each beach. When this work is completed,
it should be carefully evaluated for implementation.

5.29 Education Program - One of the most prevalent causes of shore
losses in Maine has been public ignorance of fundamental natural
processes. To heighten public awareness of the geological, botani-
cal, recreational and economic values of Maine's coastal sand beaches
an educational program should be mounted. The Maine Audubon Society
has announced its intention to organize such an effort. The
Natural Resources Council has said it will participate in a public.
education program. These organizations should receive the support
and assistance of the University of Maine, the Department of En-
vironmental Protection, the Department of Conservation and other
interested parties. Any educational program should educate the
public of the consequences of building on coastal beaches, In
particular, methods for limiting the impact of seawalls on beach
geology should be stressed.

5.30 Offroad Vehicles - Unlike many states the use of offroad
vehicles on coastal beaches in Maine has been minimal. However,

where vehicular traffic has occurred in East coast beach systems,
other than on the beachface itself, the results have been devas-
tating, The threat of these machines on dunes and wetlands looms
except on those publicly owned beaches where they are expressly
prohibited.

5.31 Research - While many of the problems faced with respect to
beach use, flooding, erosion, and conservation are clear enough,
solutions are not always as obvious. Lack of information should
not preclude many immediate actions which can be taken to preserve
future options. Still, there are a number of studies which could
be undertaken to provide data for better management of each of
Maine's coastal beaches,

Geologic research could be stepped up to provide more data on the
formation and dynamics of MaineTs coastal beach ststems. A
monitoring program could be developed to ascertain the vitality
of each beach, to quantify those forces causing erosion and to
identify potential detrimental impacts resulting from human
activity on the beach. The short and long term geologic effects
of existing jetties, seawalls and dredging projects on the sand
beaches of the Maine coast could also be studied,

Data collection could be stepped up on base flood elevations, in
particular the identification of 100 year flood levels, A number
of state and federal programs are based on this information, yet
only limited data are available to towns to determine flood levels
and designations are often arbitrary. Maine shoreland zoning
regulations require that the "first floor elevation or openings
of all buildings and structures shall be elevated at least two feet
above the elevation of the 100 year flood, flood of record, or in
the absence of these, the flood as defined by soil types identified
as recent flood plain soils."i Similarly, the National Flood In-
surance Program requires that towns "reasonably utilize any base
flood elevation data available from Federal, State, or other source,
until such data has been provided by the Federal Insurance Admin-
istration, as criteria for requiring that all new construction and
substantial improvements meet the following standards: (1) that
residential structures have the lowest floor (including basement)
elevated one foot above the base flood level, and (2) that non-
residential structures have the lowest floor (including basement)
elevated or floodproofed one foot above the base flood level,"2

IState of Maine Guidelines for Municipal Shoreland Zoning Ordinances
(adopted by the Board of Environmental Protection & the Land Use
Regulation Commission, December 15, 1973), Sec. 11, M2.
2office of Civil Emergency Preparedness, Model Ordinance Relating
to Flood Hazard Areas (drafted pursuant to National Flood Insurance
Act of 1968 (P.L. 90-448 as amended), April 1978).

Other research might focus on (1) recreational carrying capacity
based on the amount of use that can take place without significant
deterioriLtion of the site or the experience of the visitor, (2)
designation of beach associated estuaries as 'National Estuarine
Sanctuaries as among other things, one means of helping to protect
beaches, and (3) precise legal ownership of each beach.

C/)
CZ)

4M
@V

0qM
q:Eq>
C-)

0qM
C/)

Houses were lifted and shifted, piers were
floated away, and ground floors of water-
front homes were ankle-deep in water that
weathered the February, 1972 tide respectively
unshifted, unfloated, and uncovered. Parts
of roads were under water that had never
been in that perspective before.

--News item, York County
Coast Star,, January 11, 1978

6.0 SOUTHERN BEACHES

Because of the importance of the beaches on the southwest coast these
will be treated here apart from beaches on the rest of the coast.

