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








































































                             01




                                                  The University of Michigan
                                                  Ocean Engineering Laboratory


                                                  Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
                                                  College of Engineering
                                @J"


                                                                I





         I                                                                                                   I













                               COASTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
                                                AND
                                 SHORELINE EVOLUTION MODEL
                                      YEAR TWO: REPORT
                                              TO THE
                                      STATE OF MICHIGAN
                           DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES










                                      Coastal Monitoring Program








                                     L. Meadows, G. Meadows, T. Reno,B.Haus, G. Root,
                                            M. Wise, and T. Bromwell



                                            28 February 1990




                                      
                                     
                                             to:

                                        The State of Michigan
                                  Department of Natural Resources











                                           
                                  Report No. OEL-9001-LWMD-11C-6







             The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab  28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-110M








                           This document was prepared in part through financial
                           assistance provided by the Office of Ocean and
                           Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic
                           and Atmospheric Administration authorized by
                           the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.





                          This publication is a result of work sponsored
                          by the State of Michigan, Department of Natu'ral
                          Resources, Land and Water Management Division

                          under contract number LWMD-10C-5.







               The UMv.@of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab       28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-100-5



                                             TABLE OF CONTENTS


               List of Tables and Figures                                                             iii

               Introduction                                                                             1

               Purpose and Goals                                                                       3

               Summary of Year One Findings                                                             9

               Re- Establishment of Permanent Beach and Nearshore Precision
                   Hydrographic Survey Lines                                                          10

               Precision Hydrographic Survey Data Collection                                          1 1

               Data Reduction                                                                         20

               Background                                                                             21
                        Modelling of Shoreline Evolution                                              21
                        Equilibrium Profiles in the Great Lakes                                       22
                        Shoreline Response to Changes in Water Level                                  23

               Discussion                                                                             27
                        Climatology                                                                   27
                        Volumetric Change and Bathymetric Response                                    33
                        Equilibrium Profile Evaluation                                                37

               Conclusions                                                                            45

               Acknowledgements;                                                                      47

               References                                                                             48

               Appendix A: Bathymetry                                                                 53






                  The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab       28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-dNlIIIIIIIl11l@




                                          LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES



                  TABLES

                  Table 1.     MDNR coastal monitoring program permanent survey sites.                           6

                  FIGURES


                  Figure 1.    Map of UM survey sites (from OEL 1989).                                           4

                  Figure 2.    Illustration of Bruun's conceptual model of shoreline change (from              25
                                 Bruun, 1962).

                  Figure 3.    Illustration of Weishar and Wood's conceptual model of tideless                 25
                                 coastal response (from Wieshar and Wood, 1983).

                  Figure 4.    Water level history for Lakes Michigan and Huron, 1988 and 1989                 28
                                 (from USAE, 1988).

                  Figure 5.    Timeseries of 1989 field season wind speed and direction data from              29
                                 National Data Buoy Center.

                  Figure   6.  1988 and 1989 Field season storm climatology by wind direction.                 32

                  Figure   7.  Volume change computation diagram (after Birkemeier, 1984).                     34

                  Figure   8.  Volume change calculations for UM survey sites.                                 35

                  Figure   9.  Inner and outer bar movement values for UM survey sites.                        38

                  Figure   10. Root mean square error and linear correlation coefficients      for             40
                                 two thirds power law equilibrium profile model.

                  Figure   11. Equilibrium profile shape coefficients for UM survey sites.                     41

                  Figure   12. Examples of two thirds power law equilibrium profile fit to data.               43
                                 UM29 is a poor fit. UM1 is a good fit.

                  Figure   13. Mean sediment diameter vs. best fit shape coefficients.                         44






                 The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001          -LWMD-AW


               lintroduction


                       The coastlines of the United States are projected to suffer increased population
                 pressure in the near future, resulting in the need for an accurate and reliable predictive
                 capability to assess the impact of physical processes and coastal engineering structures
                 on shoreline properties. The Great Lakes encompass over 9000 miles of coastline,
                 providing a home to approximately 15 percent of the U.S. population and 50 percent of
                 Canada's. Of the Great Lakes coastline (U.S. and Canada) about 83 percent is privately
                 owned land valued between $105,000 per linear foot, yielding a conservative resource
                 value estimate of $20 billion.
                        The dominant processes controlling coastal erosion and sediment transport are
                 waves and wave-generated currents, particularly during the passage of storms. Wave
                 generated processes are the primary control on erosion of the bluff and sandy
                 shorelines, while water level changes provide a secondary effect by modifying the
                 vertical distance over which the wave processes may operate (Davidson-Arnott and Law,
                 1989). Coupling of high water levels and severe storm conditions may result in
                 concentrated periods of economic loss, such as those of 1951-52, 1972-76 and the
                 early 1980's. However, nearshore losses can continue throughout fluctuating and low
                 water periods with lower vertical impact.
                        Therefore, assessment of the impact of both long and short term physical
                 processes on the coastline is required to gain a true understanding of the evolution of the
                 Great Lakes shorelines. In his review of nearshore research, Hails (1974) states that
                 the largest problem facing a study of this nature is the collection of data for a
                 sufficiently long time period to gain a representative picture of the changes taking place
                 in the coastal zone.
                        It was, therefore, proposed that, through a multi-agency cooperative effort,
                 numerical predictive models of shoreline evolution be developed accompanied by a
                 comprehensive and thorough investigation of long term beach profile response.
                        The specific purpose of the coastal monitoring program described herein is to
                 initiate and maintain field data collection activities for the establishment of a beach and
                 nearshore survey grid and to obtain the necessary hydrographic survey data for an
                 evaluation of shoreline response to changes in water levels and storm activity. The
                 Ocean Engineering Laboratory is actively involved in utilizing this data to improve
                 shoreline response forecasting capabilities. The latter portions of the total work effort
                 are being pursued through research grants and cooperative efforts with the Coastal



                                                             1






             The UnjyopfMich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


             Engineering Research Center (CERC), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
             Administration (NOAA), and the Michigan Sea Grant College Program.
                    The purpose of this report is to summarize the results of the first two years of
             the coastal monitoring program funded by MDNR, Division of Land and Water
             Management through the Coastal Zone Management Program.














































                                                      2







                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-4114M


               IPurpose and Goals


                       As described in the Year One Report for this project, in February, 1988, The
                University of Michigan's Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering's
                Ocean Engineering Laboratory (OEL) proposed to the State of Michigan Department of
                Natural Resources (MDNR) a program to conduct a series of precision hydrographic
                surveys along the Lakes Michigan and Huron coastlines of the State of Michigan. The
                purpose of this research effort is to initiate a long term monitorin g program aimed at
                establishing the current state of the shoreline and to provide valuable information on the
                rates of shoreline change in response to individual storms as well as seasonal and long
                term climatic variations. The ultimate goal of this research activity is to provide the
                data necessary to substantially advance our knowledge of Great Lakes coastal erosion
                processes and to support the development of a predictive shoreline evolution model. This
                effort will consider natural and man-impacted coasts in response to wind, waves, and
                Great Lakes water level changes.
                       The proposed research plan consisted of precision hydrographic surveys
                conducted at 45 permanent survey sites. These sites were chosen to provide long term
                data on the rate of shoreline change over a wide range of both structurally impacted and
                naturally occurring beaches along the Lakes Michigan and Huron shorelines of the Lower
                Peninsula of Michigan (Figure 1). The 45 survey lines have been chosen to coincide,
                whenever possible, with historical survey data previously obtained by the U.S. Army
                Corps of Engineers as well as other research efforts reported in scientific literature
                (see Table 1). Additional areas of particular scientific interest to both the MDNR and to
                The University of Michigan's coastal erosion research program have also been included.
                       It was recommended that surveys be conducted twice yearly (each Spring and
                Fall) commencing with Spring 1988. This monitoring scheme is similar to that in place
                for the past twelve years along the Indiana coastline of Lake Michigan and is designed to
                adequately identify both the seasonal and long term variations (on/off-shore changes) in
                the beach profiles. To adequately assess the short term variability of the beach and
                nearshore region of the Michigan shoreline, it was proposed that at least 15 of the
                original 45 lines be resampled each year on a short time scale.
                       The combination of short and long term beach response data will be an extremely
                valuable addition to this data set and will provide necessary direct insight for the
                development of numerical predictive models of shoreline evolution both for natural as
                well as man-influenced beach regions. Toward this goal, the two year precision
                hydrographic survey dataset has been analyzed for gross morphological changes, annual


                                                            3





             Figure 1. Map of UM survey sites (from OEL 1989).