6.1 Ownership and Access

Many of the beaches in southern Maine are in public ownership.
Others, though privately owned, have long been open to public re-
credtional use. Four coastal beach parcels held by the Bureau
of Parks and Recreation (Laudholm, Ferry, Scarborough, Crescent)
offer approximately 7,807 feet (2,342m) of sandy shoreline -
roughly 5% of the.total beach frontage south of Casco Bay.

Some beaches, though municipally owned, are in effect largely un-
available for general recreational use because of the lack of
adequate convenient access and nearby parking facilities, Local
regulations, notably restrictive parking ordinances, further limit
beach use by the general public in some towns. Parking at munici-
pal beaches in Kennebunk, for instance, is limited to those per-
manent and seasonal residents of Kennebunk, Kennebunkport, and
Arundel with parking permits. In Wells and Ogunquit, parking is
banned on all town roads adjacent to the local public beaches.
In Kittery, residents are admitted to the beaches at Fort Foster
for a nominal seasonal fee while nonresidents are charged daily.

There are no recreationally significant federal sand beach areas in
the region Kittery to Casco Bay, though there are several beach
associated wetlands under federal jurisdiction.

6.2 Visitation

The need for increased beach opportunities in southern coastal
Maine is a difficult measure to document. The 1977 Maine Com-
prehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan indicated that while there were
no calculated needs for swimming resources in the Southern Planning
District, there were some minor needs in the Cumberland District.
From the statistical methods utilized in SCORP it was found that a
single beach in southern Maine, Old Orchard, was being used close
to maximum resource capacity based on a standard of two feet of beach
shoreline per person. One study conducted during the summer of
1975 suggested that out of staters accounted for an average of two-
thirds of the visitors to coastal municipal beaches. The percentage
of out of staters generally declined the further north of Kittery
the beach was located.

A different measure - visitation at coastal beach state parks -
suggested that pressures for beach use may be growing even faster
than might otherwise be suspected. For example, over the past
decade the number of annual visits has increased about 50% at
Crescent Beach. At Scarborough Beach, visitation rose from
approximately 30,000 in 1972 to over 73,000 in 1976. Recent
studies of coastal state parks have estimated nonresident use of
the parks in York and Cumberland Counties (Table 6).

Table 6

NONRESIDENT VISITATION OE SELECTED DAY USE STATE PARKS

% Nonresident Parties

State Park 1975 1977

Scarborough Beach 24 19

Crescent Beach 17 33

Two Lights 26 49

Wolf Neck 22 49

Source; Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation, 1977
Visitor Use Survey: Day Use State Parks and 1975
Visitor Use Survey, Day Use State Parks and Coastal
Municipal Beaches.

Both the proportion and number of out of state state park visitors
appear to have been on the increase in recent years,

In brief, there generally appears to have been an increase in
coastal beach use, particularly in southern Maine, in recent
years. More and more out of staters are flocking to the beachesi
(though nonresident use of nonbeach day use state parks appears
to be increasing even more rapidly). This coupled with increased
beach visitation by young in-migrants points to growing pressures
for expanding beaching opportunities. Recent public opinion
surveys suggest that the State should be involved helping to
meet these needs.

6.3 Facilities

Early in 1975, a survey of all major coastal beaches from Kittery
to Portland was completed by the Bureau of Parks and Recreation.
Information was collected.on beach length, available day use
parking capacities, existing public access and sanitary facilities.

1 Nonresident use of coastal state park beaches has generally been
increasing in recent years, As suggested in Table 2@ Scarborough
F
@jONRI

Beach may be the exception, However, it should be noted that
Scarborough Beach is a relatively new park known predominantly to
local residents. Also, of all beach parks sampled in 1977, Scar-
borough had by far the lowest sample population.

Most of this is presented in summary form as an appendix exhibit,
Generally, parking capacities and access from nearby public roads
were judged to be adequate while sanitary facilities were deemed
insufficient and unappealing, Although there undoubtedly is some
outdated and inaccurate information in the survey, it is the most
complete available.

6.4 Evaluation

In southern Maine where beach use has traditionally been heaviest
there are several possible courses of action for making the
beaches more readily available for general public recreation. The
State could, for example, pursue acquisition of those beaches still
outside the public domain., TLe only beaches which are not heavily
developed and are likely to offer significant potentia=r pu5I1c
recreation are Crescent Surf, Parson's and Scarborough Beaches.

While public use is not encouraged at Crescent Surf, the public is
allowed to use Parson's Beach in Kennebunk, Parking here is the
factor limiting use. Parking accommodations could be improved
though it is unlikely the present owners would tolerate use above
current levels. Since acquisition of Crescent Surf and Parson's
Beaches would likely be very expensive and since the beaches are
immediately north of Laudholm which will be developed to allow
swimming, it may be best to let them remain in private ownership.
The Bureau of Parks and Recreation or the town might pursue an
ea Lz,@.nt on Parson's Beach guaranteeing public use at a specified
level. In addition, though a small section of the wetland area
bordering Back Creek behind Parson's Beach has already been marked
for inclusion within the Rachael Carson National Wildlife Refuge,
to protect the whole beach-wetland ecosystem the entire vulnerable
Back Creek marsh area should be included within the Refuge if the
area becomes threatened.

Scarborough Beach is both a significant natural and an interesting
historic site as well as an important recreational resource. The
beach itself is one of the largest, little developed beach-dune
systems remaining in southern Maine. It is popular with those
seeking an uncrowded beaching experience, particularly in the
nonpeak hours and season. That is not to say the Bureau's property
at Scarborough Beach is not often used to capacity. Between 1972
and 1976, yearly public use of the park increased nearly two and
one-half fold to more than 73,000 visits. On sunny summer days,
the 300 car parking lot commonly fills very quickly and people spill
over the boundaries of the Bureauls 67 feet of beach frontage,

Nearby the Bureauls property is the site of a 17th century
fortification built by one Captain Joshua Scottow of Boston in
1681 following the First Indian War of 1675. The fort provided
a haven for settlers in times of peril during the Indian Wars of
the 1600-1700"s, though on at least one occasion it was captured
by the Indians. During the First and Second Indian Wars, few
towns in New England suffered as many deaths as Scarborough.

Nine-tenths of the settlers killed lived at the colony established
at Black Point on Scarborough Beach. Perhaps that is the derivation
of the name of Massacre Pond,

Today most of the beach is held in a single collective ownership.
The Bureau of Parks and Recreation has made offers to purchase
additional beach land but has been unsuccessful. Nevertheless,
Scarborough Beach is of such significance that it ought to be the
explicit intention of the State to acquire more land for expanded
public use, including the establishment of an interpretive trail
network in the pond-dune area backing up the beach, If more pro-
perty is acquired at the beach, the Bureau (1) could remove the
existing road and parking lot near the beach itself, limiting all
parking to lots by the road, (2) should protect the plant associations
in the dunes which are uncommon in Maine (e.g. earth star puffball,
wormwood, beach heather, pitch pine) and (3) maintain existing
facilities for low intensity public beaching use, High intensity
beaching can be accommodated at nearby Crescent Beach State Park,

The Bureau of Parks and Recreation could also work with each of
the towns to improve facilities such as restrooms and change
houses at all of the principal beaches in southern Maine. The
large popular tourist beaches are a resource of state level signi-
ficance. The State would be justified in making grants to com-
munities for beach maintenance and long-term protection. To
solve the traffic dilemma, expanded public (e.g. minibus) and
bicycle transportation should be explored as an alternative to
additional nearbeach parking lots, Wells, York, Kennebunk, and
Old Orchard have been trying for years to cope with traffic
congestion. All improvements expanding public use should be con-
sistent with natural carrying capacities limiting the amount of use
which can take,place without significant deterioration of the site
or the experience of the visitor. In fact, a spectrum of carrying
capacities could be established for the major recreational beaches
open to the public with some available for high and some for
low intensity use,