                                               P

                                                                          U14 32-IMM PETOSKEY











                                                          UA431


                                                          UAIW



                                                         U,W29



                                          UM 19-28   LUDINGTON

                                                      UAf /a



                                                    UAd 17

                                                     UA# 16



                                                       Ubt 15



                                                  UM 14-
                                                         .. GRAND HAVFJV
                                                    UM 13- -
                              LAKE                       ',,UM12
                                MICHIGAN

                                                          U14 I/


                                                         UAI /0


                                                         UM 09

                                                      UU08


                                                    UA407
                                                                              KlLomErERS
                                                                   20    0         40 w do
                                    UA#01-06                                -S   U-TE mILES
                                                EW BUFFALO        io- -            9 - -1@40       -eb
                                                                              SITE LOCATIONS
                                                                                  UM 0/ -3
                                                                               DR.r-RENO 1 10-28-88


                                                         4





























                                           ALPENA




                                                                    LAKE
                                                                   HURON






                                             TAWAS
                                                      UM 37-40













                                       BAY CITY


                                                                  PORT      UAd 41- 45
                                                                SANILAC












                                      KILOMETERS
                                   20    -40- '- 60-- so AOO               SITE LOCATIONS
                                     STATUTE MILES

                                                            60
                      a(D       0                                              UM,37-45
                                                                           DR.T.RENO I ll:@
                                                  5





               Table 1. MDNR Coastal Monitoring                            Program Permanent              Survey Sites


             Reference                                                                                     Hl@torlcal       SPRING          POST-STORM             FALL
               No.    Location                   Description               County      Section,T,R         Reference      Date    Time      Date    Time       Date    Time
             UM01     NEW BUFFALO             IN/Ml State Line             Berrien     24,TO8S,R22W        H&J 26         5-04    13:00                        8-09    08:00
             UM02     NEW BUFFALO             Grand Beach                  Berrien     17,T08S,R21W        H&J 29         5-04    11:45                        8-09    09:20
             UM03     NEWBUFFAL0              Dunewood Condominiums        Berrien     09,TO8S,R21W        H&J 35         5-04    09:00                        8-09    10:30
             UM04     NEW BUFFALO             City Waterfront Park         Berrien     03,TO8S,R21 W       H&J 42         5-03    16:10                        8-08    11:45
             UM05     NEW BUFFALO             11059 Riviera Dr.            Berrien     35,TO7S,R21W        H&J 44         5-08    15:45                        8-09    14:00
             UM06     CHIKAMING               Township Park                Berrien     19,TO7S,R20W        D  17          5-09    09:30                        8-09    15:15
             UM07     STEPHENVILLE            Chalet-on-the- Lake          Berrien     20,TO5S,R19W        D 16,13 Al     5-22    08:25                        8-09    17:00
             UM08     HAGARTOWNSHIP           Township Park                Berrien     15,T03S,R18W        D  15          5-22    10:05                        8-10    07:40
             UM09     VAN BUREN ST PK         Beach Access                 VanBuren    32,T01S,R17W        D 14           5-22    12:15                        8-10    10:35
             UM10     GLENN                   Public Road Easement         Allegan     31,TO2N,R16W        D  13          5-22    15:00                        8-10    12:30
             UM1 1    DOUGLAS VILLAGE         Public Beach                 Allegan     17,TO3N,R16W        D  12          5-22    16:40                        8-10    15:00
             UM12     HOLLAND                 James St. Beach Access       Ottawa      21,TO5N,R16W        D  11          5-22    18:30                        8-10    18:20
             UM13     GRAND HAVEN             Buchanan St. Bch Acc         Ottawa      17,TO7N,R16W        D  10          5-23    09:15                        8-15    07:35
             UM14     HOFFMASTER ST PK        Beach Access                 Muskegon    36,TO9N,R17W        D 09           5-23    11:15                        8-15    09:40
             UM15     WHITEHALL               Duck Lake Outlet             Muskegon    24,T1 I N,R1 8W     D 08           5-23    13:00                        8-15    11:30
             UM16     CLAYBANKS               Township Park                Oceana      16,T13N,R18W        D 07,H 24      5-23    15:30                        8-15    13:00
             UM17     LITTLE SABLE POINT      USCG Lighthouse              Oce"        35,T15N,R19W        D 06,H 17      5-23    17:30                        8-15    17:25
             UM18     SUMMIT TOWNSHIP         Township Park                Mason       23,T17N,R18W        D 05.1-1 32    5-24    09:45                        8-17    16:00
             UM19     LUDINGTON               Buttersville Park            Mason       22,T18N,R18W                       5-24    11:20                        8-17    13:20
             UM20     LUDINGTON               Buttersville                 Mason       22,T18N,R18W                       5-24    12:00                        8-17    14:30
             UM21     LUDINGTON               Stearns Park                 Mason       16,T1 8N,R1 8W                     5-24    14:55                        8-17    10:30
             UM22     LUDINGTON               Juanita Rd.                  Mason       09,T18N,R18W                       6-06    08:08                        8-17    09:30
             UM23     LUDINGTON ST PK         Checkin Station              Mason       29,T19N,R18W                       6-06    09:24                        8-17    08:25
             UM24     LUDINGTON ST PK         Beach House                  Mason       19,T19N,R18W                       6-06    10:51                        8-16    17:20
             UM25     LUDINGTON ST PK         N of Outpost Camp            Mason       18,T1 9N,R1 BW                     6-06    11:48                        8-16    16:20
             UM26     BIG SABLE POINT         USCG Lighthouse              Mason       07,T19N,R18W        D 04           6-05    13:00                        8-16    14:07
             UM27     LUDINGTON ST PK         Wilderness Area              Mason       06,T19N,R18W                       6-05    16:00                        8-16    15:00
             UM28     LUDINGTON ST PK         N. Boundary                  Mason       05,T19N,R18W                       6-05    14:30                        8-16    09:05
             UM29     MANISTEE                Bar Lake Outlet              Manistee    24,T22N,R17W        D 03           6-06    14:59                        8-18    10:20
             UM30     BEMMAN CNTY LINE        Sunset Valley Resort         Manistee    03,T24N,R16W        D 02           6-06    16:39                        8-21    18:30
             UM31     POINT BESTIE            USCG Lighthouse              Benzie      04,T26N,R16W        D 01           6-06    18:07                        8-22    11:00
             UM32     PETOSKEY                Magnus Municipal Park        Emmet       06,T34N,R05W                       6-07    16:18     7-19    12:30      8-23    07:00
             UM33     PETOSKEY                Bayfront Park                Emmet       32,T35N,R05W                       6-07    15:30     7-19    13:40      8-23    08:20
             UM34     PETOSKEY                Bayview Association          Emmet       33,T35N,R05W                       6-07    12:46     7-19    14:40      8-23    09:15
             UM35     PErOSKEY ST PK          Beach Access                 Emmet       27,T35N,R05W                       6-07    11:00     7-19    17:00      8-23    10:00
             UM36     PETOSKEY                Harbor Springs               Emmet       13,T35N,R06W                       6-07    10:43     7-19    18:25      8-23    11:07


               Historical References: H&J:    Hawley and Judge (1969),     D: Davis (1976) and Birkerneier (1981),
                                           13: Birkerneier (1980), H: Hands (1979).





               Table 1. MDNR Coastal Monitoring                         Program Permanent             Survey Sites

             Reierence                                                                                 Historical      SPRING          POST-STORM            FALL
               No.   Location                Description                County      Section,T,R         Reference    Date    Time      Date    Time      Date    Time
             UM37    TAWAS                   Aster St.                  losco       05,T22N,R09E                     6-26    12:00     7-18    12:40     8-23    16:49
             UM38    TAWAS                   E. Birch Dr.               losco       26,T22N,R08E                     6-26    10:10     7-18    11:25     8-23    18:27
             UM39    TAWAS POINT ST PK       Beach Access               losco       34,T22N,R08E                     6-26    09:15     7-18    10:10     8-23    19:21
             UM40    TAWAS                   Harbor Pier                losco       20,T21N,R08E                     6-26    07:15     7-18    08:15     8-23    15:30
             UM41    PORT SANILAC            Murphy Dr.                 Sanilac     35,T13N,R16E                     6-29    10:00     7-17    11:35     8-25    07:00
             UM42    PORTSANILAC             349 S. Lake Rd.            Sanilac     02,T1 I N,R1 6E                  7-06    08:00     7-17    12:35     8-25    08:30
             UM43    PORTSANILAC             Goldman Ave.               Sanilac     02,T1 I N,R1 6E                  7-06    10:00     7-17    13:35     8-25    09:45
             UM44    PORTSANILAC             Roadside Park              Sanilac     1 1,T1 1 N,R1 6E                 7-06    12:00     7-17    15:05     8-25    10:40
             UM45    PORT SANILAC            Walker Rd.                 Sanilac     14,T1 I N,R1 6E                  7-06    14:00     7-17    16:00     8-25    11:30




























               Historical References: H&J: Hawley and Judge (1969), D: Davis (1976) and Birkerneier (1981),
                                         8: Birkerneier (1980), H: Hands (1979).






              The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab  28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


              volume change, and conformation of the coastal bathymetry to an equilibrium profile.
              Results of these analyses will be presented in this report.















































                                                       8







               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


              ISurnmary of Year One Findings


                       The success of the first year of this study was predicated upon the accuracy of the
                 data collection and analysis techniques, the use of appropriate time and length scales
                 over which data was collected, the incorporation of past data and insight, when
                 available, into the planning and analysis scheme, and the ability of future researchers
                 to use and build upon the database. The OEL employed the most reliable and accurate
                 surveying technique available for hydrographic survey and sedimentological data
                 collection. Data reduction and analysis was performed with nationally accepted
                 programming and database management which was only slightly modified for
                 streamlining in Year Two. Historical data was consulted for insight to process time and
                 length scales, field and laboratory techniques, as well as comparison with present data
                 collection.

                       Examination of historical literature revealed that there exists a need for further
                 study of coastal evolution, particularly during falling lake levels. The first field season
                 of data indicated that processes in action during the 1988 summer served to inflate the
                 beach profile in most cases, as expected. Based upon previous studies of Great Lakes
                 shoreline response to water level variation and storm waves, a decrease in mean lake
                 level should cause a lowering of the effective wave base, thus increasing the amount of
                 wave energy impinging the bottom at any depth. In response to this increase in energy,
                 increasing sediment transport may result in offshore migration of the outer bars. The
                 1988 dataset displays about a 50 percent agreement with this hypothesis, reflecting
                 the need for longer term monitoring during failing water levels.
                       The year one dataset also provided a first look at the response of the nearshore
                 region to the passage of storm fronts in a southern and northern Lake Michigan regime.
                 In order to characterize the long term response of the shoreline to falling annual lake
                 levels, it was found necessary to compare the 1989 and 1988 datasets.