Additionally, the Bureau of Parks and Recreation could develop
Laudholm Beach as part of a day use state park. The beach could
serve as a low intensity use area in a region of crowded, high
intensity use beaches. Mitigation of erosion may be necessary
as the beach has recently been eroding at an accelerated rate,
aggravated apparently by the jetties at Wells Harbor.1

1"Several property owners in the vicinity of the jetties have
benefited with the addition of land (sand accretion) to their
deeded holdings of 1962, Unfortunately, their gain is at the
expense of increased degredation of the recreational beach
and erosion of property owned by the State on the northern tip
of Drakels Island," Barry S. Timson and Donald Kale, Maine
Shoreline Erosion Inventory (draft report prepared for the Maine
State Planning Office, 1977), p. 77,

C:)

:2-1
CZ)

0qM

C__)

The mile-long beach is always a special joy
for children and dogs and for beachcombers of
all ages; and there's some shelter from the
biting northerlies if you hug the dunes. As
if the scenery itself were not enough, there's
usually some acitivity at sea to reward the
rugged who climb the headland--a fishing
vessel wallowing in the seas off Sequin,
inward bound for the Kennebec, a lobsterman
hauling in Sheepscot Bay, a tanker hard down
on the horizon.

--News item, "Winter Beach",
Brunswick Times Record,
February 7, 1977

7.0 NORTHERN BEACHES

7.1 Ownershi-P

Northeast of Cape Elizabeth, several of the major sand beaches are
already in public.ownership. The Bureau of Parks and Recreation
holds seven beaches with a total of approximately 25,330 feet .
(7,720 m) of sandy shore frontage. This is about ten percent of
the total beach shoreline. in addition to several small, locally
important beaches, Pemaquid Beach is municipally owned. Sand Beach
in Bar Harbor is managed as part of Acadia National Park.

Unlike southern Maine, there are a number of fine sandy beaches
located on some of the offshore islands along this stretch of the
coast. Long and Little Chebeague Islands in Casco Bay, Pleasant
and Marshall Islands in Jericho Bay, and Roque Island in English-
man Bay all have particularly good beaches.

7.2 Visitation

According to the 1977 Maine Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan
there are only modest needs for beaching areas along this part of
the coast. In the Mid-coa,st District, there are presently some
calculated needs. In the Eastern District there are only minor
calculated deficiencies beginning around 1990.

The two major beach state parks, Popham and Reid, have shown heavy
use in recent years. Reid is the most heavily used day use park
in the state. Two hundred thousand beachgoers visit Reid each year.
At Popham visitation trippled between 1968 and 1976. More than
110,000 day trippers now visit Popham annually. Results of a 1977
survey indicate nonresident parties to Reid comprise 38% of the
total. Nonresident parties to Popham Beach State Park make up
49% of the total.

7.3 Facilities

No information has been compiled on beach facilities Downeast, but
there is little to compile. Parking lots, change houses and life-
guards are provided at Popham, Reid and Roque Bluffs State Parks.
In addition, refreshments are available at Reid.

Parking is accommodated at a couple of other beaches but there are
few, if any, other formal facilities provided.

7.4 . Evaluation

The problems of the Downeast beaches are much different from those
in southern Maine. The local beaches in this region tend to be
short, narrow pocket beaches. These serve as recreation areas
(usually more for sunning than swimming due to the cold water
temperatures) for local permanent and seasonal residents. Unlike

the southern beaches, most of these small beaches are little used
by transient tourists and suffer few congestion problems.

Already several of the large beaches of recreational importance
east of Casco Bay are in public ownership. Of these, the beaches
of Popham Beach and Reid State Parks were the subject of a recently
completed botanical-geological study. Ten specific management
recommendations have been proposed by Philip Trudeau, et al in the
report Beach Vegetation and Oceanic Processes Study of Popham State
Park Beach, Reid State Park Beach, and Small Point Beach. These
management suggestions deal with fences, picnic areas, planting and
fertilizing, boardwalks, foredunes, park accessibility, beach
erosion, beach nurishment, park enlargement, education, and'other
Problems. Similar management studies could be undertaken for other
beach parks owned by the Bureau including Ferry Beach, Scarborough
Beach, Roque Bluffs, Laudholm, Little Chebeague, Andrews Beach and
Birch Point Beach.

There are only a few large privately owned beaches east of Casco
Bay which offer potential for significant public recreation: the
beaches on Hermit Island and Cape Small in Phippsburg, the sections
of beach on the Popham peninsula not in State ownership, Sandy
River Beach in Jonesport, and the beaches on Roque Island off
Jonesboro. Another, Seawall Beach (aka Morse, St. John, Small
Point, Long Beach) in Phippsburg, is now protected by a conserva-
tion easement granted to The Nature Conservancy. It is available
for scientific and educational use and low intensity recreation use.

The beaches on Hermit Island and Cape Small are for the most part
not very large. However, acquired in conjunction with adjacent
upland areas and tied into.the nearby Popham Beach area, they could
be a major recreational resource.

Although only a portion of Popham Beach in Phippsburg is owned by
the State, as park use has grown more and more visitors spill out
onto the private beach area. This same private property has been
the section of the beach most seriously subject to beach erosion in
recent years. Because of the natural and historical importance of
the entire Popham peninsula it would be appropriate for the State
to-begin action for the protection of the entire beach by eventual
acquisition or other means.

Already Sandy River Beach on Chandler Bay in Jonesport is used as
a local beaching area. Several homes back a portion of the beach.
The most urgent need is for offroad parking space to keep people
from driving onto the sand dunes.

The beaches on Roque Island have been, at once, long recognized
for their unique natural beauty and yet little known save by local
residents and cruising enthusiasts. Under continuous ownership by
one family for the past century, they have traditionally been Open
to all. These beaches appear to be both well managed and available
under present ownership.

C:)

C/)

CD
n

rri
;R_"
t=

Cq:)
;Z:
C./)

Gov. James B. Longley...called on tourists
Monday "to treat...our beaches as they
would their own living rooms," in his
holiday message.

--News item
Bangor Daily News,
July 4, 1978

8.0 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Coastal sand beaches in Maine are, for all practical purposes, a
natural re@ource in finite, fixed and hence scarce su-oply. They are
also irregularly distributed, some communities having expansive
stretches of sandy beach while others have none. Equally unevenly
distributed are the users of the resource: seasonal and permanent
local residents, day trippers from inland cities and towns, tourists
from out of state. Clearly the importance and problems associated
with many beaches transcend local boundaries; so too must the re-
sponsibility to deal with them.

Many actions can be taken by municipalities to protect,the economic
interest and beach resources of a community. However, often the
latter is sacrificed to the former. Where towns are willing to
work within the long term constraints of protecting the beaches
State-local cooperation is most practical. However, this brief
discussion cannot deal with the specifics of each local situation.
It can only suggest broad actions for protecting the longer public
interest.

Based on the information gathered for this paper and the report
The Maine Coast: Recreation and Open Space, it is recommended that
the following State and local actions be considered.

8.1 Program Recommendations

Recommendation SugEested Agent

1. Impose a moritorium on major construction on Legislature
all coastal sand beach systems, including dunes,
beach associated wetlands and accretionary
beach areas as an interim measure during which
some or all of the following are implemented.
(Work directly related to the management of
public beach systems such as walks, traffic
control fencing, etc. could be allowed after
permit review by the Department of Environmental
Protection).