                                                           9







               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


               1
               Re-Establishment of Permanent Beach and Nearshore Precision
               11ydrographic Survey Lines


                      During the 1988 field season, the OEL established a total of 45 survey lines along
               the Lower Peninsula's Lakes Michigan and Huron coastlines (see Figure 1). Previously
               existing nearshore survey lines along the Lake Michigan shoreline, and in particular,
               those reported by Hawley and Judge (1969), Davis (1976), Hands (1979), and
               Birkemeier (1980, 1981), were re-established and precisely relocated wherever
               possible. Due to recent, rapid changes in shoreline topography as a result of record high
               lake levels, it was only possible, in some cases, to establish survey lines in the same
               general vicinity as the previously existing lines. The Year One Report summarizes the
               site selection and initial bench mark establishment procedure
                      During April of 1989, a small shore-based survey crew visited all forty-five
               sites for a temporary bench mark (TBM) reconnaissance study. The main purpose of
               this endeavor was to take inventory of the TBM survival over the past winter. At this
               time, all of the 1988 TBM's were recovered, however, at ten sites the TBM's were
               buried and particularly difficult to salvage. At these burial sites it was found useful to
               place a higher TBM adjacent to the concealed pipe. The elevation difference between the
               two TBM's was precisely measured. Nine fall surveys were conducted from this adjacent
               benchmark. As a precautionary measure, we placed back-up bench marks on the dune or
               bluff at eight of the most dynamic sites. Each of these back-up bench marks was
               precisely surveyed and measured in order to maintain continuity between successive
               surveys which may rely upon them. One survey in the spring and four surveys in the
               fall were conducted from these back-up benchmarks due to large seasonal changes in the
               beach. It should be noted that north of UM23 (Ludington) and on Lake Huron, the TBM's
               were quite easy to relocate and no adjacent or back-up bench marks were necessary.

















                                                          10






                 The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-IOC-5


               lPrecision Hydrographic Survey Data Collection

                       The survey activity consisted of conventional hydrographic survey techniques as
                 described in the Year One Report. Consistency between successive surveys was of utmost
                 importance. Since 1989 brought the use of a new survey fathometer, care was taken to
                 run the new and old unit side by side to evaluate the interchangability of the tool and
                 assure reproducibility of results. Otherwise, no modifications were made to the
                 successful surveying technique as employed in 1988.
                        Table I provides a listing of survey site locations as well as survey dates and
                 times. As in Year One, the entire study area was sampled during the spring and fall
                 surveys. However, the post storm survey for 1989 was conducted at UM site 32
                 through 45. The Year One Report provides justification for the survey interval
                 selection. Following is a summary of the site descriptions logged in the field notebooks
                 1988 and 1989.



                 NEW BUFFALO:

                 UIV101 is located adjacent to a public road easement at the Michigan/Indiana state line.
                 The TBM is positioned adjacent to the rubble mound structures at the base of a steep
                 bluff protect the road from washout. Approximately 150 ft north of the survey line, a
                 dilapidated seawall structure remains and 100 ft to the north is a sand bag groin.
                 1988-Some boulder movement was evident due to a slight tilting of the TBM pipe prior
                 to the post-storm survey.
                 1989-A large amount of sand has accumulated at the base of the revetment. During the
                 spring survey, a 10 ft gravel band appeared at the water line which narrowed to a 4 It
                 width in the fall. Tire tracks exist at this site.

                 UM02 is below a private dwelling construction site in Grand Beach. It is characterized
                 by a steep dune face above a natural beach. The site is just north of a blowout in the dune.
                 1988-The blowout had been plowed throughout prior to the post-storm survey.
                 1989-As in UM01, a gravel band exists at the waterline. New large boulders to the
                 south of the TBM have been dumped over the bluff from the southern side of the blow out
                 o the southern end of the development. A clay horizon appears on the edge of the blow
                 out to the south, approximately 4 ft above the TBM.- To the north, a gravel bar appears
                 to be welding to the shore during the spring survey. The shoreline is mildly undulating,
                 exhibiting a 500 ft wavelength, with the TBM stationed at the crest of the cusp. The
                 sandbar appears welded during the fall survey. In the fall, a ridge of water exists just
                 inside the berm and dune grass has grown along bluff.

                 UM03 is a construction site just north of the Dunewood condominium development and
                 just south of the harbor jetties at New Buffalo.
                 1988-A small vegetated bluff and cuspate beach forms were present at the fall survey.
                 This site experienced beach nourishment during the late Fall 1988.
                 1989-The beach has grown larger. Large rocks lie along the base of the bluff at the edge
                 of the tall beach grass. Pebbles lie along the swash line.




                                                             11







               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


               UM04 is located within the New Buffalo City Park north of harbor jetties. It is a
               heavily vegetated bluff with walkways and stairways for erosion control.
               1988-The site is characterized by a broad beach. There was a large amount of boat
               traffic and beach use during post-storm and fall surveys.
               1989-Cobbles exist on the backbeach while course gravel covers the midbeach. A
               snow/sand fence winds three-fourths of the way up the bluff.

               UM05 is a private residence in New Buffalo. The bluff is high with riprap at the
               bottom (placed when the area was declared a national disaster in 1973). Otherwise the
               site is a natural beach.
               1988-A large shallow bar was evident during the spring survey and cuspate shoreline
               features were present at the fall survey.
               1989-The till bluff near the TBM has been built up and a berm has been formed. The
               undulating shoreline has a 300 ft cusp. Tire tracks appear on the beach. The rocky
               nearshore bottom turns to sand at around a 75 ft distance.



               DAVIS SITES:

               UM06 is located in Chikaming Township Park at the end of a road bed. It is
               characterized by a very steep till bluff. A water outlet is to the south of the TBM.
               1988-During the spring survey, there was no beach present, however, approximately
               45 ft of beach was exposed and a new staircase was built prior to fall survey.
               1989-The beach has grown to be quite large with tree foliage growing in front of the
               TBM. No evidence of bluff slumping. A small amount of soil drainage,occurs from the
               till bluff through a drainage pipe. A bar has welded to shore and ridge of water runs 7 ft
               from the water's edge, parallel to the shoreline. A 1 ft berm appears above the swash
               level and the migrating sandbar is almost fully welded to the shore in the fall.

               UM07 is a private residence north of Chalet on the Lake near Stevensville. It is a
               pocket beach with a rubble mound structure to the south and undercut concrete slabs to
               north.
               1988-It was necessary to move this site at the request of owner to the north boundary of
               Chalet on the Lake at the fall survey. This site covers a steel sheet pile with rubble
               mound toe protection.
               1989-Nearly 20-30 ft of beach has accumulated since the last survey. Waves lap at the
               base of the rubble to the south. A small berm appears above the swash line. A snow/sand
               fence winds down northern side of the line to the end of the beach, however, no evidence
               of sand accretion appears.

               UM08 is located within Hagar Township Park. There is a steep till bluff with rubble at
               the base shoreward of an otherwise natural beach. The site is immediately seaward of
               rubble at the base of the bluff.
               1988-Some slumping of bluff behind the TBM was evident at the fall survey.
               1989-The broad beach's high berm has a gentle slope on the seaward side. Some ground
               water runoff occurs to the north of the site and a large slump region to the south may
               have occurred. No cusps appear at the spring survey. In the fall, the beach has become
               slightly cusped.

               UM09 is located at the beach access in Van Buren State Park. This is a region of large
               active sand dunes.
               1988-There is a broad natural beach and the park has posted an erosion control area
               sign on the vegetated dune.



                                                           12






                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab     28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                1989-The broad beach has a gentle seaward sloping berm and 500-750 ft wavelength
                cusps. The TBM is located between a trough to the south and a peak to the north. Well-
                rounded gravel material exists at the water line and the rocks at the knee sample are 1-
                2 in diameter. A deep trough occurs before the first bar. Black sand lies at the dune,
                base of dune, and midbeach.

                UM10 is adjacent to a public road easement in Glenn. The site is a severely eroding till
                bluff. Gravel material appears at the water line and a small stream outflow runs to the
                north. Large concrete blocks form a revetment on the shore.
                1988-There is evidence of recent slumping at the spring survey.
                1989-The small stream has almost disappeared. A slumping of the bluff has occurred to
                the south of the TBM. The beach has a cusp wavelength of about 250 ft.

                UM11 is located at the Douglas Village Public Beach, a residentially developed area. The
                bluff is thickly vegetated over a natural beach.
                1988-There was evidence of slumping activity at the base of bluff at the spring survey.
                1989-The stairway of the park has been buried to the first landing. A bluff has slumped
                just north of the site behind the staircase. Three feet north of the TBM, a maple tree's
                roots have been exposed. Sand has also been lost at the base of the tree which lies behind
                the TBM. A large rock lies in the southern nearshore water. In the fall survey, the
                stairs to the parking lot are still buried and no evidence exists of new slumping.

                UM12 is the James St. public beach access north of Holland. This area is heavily
                populated. A vegetated trail over a 40 ft dune leads to a natural beach.
                1988-There was a high berm present at the fall survey.
                1989-The 35 ft wide beach has no cusps. A large accumulation of wind blown sand
                appears at the bluff base. No evidence of slumping exists.

                UM13 is a beach access at the end of Buchanan St. south of Grand Haven. This area is
                almost completely residentially developed. The bluff is well vegetated, but slumping.
                There are old wooden seawalls to the north and south.
                1988-At the spring survey there was a steep beach with loose sand and three offshore
                bars. At the fall survey snow fences had been placed from the bluff half way to water's
                edge and cuspate beach forms were present.
                1989-A gently sloping berm exists at the water line in the spring. Very pointy cusps
                exist about 300 ft north of the site, between the site and a low profile wooden groin
                field, however, no cusps appear directly at the site.
                UM14 is a beach access at P.J. Hoffmaster State Park. There is a wooden -walkway over
                the well vegetated dune with a broad natural beach.
                1988-The wooden walkway had been replaced and a garbage bin and anchoring pole set on
                top of the TBM at the fall survey.
                1989-The broad beach has a low berm and no cusps. The first of three sand bars is very
                broad. This bar narrows and moves offshore south of the site and eventually splits into
                two bars north of the site. In the fall, a large amount of tree growth has occurred. The
                wide, inshore sand bar falls steeply on the landward edge.

                UM15 is a public road easement on the south side of the Duck Lake outlet near
                Whitehall. There are rubble mound structures to the north protecting the road bed and a
                steep sand bluff lies above the site.
                1988-There was a steep scarp near the waterline and three bars present at the spring
                survey. The TBM had been buried under 2 ft of sand at the fall survey.
                1989-A high berm exists above the swash while another small berm appears at the
                swash zone. The larger berm runs to the northern rubble mound and pinches out to the


                                                            13







               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab     28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


               south. The broad flat beach has inflated. In the fall, the TBM is mostly covered by the
               path and sand has accumulated to create a larger beach.

               UM16 is located at the south end of Claybanks Township Campground. Bluffs of glacial
               till dominate this area. There is evidence of recent bluff erosion over a narrow natural
               beach.
               1988-At the fall survey, the TBM was not relocated and a new TBM was placed. It is
               possible that the bluff slumped and buried the TBM.
               1989-Continued evidence of slumping exists at the base of the bluff. The broad flat
               beach includes a minor berm. Sand runs half way up the bluff, then clay evolves. In the
               fall, the beach appears in a summer inflated condition with no cusps. The dune is highly
               vegetated except for the path.

               UM17 is located at the Little Sable Point Lighthouse. The concrete at the base of the
               light is broken and the beach is natural.
               1988-There were cuspate beach forms at the fall survey.
               1989-In the spring, the old TBM has been buried by rubble at the base of the light. The
               nearshore bar, which has already welded to the north and south, is welding to the shore
               at the line. In the fall, the broad beach has low profile cusps with the site lying at the
               peak of a cusp.

               UM18 is located within Summit Township Park. This region is characterized by 40 ft
               bluffs to the north and south. However, the site is located at a sand terrace. Previous
               severe erosion of the bluff is evident above a natural beach. A sheet pile structure lies
               to the north.
               1988-The bluff slumped on the north side of the TBM to slightly bury the pipe prior to
               the fall survey.
               1989-Cobbles appear on the beach which has a gently sloping berm. A stream outflows
               to the south. In the fall, a large sandy beach with high berms exists. There are many
               pebbles on the berm and larger stones in the water.


               LUDINGTON:

               UM19 is located in Buttersville Park south of the Ludington harbor jetties. The site is
               characterized by a very steep bluff. There are three offshore breakwaters just north of
               this otherwise natural beach site.
               1988-At the spring survey there was a tombolo forming behind the southernmost
               breakwater. Prior to the post-storm survey, the tombolo was completely formed out to
               the southernmost structure and there had been no movement of the bluff.
               1989-Tombolos to the north are well developed. A small berm exists above the swash
               which heightens to the north, towards the tombolo, and then recedes again. No evidence
               of bluff slumping exists and three bars occur. In the fall, the TBM was buried under 6
               in of clay. Runoff from the bluff has created a beach with a hard clay shell. Sand is only
               present on the berm and at the shoreline.

               UM20 is a broad natural beach adjacent to undeveloped shorefront property south of
               the Ludington harbor jetties.
               1988-At the fall survey the TBM was slightly covered with sand.
               1989-The broad beach contains cobbles and a lot of driftwood. The beach cusps to the
               north with a wavelength of about 100 ft eventually die out north of the site. At the fall
               survey the TBM lies flush with the sand. The large sandy beach contains high berms and
               the cusps have decreased to about a 50 ft wavelength.



                                                           14






                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab   28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                UM21 is located at the north end of Stearns Park. Thereisarubblem     ound to the north
                and the Ludington harbor jetties to the south. The broad beach is snow fenced every
                winter and bulldozed in the spring prior to the opening of the park concessions.
                1988-During the fall survey the beach showed small cuspate forms.
                1989-In the spring the pipe was possibly hit by a bulldozer and found 2 ft above the
                sand, at a 60 degree angle leaning towards the water. A depression occurs in the sand
                behind the TBIVI due to the presence of sand/snow fence. In the fall, the TBM was found
                pulled out so a backup TBIVI was utilized. The cuspate beach has accumulated sand since
                last year and is building in front of the rubble mound.

                UM22 is located at the end of Juanita St. in Ludington. There is a wood groin and rubble
                revetment to the north near the water line and a wood seawall to the south shoreward of a
                broad beach.
                1988-The site has not incurred any noticeable variations this year.
                1989-A major slumping of the bluff has occurred in the spring. A new snow/sand fence
                runs about 10 ft south of the TBIVI. At the fall survey a new wood structure exists west
                of the TBM. The large, flat beach has accumulated sand compared to last year. A berm
                has developed near the water's edge.

                UM23 is located adjacent to the check-in station at Ludington State Park.
                1988-There is a broad natural beach and vegetated dune.
                1989-In the spring, the beach appears to be twice as large as last year. A very small
                steep berm of 1-2 in has developed near the shore. The beach landward of the berm is
                damp indicating a recent overtopping. In the fall the large beach encompasses two
                berms. The first sandbar lies- 150 ft offshore and two mild troughs exist. The shoreline
                appears fairly straight.

                UM24 is located at the beach house at Ludington State Park. There is a concrete seawall
                at the swash zone with coarse sand fill behind.
                1988-At the post-storm survey there was approximately 10-15 ft of beach exposed in
                front of the seawall, and at the fall survey there was approximately 4-6 ft.
                1989-In the spring 10-15 ft of beach exist. The coarse fill which lies landward of the
                seawall appears the same. Rubble has been placed on the northern side of the river
                entrance to the south about 200 ft away. A small cutback emerges on the northern side
                of the site yet does not affect the beach at the site. The cusps on the beach to the north
                have a 200 ft wavelength.

                UM25 is located north of the outpost camp in Ludington State Park.
                1988-At both the post-storm and fall surveys the beach was highly cuspate with the
                forms approximately 60 to 70 ft in length.
                1989-The wavelength of the cuspate shore has grown to about 100 ft in the spring. Two
                of the bars are very visible. Some sand has built up around the amafala grass. During
                the fall survey, the cuspate beach has a 300 ft wavelength and a height of 20 ft with the
                site situated at a shoreward peak. Between lines UM25 and UM26, there are some shore
                normal bars welding to the beach.
                UM26 is just south of the Big Sable Point Lighthouse. There is a failing sheet pile
                structure to the north protecting the lighthouse which may influence the survey site.
                The dunes of approximately 30 ft height are vegetated.
                1988-Prior to the post-storm survey a rubble mound had been placed tying the sheet
                pile to shore on the south side of the structure. The TBIVI was buried and the beach
                cusped at both the post-storm and the fall surveys.
                1989-In the spring, a cusped shoreline lies to the south and sand has built out in front
                of the rubble. During the fall survey, the cuspate shoreline maintains a 300 ft


                                                          15






              The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab   28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


              wavelength with the site lying at the midpoint between the crest and trough. A high berm
              appears about 1 ft in height.

              UM27 is located in the wilderness area of Ludington State Park north of the lighthouse.
              The area is characterized by low dunes near the beach and numerous blowouts.
              1988-At the post-storm survey, the beach was cuspate, however, at the fall survey
              these forms were absent and two prominent bars were present.
              1989-At the spring survey, no cusps appear on the shoreline. The first trough cuts
              very deep and a small berm has appeared. Pebbles exist throughout the beach. In the
              fall, the shoreline has become mildly cuspate again. The large sandy beach has a high
              berm with a terrace on the shoreward side.

              UM28 is located at the north boundary of the Ludington State Park. This site is similar
              to UM27 with low dunes and blowouts.
              1988-At the post-storm and fall surveys there was coarse material on the beach.
              1989-The site appears stable and the shoreline contains no cusps. Three bars are
              evidenced from the shore. The first trough cuts deep and consists of cobbles. The cobbles
              also appear at the swash zone and the nearshore water is very murky. Roots of a tree lie
              across the survey line about 10-15 ft in front of the TBM. In the fall, a large berm
              appears and a wide sandbar occurs 30 ft offshore. Cobble stones appear at the base of the
              bluff.



              DAVIS SITES:

              UM29 is located north of Manistee at a public road easement near the Bar Lake outlet.
              There is rubble revetment at the side of road with seawalls to the north and south of the
              site. This forms a small pocket beach.
              1988-At the fall survey gravel covered the swash zone.
              1989-The pocket beach material has concentrated on the north margin. North of the Bar
              Lake outflow a cut back occurs. The beach contains rubble at the midbeach and a small
              berm. In the fall the sandy, pebbly beach includes a larger berm. The first sandbar has
              migrated to within 1 ft of shore and starts to connect at the northern end of the beach
              with a little water occurring between the berm and connected sandbar. Sand is exposed
              in front of both the northern and southern seawalls.

              UM30 is located at the Sunset Valley Resort near the Benzie/Manistee county line.
              There is a 250 ft bluff to the north exceeding the angle of repose. The site is
              characterized by an eroding bank with a wood seawall to north and old dock pilings to the
              south. The beach material is gravelly.
              1988-At the fall survey, it appeared that beach material had accumulated at the base of
              the bluff.
              1989-The beach has widened in the spring. Rocks appear on the shoreline and
              throughout the wading survey. The shoreline cusps to the north. A large tree is failing
              down on the bluff immediately behind the TBM. In the fall, one band of 3 in rocks lies 10
              ft from the TBM parallel to the shoreline with another lying at the shoreline. Sand
              inhabits the area between the bands. The TBM was buried under 1 in of sand.

              UM31 is located just south of the Point Betsie Lighthouse. There are steel groins to
              the north and south. Low-lying vegetated dunes containing numerous blowouts are
              adjacent to the beach.
              1988-At the spring survey the beach face was very steep and nearshore accretion
              between the structures showed littoral drift to the south. At the fall survey, the beach
              was wider.