2. Amend the Coastal Wetlands Act to bring beach Legislature
dunes and associated wetlands not covered by
shoreland zoning into the permitting process
administered by the Department of Environmental
Protection.

3. Review, and amend where necessary, local shore- SP05 DEP, LURCI
land zoning ordinances to prohibit or regulate Towns
development on nontolerant beach system areas.

Recommendation Suggested Agent
4. Increase State technical and financial DEP, DHS, LURC,
assistance to improve the enforcement of etc.
existing local land use regulations (shore-
land zoning ordinances, plumbing codes,
building codes, etc.) over seaside develop-
ment.

5. Un rtake a comprehensive review of local, SPO, AG
@_.N
Sta and federal statutes dealing with
shorel' e erosion and coastal flood plain
,.N
e
manageme t.

6. Establish a uniform minimum shoreline set- Legislature
back for all new structures, except those
whose function depends directly on seaside
location.

7. Review all seawall reconstruction projects BEP
on a case by case basis and restrict recon-
struction where it can be reasonably demon-
strated that a wall will significantly inter-
fere with the natural processes of the
particular beach system.

8. Authorize acquisition of designated beach areas Legislature
prone to chronic and acute erosion and establish
a fund to finance such State or municipal
acquisition.

9. Provide reconstruction aid for storm damages Federal
one time to private property owners located
in coastal flood hazard areas.

10. Clarify public recreational rights in coastal Legislature
intertidal areas by enactment of open beaches
type legislation.

11. Identifyand where appropriate,open and mark Towns
existing public rights of way to the shore.

12. Acquire, mark, and develop additional public BPR, Towns
rights of way to the beach face where carrying
capacities will not be exceeded

13. Register as critical areas and prohibit all. SPO, Legislature
development on unique or especially valuable
natural beach areas or wildlife habitats.

!4. Protect the remaining major undeveloped coastal BPR, Towns,
beach systems by implementing the management Private land-
recommendations of the coastal beach atlas owners
being prepared by researchers at the University
of Maine.

Recommendation Suggested Agent

15. Organize an'Nqducation program to improve SPO, MAS, NRC,
public awarene-t%eof the value and the BPR, DEP
of, coas'&.41 beach systems and the
processes
effects of building -Cv,,,the beach.

16. Prohibit offroad vehicular use of all beach Legislature
areas.

17. Expand public service radio reports of swim- BPR
ming conditions (tides, temperatures), traffic
and crowds at State park beaches.

18. Study the geologic effects of existing jetties, BOG, ACE
seawalls, and dredging projects on coastal sand
beaches to assess the benefits of each structure
in relation to thedamaging effects and make
detailed recommendations.

19. Step up data collection on base flood levels. Federal

20. Determine beat.J@ recreational carrying capacities BPR
'tl
for each coasta %@tate managed beach.

21. Study beach as ciated estuaries for possible SPO
NIP- I
51
designation as aNional Estuarine Sanctuaries.

1,22. Research precise legal ownership of all coastal Towns
sand beaches.

23. Provide financial and technical assistance to BPR
municipalities with beaches of state level
recreational significance to improve restrooms,
change houses, and ecologically sound beach
maintenance.

24. Encourage.public and bicycle transportation for BPR
the heavily used southern coastal beaches as an
alternative to the construction of additional
nearbeach parking areas.

25. Provide a readily av
,\itlabb: and well advertised SCS
source of beach gra ach property owners
and technical assistan in planting and main-
t u
taining the grass as ap%nral method of dune
stabilization where ap r0 iate.

8.2 Site Recommendations

26. Pursue an easement or agreement on Parson's BPR or Town
Beach guaranteeing pub.lic lase at a specified
level.

Recommendation Suggested Agent
27. Continue management of C@escent Beach.State BPR
Park and Reid State Park principally as
beaching-picnicking State park facilities.