                                                         16






                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                1989-The beach remains large in the spring. The southern groin is totally exposed
                containing about 10 ft of gravel and sand seaward. The swash appears at the end of the
                northern groin.


                PETOSKEY:

                UM32 is located at Magnus Municipal Park in Petoskey west of the harbor jetties.
                There is a stone groin to the west and the nearshore bottom is rock slabs. The site has a
                vegetation line instead of a bluff.
                1988-The beach material is sand with coarse cobble material.
                1989-Two berms of large cobble material appear. A build up has occurred on the
                western side of the groin. At the post-storm survey, more dune grass appears in the
                TBM area.

                UM33 is located at the Petoskey Bayfront Park east of the harbor jetties. The
                nearshore bottom is very rocky.
                1988-At the fall survey, evidence of water level drop was prominent.
                1989-The park has planted grass on the bluff for stabilization. Small rocks (1-3 in)
                appear from the base of stairs to the rubble (1-16 in) on the shore. In the post-storm
                survey a moveable webbed plastic piece has been placed over the TBM.

                UM34 is located in the Bayview Association in Petoskey. The site hosts a rubble
                revetment to the East.
                1988-The beach consists of sand and rock.
                1989-To the east, there is a rubble mound groin in place at the end of the rubble
                revetment. At the post-storm survey, new large rocks (8-18 in) appear on line at the
                waterline, surrounded by little rocks. In the fall, sand appears about 10 ft behind the
                waterline.

                UM35 is located at the beach access of Petoskey State Park.
                1988-There is a broad natural sandy beach at this location.
                1989-The broad beach remains. In the fall, large pebbles appear on the beach and a
                sloping berm occurs at the water's edge.

                UM36 is at the end of a city street in Harbor Springs. There is a rubble mound at the
                site with a sheet pile structure to the West.
                1988-Prior to the fall survey, a new rubble mound had been placed to the East.
                1989-The profile of the n-earshore area is as follows: rubble revetment, 10 ft of sand,
                30 ft of smaller rubble (.5-2 ft diameter), sand. At the post-storm survey the eastern
                house has put up a wooden embankment near the westward corner of lot. In the fall more
                rubble has been placed at the eastern house next to the site and more large boulders
                appear on line.


                TAWAS:

                UM37 is located at the end of Aster St. in Tawas. There is a storm sewer drainage pipe
                on a natural beach.
                1988-During the fall survey there was a large drainage canal from the storm sewer,
                most likely due to the rain storm earlier that day.
                1989-The drain pipe has created more water. Sand has accumulated in front of the
                drain, trapping the water. The DNR has placed a permanent monument 15 ft shoreward
                of the TBM around which sand is beginning to erode. At the post-storm survey-the large


                                                            1 7






               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


               beach has become very swampy with a small pond lying south of the TBM. Grass has
               grown at the swampy part near the drain in the fall.

               UM38 is located at the end of E. Birch Dr. in Tawas. This site is characterized as a
               pocket beach with rubble mounds to the north and south.
               1988-There is a very low berm at the vegetation line.
               1989-The first bar has welded to the shore creating a small pond extending south to
               north, parallel to the shore. At the post-storm survey the beach is large with a straight
               shoreline. Water still lies south of the TBM, however, no flow occurs into the lake.
               Southward the water stream has dried and hollowed out. A large berm occurs 10 ft from
               the swash.

               UM39 is located east of the Tawas Point Light near the beach house at Tawas Point State
               Park.
               1988-This area is very shallow showing welding of bar forms to the shoreline. During
               the spring survey, there was a cuspate shore. The fall survey caught a sand wave
               migrating to the south in the survey record.
               1989-The beach has accumulated and the sandbar has welded to the shore and begins to
               weld north of the line. The southerly migrating bar from last year has been exposed. In
               the post-storm survey, the shoreline has large cusps with sandbars perpendicular to the
               beach. A large beach appears north of the TBM, mostly covered with water. Small
               pebbles lie throughout the beach. At the fall survey, a swim area has been created to the
               north. Compared to the previous survey, the water covers more of the beach. The cusps
               of the shoreline have a wavelength of nearly 40 ft.

               UM40 is located south of the Tawas harbor pier in the city park. There is a narrow
               beach seaward of a small concrete seawall.
               1988-At the fall survey there was a small berm on the beach resulting from the storm
               activity earlier in the day.
               1989-In the spring a slight berm appears. A large mound of sand occurs in front of the
               TBM. Black dirt covers the swash area. In the post-storm survey, drainage occurs to
               the south from the pipe and black dirt remains in the swash area.


               PORT SANILAC:

               UM41 is at the base of Murphy Drive in Port Sanilac north of the harbor jetties. This
               site has a broad sandy beach.
               1988-There was gravelly material at the swash zone during the fall survey.
               1989-The beach contains gravel at the swash zone. The fence behind the TBM is nearly
               covered with sand. Vegetation has grown on the hill behind the TBM. At the post-storm
               survey, the TBM lies flush with the sand level.

               UM42 is located at a private residence south of the harbor jetties. This entire stretch
               of coast is structured with an undercut concrete slab at the site and seawalls and groins
               to the north and south.
               1988-At the fall survey, dredge spoils were being deposited south of the harbor and this
               loose clay/mud material was 2-3 in deep in the nearshore region.
               1989-The seawall remains unchanged. Slippery boulders (3-4 ft       wide) augment the
               sand at the seawall's bottom. In the fall sand bags and rebars have been added at the base
               of the seawall. Since the post storm survey, the cement at the base of the wall has
               cracked into 3 pieces.

               UM43 is located at the end of Goldman Avenue in Port Sanilac.



                                                           18






                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                1988-This site was a rocky shoreline with no beach at the spring survey. However, at
                the fall survey, the dredge spoils were actively being deposited approximately 150 ft
                south of the survey range. Approximately 150 ft of material was exposed to air seaward
                of the TBM. The dredge disposal pipe passed across the survey range, and crews were
                busy bulldozing the mud and sand.
                1989-No evidence of dredge spoils exist from previous survey in the spring. Large
                pebbles lie on the beach between the revetment and water line. The nearshore bottom is
                very rocky. The owner next to the line reports hazards exposed during the summer and
                that the dredge muck was in suspension all last summer. At the post-storm survey, a
                small beach has been created in front of the northwest and southwest sides of the TBM
                with a larger beach lying farther south. Many pebbles lie on the beach with larger rocks
                further out. Beyond the rocks, the bottom is very mucky with few rocks. In the fall, the
                beach has narrowed considerably. Only large rocks (2-4 in) remain at the swash.
                Smaller pebbles exist from the shore to the sewer pipe. The beaches mentioned in the
                post storm survey have almost disappeared.

                UM44 is located at the south end of a roadside park near Port Sanilac. This site showed
                gravel in the sand above the swash and a steep bluff to the north with a stream bed to the
                south.
                1988-At the fall survey the stream bed was dry and there was a rocky berm present.
                1989-In the spring a rocky berm with 3-4 in rocks exists and large rocks lie in the
                water. Mucky sand lies at the shoreline and the sand, when present, is very fine. At the
                post-storm survey large rocks and boulders lie offshore. In the fall the rocky berm is
                not noticeable

                UM45 is located at the base of Walker Road south of Port Sanilac. This site is a natural
                beach with a small vegetated bluff.
                1988-At the fall survey, there was a wide swash zone and no evidence of dredge spoils in
                the nearshore survey.
                1989-The sandy beach contains cobble (1-1.5 in) at the water line. One sand bar
                exists past the rocks at a 2 ft depth.
























                                                            9






               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab  28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


               Data Reduction



                     During year one of this research effort, the Interactive Survey Reduction
               Program (ISRP) was utilized (Birkemeier, 1984). This software was selected in
               order to remain consistent with the archive data format of other government agencies
               engaged in survey activity. The program is an IBM based application.
                     In 1989, the OEL, in a move toward consistency of computing facilities within
               the Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Department of the College of
               Engineering, purchased a Macintosh IN personal computer and peripheral digitizing
               board. This provided not only departmental consistency, but streamlined the majority
               of the laboratory's work efforts to the use of one type of computer. The Corps of
               Engineers, as yet, had not adapted ISRP for use on such a mainframe, therefore the OEL
               designed a similar interactive data reduction system with a translator for interchange
               of data files between the UM format and the ISRP format. In this way, consistency of
               database storage was preserved.
                     The reduction and analysis of the raw field data then proceeded in a similar
               manner to that described in the Year One Report. Bathymetric records for each survey
               period and individual site for the two year study were then overplotted for a detailed
               comparison of long and short term topographic changes. These plots are supplied as
               Appendix A.
                     All bathymetric data collected for each survey site was analyzed for unit volume
               change. In addition, detailed analysis of the natural or "equilibrium" profiles for the
               regions of the survey was performed, as well as an investigation of the offshore bar
               characteristics and movement in response to storm induced waves as well as water level
               changes. Methods and results of this analysis are presented in the Discussion section of
               this report.


















                                                        20







                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab     28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-100-5


                113ackground


                        A brief summary of past investigations of coastal erosion on the Michigan
                 coastline is provided in the Year One Report. It is the purpose of this report to evaluate
                 the response of the nearshore profile to storm activity, evaluate short and long term
                 changes in water level, and provide a database for the design of a numerical model of
                 shoreline evolution. Therefore, a discussion of previous work on modelling of this type,
                 equilibrium profile theory and shoreline response to changing water levels follows.


                 Modelling of Shoreline Evolution
                        Three primary approaches exist to the prediction of shoreline evolution and
                beach response for both natural and structurally impacted beaches. These approaches
                are: i) physical models; ii) analytical solutions; and, ill) numerical solutions to the
                mathematical equations which describe the physics of nearshore sediment transport.
                Physical models are generally very costly to accurately construct and tend to be site
                specific. Complete analytical solutions to the governing equations only exist for the most
                simple cases and are generally not applicable to most real shorelines. A numerical
                approximation to the solutions of the governing equations is, therefore, the most
                reasonable approach to the accurate prediction of beach response.
                        Numerous studies of sediment transport and shoreline evolution models have been
                conducted: Bowen (1980) provides an initial formulation of bed and suspended load
                sediment transport;      Bailard (1981, 1982, 1983, and 1985) has developed an
                energetics sediment transport model for a plane sloping beach; Dally and Dean (1984)
                have also developed a suspended sediment transport and beach profile evolution model;
                Hanson (1987) discussed the use of a one-line model of general shoreline change
                (GENESIS); Yang (1981) has investigated on-offshore sediment transport; and, Moore
                (1982) has discussed beach profile evolution in response to changes in water level and
                wave height. Vellinga (1983, 1986) and Kreibel (1982, 1984a, 1984b, 1986, and
                Dean 1985b) have both recently developed relatively reliable beach erosion models.
                Dragos (1981) and Perlin and Dean (1983) developed an N-Line model to predict
                shoreline evolution in response to groin field emplacement. This model was further
                enhanced for application to other coastal structures by Sheffner and Rosati (1987).
                Meadows (1982) adapted this model for use along the Pennsylvania shoreline of Lake
                Erie, a region of relatively simple bathymetry.
                        The one-line model approach, as discussed by Hanson (1987), is limited by the
                fundamental assumption that the natural beach profile does not change with time. One


                                                            21






               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab     28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-100-5



               important implication of this assumption is that cross-shore sediment transport must
               be considered negligible and that the response time for the return of the bottom profile
               to equilibrium after storms is on the order of days or weeks. However, due to the
               hydrodynamic forces in operation within the Great Lakes, such as drastic changes in sea
               level and fetch limited wave growth and as evidenced from this data set, the response
               time is believed to be orders of magnitude longer. In addition, a true two-dimensional
               representation of coastal evolution is what is clearly needed, especially in the vicinity of
               coastal structures, both natural and man-made.
                      Birkemeier, et al (1987) recently evaluated Ballard's, Vellinga's, and Kriebel's
               qualitative shoreline evolution models. Bailard's theoretical models have not had their
               applicability demonstrated, and when they were compared to actual shoreline evolution
               data, the results were "disappointing". The Vellinga model provides good results, but is
               not valid for situations in which there is a mildly sloping beach. The Kriebel model was
               found to work well, but in a limited region; it is only applicable from the swash zone to
               the breaker zone, which is not sufficient coverage for proper prediction of shoreline
               evolution. Therefore, a need exists to develop a well-formulated model which can be
               generally applied to the broad spectrum of real shoreline environments.
                      A numerical model which has been successfully demonstrated for use in the Great
               Lakes region (Meadows, 1982), based upon the previous work and models of LeMehaute
               and Soldate (1977, 1980), and Dragos (1981), and a precursor to the work of Perlin
               and Dean (1983), utilizes a sediment budget technique to numerically balance flows of
               beach material in the alongshore and on-offshore directions. The sediment motions are
               driven by the changes experienced by the incident wave field as it approaches the beach.
               If more sediment enters than leaves the volume of beach under consideration, the beach
               profile swells with sediment. Conversely, if a net deficit of material exists during a
               particular time interval, the beach profile will exhibit erosion.
                      To adapt this capability to the Great Lakes, the models' ability to account for a
                large variation in sediment characteristics and coastal environments must be evaluated.


               Equilibrium Profiles In. the Great Lakes
                      The theory that a beach profile will tend toward an equilibrium shape when
               exposed to constant wave and water level conditions provides a valuable tool for
               numerical modelling of beach profile evolution. The two-thirds power law equilibrium
               beach profile was empirically derived by Bruun (1954). Dean (1977) provided a
               theoretical derivation of this model based on uniform wave energy dissipation per unit
               water volume. This relationship is expressed as:


                                                           22






                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 0       EL-9001-LWMD-10C-5



                                                       d = Asx 2/3
                where d is the water depth, x is the distance offshore, and As is a constant which is
                dependent upon sediment and fluid properties. Moore (1982) presented a relationship
                between As and sediment diameter. This relationship was based on extensive
                experimental data for a wide range of sediment sizes. Balsillie (1987) proposed a model
                for As based on a parameter which includes sediment fall velocity (w) and wave period
                (T) and wave height at the break point (Hb):
                                                           Hb
                                                           WT.
                       The usefulness of the two thirds power law equilibrium beach profile has been
                demonstrated by many investigators. Hughes and Chiu (1978) studied the applicability
                of the two-thirds power law model to the Florida coast. It was found that the equation
                modelled the profile well to 1200 ft offshore. The two thirds power law equilibrium
                profile is used in most current numerical models for coastal evolution, including the
                Genesis model (Larson and Kraus, 1989) and Perlin and Dean (1984). Larson and
                Kraus (1989 ) showed that Deans equilibrium profile could be useful in zones of wave
                reformation. In the development of the SBEACH model of beach profile evolution they
                applied the relationship to the formation and movement of nearshore bars.


                Shoreline Response to Changes in Water Level
                        As outlined by the Impact of Great Lakes Water Levels on Shore Processes
                workshop (Davidson-Arnott and Law, 1989), the key processes affecting the nearshore
                environment are waves and wave generated currents which control sediment erosion,
                transport and deposition. At any individual site, the wave climate is determined by the
                shoreline orientation, fetch lengths, wind climate, and presence of shorefast ice. Storms
                results in an increase of wave energy reaching the shoreline, thus the storm climate is
                an important parameter. In addition, there is a wide range of coastal environments in
                the Great Lakes, ranging from bedrock shorelines through cohesive bluffs to protected
                bays. Each shoreline type may be characterized by a different subset of controlling
                coastal processes. Variations in water levels change the location of still water elevation
                and thus, the area over which these coastal processes operate.
                         In the sand beach and dune environment, increased water levels produce beach
                erosion and act to cut the dune face, while low water levels result in build up of the
                foredune by wind action. Along the Lake Michigan shoreline, there is evidence that the
                foredune construction during lower water levels is inactive, thus indicating that water



                                                             23






              The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-IOC-5


              level cycles may shift the range over which the dominant wave-induced sediment
              processes occur, but may not alter the long term sediment budget.
                      Much of the southern Lake Michigan shoreline is characterized by steep bluff
              faces. In this environment, high water levels may accelerate the bluff recession in the
              short term, thus steepening the bluff slope and decreasing the offshore slope. The
              nearshore would then adjust quickly. Lower water levels would result in a simple
              adjustment (lowering) of the nearshore profile. In some cases, the bluff material
              exposed near the water surface contains boulders or more erosionally resistant
              material. Its presence may serve to reduce erosion by decreasing the exposure of
              erodible bluff to wave forces.
                      Structurally impacted shorelines suffer greatly from our inability to accurately
              predict water level fluctuations. High water levels will overtop structures rendering
              them ineffective, while low water levels may expose the bases of structures causing
              structural degradation.
                      The impact of changing water levels on shoreline morphology and bathymetry
              has long been a topic of interest in both oceanic and Great Lakes coastal research. Bruun
              (1962) suggested that an increase in the mean water level tends to shift the nearshore
              profile landward. Therefore, as water levels rise, erosion prevails on the upper be ach
              causing the shoreline to recede. This eroded material supplies the offshore region
              causing an upward building of the outer profile (see Figure 2).
                      Investigations of beach changes on tideless coasts have been limited. Evans
              (1940) and King and Williams (1949) investigated the variability of longshore bars
              and troughs in the Great Lakes and Mediterranean Sea respectively. The studies of
              Bajorunas and Duane (1967), Davis and Fox (1971, 1974), and Fox and Davis (1971,
              1973) were of limited duration, and therefore were inadequate to evaluate long term
              variability in nearshore bathymetry. Hawley and Judge (1969) evaluated two sets of
              profiles obtained in 1966 and 1967 along the southern Lake Michigan shoreline,
              defining a possible closure depth for the region. Hands (1976, 1979, 1980, and 1983)
              analyzed beach and offshore profile data taken during a period of rising water levels. He
              found Bruun's sediment balance approach to work well for sandy Great Lakes coastlines
              under rising water levels and recommends further investigation under falling water
              levels.
                      Weishar and Wood (1983) propose a conceptual model for barred bathymetry
              response to changes in mean water level based upon a four year set of nearshore profiles
              taken at one month intervals along the Indiana shoreline of Lake Michigan. The model is
              shown in Figure 3. Under the condition of rising lake levels, the inner bar and outer bar


                                                         24





                                                                 87ach        Sea level after rise                              Initial sea level

                                                                               Hypothetical bottom profile
                                                                                 after rise of sea level
                           Actual bottom profile after rise                            Initial bottom profile
                                                                                                                        Bottom otter sea level rise
                         of sea level VW after quantitative                                                                          I ' lot bottom     a
                           bola= bet          owe erosion
                                 vW bottom deposits
                                                                                                          Urniting depth between predomina
                                                                                                            neorshore and offshore material
                                                                                                             and littoral drift characteftics




                      Figure 2. Illustration of Bruun's conceptual model of shoreline change (from Bruun, 1962).


                                                                                              .j
                                                                                              W
                                                                                           zW                          T
                                                                                           41
                                                                                           W                            2
                                                    T                                         W
                                                      I %
                                                A
                                                                                                    T,
                                                        T2                                       TIME IN YEARS




                                                                                              W
                                                                                           zw
                                                                                           4-1
                                                                                           W
                                                                                           MW
                                                                                              x T1 -T2
                                                                                              49
                                                                                              J
                                                8      T,   T2                                   TIME IN YEARS


                                                                                     %



                                                                                              -j
                                                                                              W
                                                                                           zw       T,
                                                                                           49-1
                                                                                           W
                                                                                           2W
                                                                                              x
                                                            T2                                9
                                                C                                             -j                      T2
                                                       T,                                        TIME IN YEARS
                                                                                              W
                                                                                           Z>
                                                                                              W-j   T,







                          Figure 3. Illustration of Weishar and Wood's conceptual model of tideless coastal response
                                        (from Wieshar and Wood, 1983).