28. Develop Laudholm Beach and Little Chebeague BPR
Island as multiple attraction State Parks.

29. Develop minimal facilities (e.g. toilets, BPR
snow fences) to protect Andrews Beach from
recreational abuse.

30. Develop Birch Point Beach to be operated by a BPR
local or regional agency as a regional park.

31. Implement the recommendations of Philip Trudeau's BPR
study of.the Popham Beach and Reid State Park
systems where practical.

32. Undertake management studies, similar to that BPR
done for Popham Beach and Reid State Parks, for
major coastal beaches held by the Bureau of
Parks and Recreation.

33. Acquire additional beachfront and backdune land BPR
at Scarborough Beach.

34. consider'acquisition by the Bureau of Parks and BPR
Recreation of property at East Cundy Point in-
cluding the beaches at the site.

35. Study conservatio@ and recreation of the Cape BPR
Small-Hermit Island beaches.

36. Establish a Popham Trust to protect the natural, BPR, Town
cultural and historic resources of the entire
Popham peninsula, including all of the sand
beaches between the Morse and Kennebec Rivers.

37. Assure long term protection of the beaches at BPR, Owners, SPO
Ram Island Farm in Cape Elizabeth and Roque
Island in Jonesboro.

38. Construct parking areas to keep traffic off the DOT
backbeach at Sandy River Beach.

KEY

ACE = Army Corps of Engineers D OT= Dept. of' Transportation
AG= Office of Attorney General LURC = Land Use Regulation Commission
BEP = Board of Environmental MAS = Maine Audubon Society
Protection NRC = latural Resources Council
BOG = Bureau of Geology SCS = Soil Conservation Service
EPR = Bureau of Parks & Recreation SPO = State Planning Office
DEP = Dept. of Environmental
Protection
DITS= Dept. of Human Services

F
9,0 REFERENCES

11 ol

1. f"

9.0 REFERENCES

Austin, Phyllis. "Beach Erosion", Maine Times (June 16, 1978).
"Unless the Seawalls Are Torn Down, the Sand Beaches.
May Disappear", Maine Times (April 7, 1978).

z . "The Beaches Are Sinking", Maine Times (August 13,
1976).

Bryfonski, Dedria. The New England Beach Book. New York: Walker
and Company, 1975.

Creteau., Paul G. Principles of Real Estate Law. Portland, Maine:
Castle Publishing Company, 1977.

Dammann, Peter A. "Spring is Here, Building on the beach is booming,
And the taxpayers are footting the bill," Maine Times
(May 19, 1978).

Ducsik, Dennis W. Shoreline for the Public. Cambridge: The MIT
Press, 1974.

Fefer, Stewart I., et al, "Marine Intertidal Beach," An Ecological
Characterization of Maine's Coast North and East of Cape
Elizabeth. Draft report submitted by Energy Resources
Co. Inc. to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Cambridge,
MA: March, 1978, pp. IV-251-269.

Fink, L.K. "Considerations for Determining the Carrying Capacity
of Maine's Coastal Beaches for Recreational Use." Un-
published, March, 1977.

Henry, Harriet P., et al. Maine Law AffectinE Marine Resources.
Prepared under the joint sponsorship of the School of
Law of the University of Maine and the National Science
Foundation, 1969-70.

Coastal Zone Management: A Legal Perspective.. Pre-
pared for the State Planning Office. Augusta, December,,
1973.

Hunter, Malcolm L. Maine Ecosystems. South Gardiner, Maine:
Center for Natural Areas, August, 1976.

Jagschitz, John A. and Robert C. Wakefield. How to Build and
Save Beaches and Dunes. Kingston: University of Rhode
Island, 1971.

Klock, Thomas (ed.) The Ocean's Reach: Identifying the Extent of
Coastal Flood Hazard Areas and Associated Risk Zones.
New England River Basins Commission, 1976.

Maine Audubon Society. Seawall Policy. Approved April 5, 1978.

Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation. "1977 State Park Day Use
Survey." Unpublished. Augusta, May, 1978.