                                                                                    25







              The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab   28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-IOC-5



              migrate shoreward. The beach and nearbeach region show a corresponding erosion as
              lake level and wind wave activity advance up the shore face. If no change in water level
              is experienced, there will be movement only of the inner bar in response to storm
              activity. Should water levels decrease, as seen through the duration of the MDNR Coastal
              Monitoring Program, the inner bar and outer bar may migrate offshore and/or show
              erosion. The beach and berm area will increase in subaerial extent and experience
              deposition. As the wave base is lowered, the amount of wave energy impinging the bottom
              at any point will increase, thus increasing sediment transport in deeper regions of the
              profile.










































                                                       26






                 Th e Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab 28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                 IDIscussion


                       To gain basic insight into the dominant coastal processes through the duration of
                 this study, a detailed analysis was performed. In order to examine the forces acting to
                 shape the coastal environment, an evaluation of the wind climate and water level history
                 was completed. Bathymetric response of the nearshore region was estimated through a
                 volume change analysis and longshore bar migration assay. In an effort to establish a
                 characteristic profile shape for various nearshore environments, an examination of the
                 application of the equilibrium profile concept to the data set was undertaken. This
                 section presents a summary of the data analysis and a discussion of the results.


                 Climatology
                       In any study of environmental response, it is of utmost importance to
                 characterize the forcing functions responsible for the observed changes. In this study,
                 and as indicated by previous studies, the two most important factors responsible for
                 coastal evolution, in order of importance, are storm wave activity and water level
                 variations. Engineering structures play a secondary role in modifying the flow
                 structure of the nearshore zone and will be treated in the bathymetric response
                 discussion.
                       Figure 4 illustrates the water level changes experienced through the two year
                 data collection period. The duration of the study saw an overall change in mean water
                 level from 0.6 ft above to 0.2 ft below the long-term mean; 0.8 ft overall.A seasonal
                 cycle is superimposed upon this overall change in mean level. Water level rises during
                 spring and declines during late summer and fall. Between successive spring surveys,
                 the water level fell 0.8 ft, while successive fall surveys experienced a drop of only 0.1
                 ft. In summary, there was a drastic decline in water levels from May to November of
                 1988, followed by a slight rise through the winter of 1988/89. The field season of
                 1989 experienced a sustained lower mean water level, with a slight fall from July to
                 August.
                       The wind climate of the northern and southern portions of Lakes Michigan and
                 Huron through the 1989 field season is provided in Figure S. Similar data for 1988 is
                 included in the Year One Report. Large waves resulting from sustained winds of 10
                 miles per hour or greater are the primary force responsible for the movement of
                 sediment in the coastal zone. Storm frequency was tabulated for the northern and
                 southern reaches of the study for both 1988 and 1989. This data in Figure 6 shows that
                 1988 was characterized by a large number of storms from the south and southwest


                                                          27








                                                                                                                 ... .............                   . ...... ........... ...                .. ................ .      . .................... . ..  . .... .............. ---             .................
                                                                                             lose
                                                                                                                                                                                                     1999                                                                          1990
                                                                                                                                                                                                        . .......                                                                         APR        -MAV JUN      Ff.'
                                                                                                                             OCT NOV DEC JAN FES MAP APR                                  MAV
                                                                                     .. . . .......                                 .... . . .......          . .......... . ............. --      .. .. ... 7W. A                                V! DEC JAN FES
                                                                                                                                                                               ..............
                                                                                                                     ............  ..........               . . ..........                                                           ...........                ..........                .. .. ...  . ............ ..........
                                      :Ft. i          'FEB:MAR;!A             R                    J       :AUG      SEP                                                                                              UG SEP         OCT     NO
                                               .JAN                        P-tl!@AV JUN U


                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ..... . .. .........       . ... ........ ... .........
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ........... .......... .
                                                                                                                                                              ....                                 ..........       .. .... . ............ ............ . . ......... ............ ........
                                                                                                                                                                       t                                                                                                                                       -4+5:
                                      i*5               . . . . . . . . .                                                                                                                                                                                                                            . . . . . . .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 . ...... ............ .......
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ............     ... . .. .. ............ ...

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            .......  ...
                                                                                                                                                                                                                ..... ..........                                         .. . ........ .......
                                                                                                   ............ .. ..... . ..........
                                                              4.         1 Rai                                                                                                                                                                                                           1988
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   +C
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ...........                  . .. ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                                                     . . . ....... ........                              9-60"
                                                                                                                                                                                                          . ......... ....                  .... ......


                                      @+3


                                                                                                                                                                                                             ..........                     . .........         ........... ...........
                                                                                                                                                                                 .... .. .... ..                          . ...........                 ....... .... ...

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .. .... . ......   b
                                                                                                                                                                                        I                                                                                                            --            +2!
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       J
                                        +2                                                                                                                                                                                           7 ......
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ......... .. ...... .. ............ ........ ..
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      . . ........... ..... .
                                                                                                                                                                               . .. .........

                                                                                                                                                                                                           .. ....... ...
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         ...... ... .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               -400
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ..........
                                                                                                                                    . ... ..... ... .......

                                                                                                                                    ... ............ ....
                                                                                                                                                                                                      6-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             p@@ +@@
                                                                                                                              ...........                                             4 Ar         7                                                                                                               0
                                                                                          GN4RT            OAT@'
                                          0
                                                                                                                               . .. . .......... ..                                                                                                                                 .... .......
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          . . ............
                                                                                                                        .. . .... ..... .. ....                  ... ..   . ......

                                                                                                                                                                                       .. ............                                                                                . ........     ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ...... ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     too
                                                  LAKE&
        00
                                                                                             @H GAN                                                .0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                241
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       904 Ma



                                                                                                        ... ... ... .                   ........ ....                                                                                                                                                . .......

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     LEGEND

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     LAKE LEVELS


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         RECORDED



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       .... ......
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         PROBABLE
                                      Figure 4. Water level history for Lakes Michigan and Huron, 1988 and 1989 (from LISAE,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            . . ..........
                                                           1988).

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         1900-1988
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         AVERAGE
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         MAXIMUMtt                       1985 =5 1973 1973
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     77"











                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         MINIMUMtt                                    1934         1926 193'4





                                Climatology of Lake Michigan
            360                               May 1989
            340

            320
            300                                              n
            280
          4)260
          0240
          4)
          0%220
                                                                                41
            200

          0 180

            160

            140

            120

            100

             80

             60

             40
             20                      1   U
             0
                1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 131415 16171819202122232425262728293031

                                                May


                   -Southern Lake Michigan            -----Northern Lake Michigan

             14-



             12-



             10-
          E
             8-                                                                    0


          W  6-



                                                                              1LJ
             4



             2



             0
                                                                               'Vill

                1   3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 @9'3'0';l
                                                May
                Figure 5. Timeseries of 1989 field season wind speed and direction data from National Data
                      Buoy Center.           29





                                 Climatology of Lake Michigan
            360                              June 1989
                                                   mill 0
            340                                       it. 1
            320
          ....%300
          0280
          4)260                                             1
          0240
          9-0220
            200                 'A
          .2180
          u160

            140

            120

            100
            80

            60
            40

            20

             0
               1 2           7 11 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

                                                June


                   -Southern Lake Michigan            ----Northern Lake Michigan

            14-



            12-



          _Cn 10
          E

             8


          CL
          U) 6



             4
                       I                          @jl
                       I                          I    I I                        ? R
             2-



             0
                                                  141
                                                                 oil



































               1 2  3 4 5 6  7 8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
                                                June



                                          30





                                 Climatology of Lake Michigan
                                                July 1989

            360

            340

            320

            300

            280
          4)260
          0240
          0220
          -200

          0180

            160

            140
                                                       lot
            120
                                                       Ito
          '0100

            80
                                                       Ito
            60
            40                                                   Al  I
            20

             0                                                                        rT@
               1 2 3 4 5 6    7 8  9 101 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1920 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
                                                 July


                         Southern Lake Michigan        -'---Northern Lake Michigan

            14-



            12-



            10-



             8 -


          CL
          U) 6



             4-



             2



             0
               1 2 3 4 5   6  7 8  9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
                                                 July



                                             31





                           Climatology of Lake Michigan
                                       August 1989

         360

         340

         320

         300
                         It
       U) 280            1
        0260
        4)240
        .O..o220                              01
                                                            I jNt ild
         200                                  1                    1@
                                              011            Ij
       .2 180                                 0
         160

         140

         120

         100

          80

          60

          40
                                                  IIA A   1
          20                                       ki A   I
                  01                                  51
           0
            1  *3 4 5 6  78 9 1011 12 13 141516 17 18192021 2 2 2 3 2 4'215"216'217 2 8 219 310 311

                                         August


                -Southern Lake Michigan        ----Northern Lake Michigan

           14-



           12-



           10-
         E

           8-



        U) 6



           4



           2-
                     ji,

           0                                     r-rrT-"
            1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   '110 11 12 113 114'115'116 17 1 #8 19 2 0 2 1 212'213'2'4'2'5"2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1
                                         August


                                      32






                            1988 Summer Storm Climatology
                            15.                                                                         Southern
                                                                                                        Northern




                            10



                        U.




                            5-

                        CL






                            0
                                   N         NE         E         9E         s         SW         W         NWN
                                                                   Direction




                            1989 Summer Storm Climatology

                            15-

                                                                                                        Southern
                                                                                                        Northern



                        Oc  10-

                        Cr


                        U.