. "Maine Resident Outdoor Recreation Participation and
Preferences Survey." Augusta, April, 1977.

Maine Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. Augusta,
March, 1977.

. "1975 Visitor Use Survey: Day Use State Parks and
Coastal Municipal Beaches from Portland to Kittery."
Augusta, September 1975.

. "1975 Coastal Beach Analyses - Kittery to Portland."
Unpublished. Augusta, May 1975.

"Southern Coastal Research-Initial Report". Unpub-
lished memorandum by B.L. Walker. Augusta, April 15.,
1975.

Maine Department of Environmental Protection. "New Policy on
Seawalls Outlined," Maine Environnews, IV, No. 19
(June 1978).

McHarg, Ian L. Design With Nature. New York: Doubleday, 1969.

Natural Resources Council of Maine. Maine Natural Areas Inventory.
Augusta, 1972.

. Resolution Re: The Need for a Comprehensive State
Policy Regarding Protection of the State's Sand Beaches.
Approved March 10, 1978.

Nelson, B.W. and L.K. Fink, Jr. Geological and Botanical Features
of Sand Beach Systems in Maine. Prepared for the Maine
Critical Areas Program, 1978.

New England River Basins Commission. "Coastal Flooding: A New
England Perspective on the Great Blizzard of 1978,"
Regional Report, 6, No. 1 (June 1978).

Regional Policy Statement on Flood Plain Management in
New England. Boston,'June 1978.

Northeast Markets, Inc., Arthur D. Little, Inc., and William R.
Fothergille. Tourism in Maine: Analysis and Recommenda-
tions. Report to Maine Vacation Travel Analysis Committee,
1974.

Maine, An Appraisalby the People. Prepared for the
Maine State Planning Office, September, 1973.

Office of Civil Emergency Preparedness. "Model Ordinance Relating
to Flood Hazard Areas." Drafted pursuant to National
Flood Insurance Act of 1976 (P.L. 90-448 as amended),
April, 1978.

Olsen, Stephen B. and Malcolm J. Grant. Rhode Island's Barrier
Beaches. Kingston: Coastal Resources Center, 1973.

Reed and D'Andrea. Conservation Priorities Plan of the Coast of
Maine. South Gardiner, Maine. Prepared under the
auspices of the Smithsonian Institution's Center for
Natural Areas, September, 1973.

Smith, M.M. Protecting Your Coastal Wetlands. Prepared for the
Maine Department of Environmental Protection. Augusta,
1974.

Social Science Research Institute. Citizen Evaluation of Public
Policy in the Coastal Zone. Prepared for the Maine State
Planning Office, May 1975.

State of Maine Guidelines for Municipal Shoreland Zoning Ordinances.
Adopted by the Board of Environmental Protection and the
Land Use Regulation Commission, December 15, 1973.

Timson, Barry and Donald Kale. Maine Shoreline Erosion InventorK.
Unpublished. Prepared for the Maine State Planning Office,
1977.

Tippie, Virginia K. (ed.) Shoreline Erosion in Rhode Island.
University of Rhode Island, 1977.

Trudeau, Philip, Paul J. Godfrey and Barry S. Timson. Beach
Vegetation and Oceanic Processes Study of Popham State
Park Beach, Reid State Park Beach, and Small Point Beach.
Prepared under cooperative agreement between Maine Depart-
ment of Conservation and Soil Conservation Service-USDA as
a project of Time and Tide Resource Conservation and
Development Area. September 1977.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. National Shoreline Study, North
Atlantic Region. Washington, D.C., 1971.

U.S. Congress, House of Representatives. Report No. 94-878. 94th
Congress, 2nd session, March 4, 1976.

York County Coast Star. Various news items (January 1975 - June 1978).

3 6668 14103 134,

US Den-co-+--t r-f Commerce
NOAA Cc Ccnter Libray
2 2 @c'" -- - -@ Avenue
Charle6ton, @,IILW' 29405-2413