                        C
                        'D
                        0   5-






                            0
                                   N         NE         E                    S         SW         W         NN
                                                                   Direction



                               Figure 6. 1988 and 1989 Field season Storm climatology by wind direction.



                                                                33







              The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


              impacting northern beaches, and an equal distribution of storms from north and south
              dominating the southern reach of the study. As is evident from Figure 6, the 1989 field
              season storm climate was significantly different from 1988. The southern survey sites
              experienced a large number of storms from the north, while the northern sites enjoyed a
              fairly mild storm season.


              Volumetric Change and Bathymetric Response
                     All bathymetric data collected for each survey site was analyzed for unit volume
               change. The volume analysis program computes changes in elevation and cross-
               sectional area for successive surveys of each profile line. To accomplish this, the
               program linearly interpolates the actual survey data into a series of uniformly spaced
               elevations. Calculations are then made of the elevation change at each digitized distance
               between each survey. The incremental change in cross-sectional area is computed by
               averaging adjacent elevation changes and then multiplying the average by the digitizing
               interval. Incremental volumes are summed to obtain a net profile change. The gross
               profile change is computed as the sum of the absolute val ues of the incremental volume
               changes. The net can be interpreted as the total material added to or removed from the
               surveyed area, while the gross is the amount of material in motion. "Cut" and "fill"
               quantities are also determined. These are areas where a series of adjacent incremental
               volumes are either all negative (cut) indicating erosion, or all positive (fill)
               indicating deposition (see Figure 7).
                     Calculations of annual volume change were derived from both the successive
              spring surveys, as well as the successive fall surveys. A bar chart of the gross and net
              volume change is presented in Figure 8. The difference between gross volume change and
              the absolute value of the net volume change is an indication of the amount of profile
              adjustment such as bar migration. In general, many sites experienced a large amount of
              profile readjustment due to storm activity and the drop in water levels, and very little
              net gain or loss of sediment. However, many high risk erosion areas as identified by the
              MDNR (1974), continued to show overall loss during this period of falling water levels.
                     The New Buffalo sites (UM 1 through 5) show evidence of structural impact with
              growth of the profile at UM 4 and 5, north of the harbor structure, and loss of sediment
              at UM 2 and 3 in the spring comparison. The fall survey comparison for this region
              shows the impact of the beach nourishment at UM 3 which helped to alleviate a large
              portion of the potential erosion, even though some nearshore loss occurred. UM 5 and
              nearby UM 6, two sites with very steep bluffs and nearshore zones, are enjoying a much
              needed period of accretion following the initial adjustment to lower water levels.


                                                        34










                                                         Volume Computation Region




                                               ---------    vertical datum (ex. IGLD) -------------










                                                                                          .................

                                          cut cell             fill cel





                         Figure 7. Volume change computation diagram (after Birkemeier, 1984).



























                                                      35






                                      Volume Accretion (cu           ft/ft-yr)                              Volume Accretion

                                                                                                        61       6)  rb   -I
                                           za                                  Cn                       0   0    0   0    0
                                  0   0    0   0    0                 0    0   0                        0   0    0   0    0
                                  0        0   0    0        8 8      0    0   0                        0   0    0   0    0
                                  0        0   0    0   0    0 0      0    0   0


                                2                                                                     2
                                3                                                    0                3
                                4                                                                     4
                                5                                                                     5
                                6                                                    3                6
                                7                                                    (D               8
                    -n          8                                                OD                   9
                                9                                                CD  0               10'
                               10'
                    (D         11                                                    :r              11
                                                                  --------           to              12'
                    FO         12
                               13'                                                -n                 13
                    <          14                                                                    14
                    0          15                                                    (D              15
                    a          16                        ...................                         17'
                    3
                    CD         17                                                                    18                         Olen
                    0          18
                                                                                                     19
                               19
                                                                                                     20
                               20
                                                                                                     21                      OWN
                    CD      u) 21
                               22                                                                    22.
                               23                                                                    23
                    0       Z  24                                                                 Z  24
                               25                                                                    25
                            El 26                                                                    26'
                    0       Cr 27                                                                 M  27
                               28                                                                    28
                               29
                               3o                                                                    29                     NOW M
                    C          31                                                                    30
                    r.         32                                                                    31
                               33                                                                    32                       OEM
                               34                                                                    33
                    2          35                                                                    34
                    CD         36
                    1<                                                                               35
                    a          37                                                                    36
                               38                                                                    37
                               39                                                                    38
                               40
                               41                                                                    39.
                               42                                                                    40    Igo
                               43                                                                    41
                               44                                                                    42
                                                                                                     43
                                                                                                     44
                                                                                                     4511






                 The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28  February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5



                        Throughout the reoccupied Davis (1976) sites (UM 6 through 18, and 29
                 through 31), high risk erosion areas continued to exhibit either dominant shoreline
                 adjustment or continued nearshore loss. Bluffs and dune faces remained fairly stable,
                 reducing the supply of littoral material to the coastal zone and causing nearshore loss to
                 maintain the sediment budget balance.
                        Volume change analysis at the Ludington sites (UM 19 through 28), as in New
                 Buffalo, exhibits the effect of the harbor structure at the City of Ludington. Recall from
                 the climatology that the major portion of the storms during the field season of 1988
                 were from the south. This is physically expressed by the gain of sediment on the south
                 side of the harbor jetties (UM 19 and 20) and a loss on the north side (UM 21 and 22).
                 During 1989, this region experienced very few storms with slightly higher occurrence
                 of a southerly component. The volume change data for the fall surveys reflects this as a
                 decrease in net movement for the sites near the structure and a reversal in the gain/loss
                 pattern. The sites comprising the Ludington State Park and Big Sable Point experienced
                 some combination of coastal readjustment and nearshore gain.
                        The five survey lines in Little Traverse Bay (UM 32 through 36) show the
                 smallest volumetric change of the study. LIM 32, 33, 34 and 36 are shaped by large
                 boulders, and in some cases bedrock, thus very little nearshore change should be
                 expected. It is impossible to distinguish survey error from real volume change if the
                 value lies below approximately 500 cu ft/ft-yr, therefore, it is necessary to conclude
                 that any changes in the nearshore bathymetry for this region were too small during the
                 past two field seasons to be detected by this hydrographic survey technique, with the
                 exception of a small gain at the Bayview site for the spring comparison and a small gain
                 at the Petoskey State Park for the fall.
                        The Tawas region (UM 37 through 40) appears, on average, to have benefited
                 from the failing water levels. The profiles have inflated in all but two annual
                 comparisons. The spring volume change shows a loss of material at the Tawas Point site.
                 This site is an extremely active region of the point characterized by multiple nearshore
                 bars and cross-shore sand waves. This loss may be attributed to the longshore migration
                 of a sand wave through the survey range.
                        Five sites were monitored in the Port Sanilac area (UM 41 through 45). The
                 volume analysis for this site is complicated by dredge activity at the harbor during the
                 late summer 1988. In August, the harbor mouth was dredged and the very fine spoil
                 material was deposited at site UM 43. In addition, the activity of the dredge caused a
                 large amount of material to accumulate at UM 42. The north side of the harbor structure
                 (UM 41) exhibited normal structurally impacted behavior, similar to that of another


                                                             37







                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5



                southern site, UM 4. The southernmost survey site   (UM 45) shows simple coastal
                readjustment with very little net change.
                       To examine the process of coastal readjustment in more detail, measurements of
                inner and outer nearshore bar position were made for all of the survey sites. These
                values were then compared over a one year time lapse (spring to spring, fall to fall) to
                provide estimates of bar migration. These data are presented in Figure 9. As proposed
                by Weishar and Wood (1983), on a tideless coast, the inner bar will move in response
                to the wind wave climate, while the outer bar depth will exhibit a strong correlation to
                variations in water level. The model suggests that as water level falls, one should
                expect the outer bar to migrate offshore. These two trends are exhibited in Figure 9.
                Here it can be seen that the inner bar migration is approximately equally distributed
                between onshore and offshore movement, while the outer bar exhibits a strong tendency
                for offshore migration. In the New Buffalo region, however, the migration of the outer
                bar is adverse to the Weishar and Wood model. The site exhibiting this adverse bar
                movement in the New Buffalo region are exposed to large structural impact which may
                affect 'onshore transport to the depth of the outer bar and produce onshore migration of
                that bar, which will far outweigh the effects of falling water levels.

                Equilibrium Profile Evaluation
                      The procedure used to analyze the data is from Balsillie (1987). As values were
                calculated using the numerical curve fitting procedure described in the above paper. The
                exponent is fixed at 2/3 and As is calculated by the following direct method:
                                                     As = Idmx  2/3
                                                           y 4/3
                                                            ,x

                where dm is the actual water depth and x is the distance offshore. The power curve fit is
                assessed using the root-mean-square-error, Erms. The lower the value of Erms the
                better the fit.
                                                   s          (d -_ d _m@
                              2/3              Erm              n  1
                where d = Asx     is the calculated depth.










                                                           38







                                    Offshore Movement (ft/yr)                             Offshore Move

                                        -I                 K)   (a                &     rb    -I
                            C3    0     0                  0    0                 0     0     0
                            0     0     0      0    0      0    0                 0     0     C3    0

                           2                                                     2-
                           3                                       0             3-           0
                           4          *0                           C             4-
                2i         5           00                                        5-                0
                                                                                 6-               0*
                           6

                                                                                 8                 0
                           8                                                     9         0
                           9
                         10                     0                               10-                0
                         11                           0                         11-                0
                                                *0
                         13                    G                                13-
                         14                                                     14-                0
                         lb                0                                    lb.                   00
                0
                a        16                                                     16-               0
                (D       17                0                                    17-                0
                cr       18                                                     18-              *0
                SD       19                                                     19-
                         20                                                     2U.                   00
                       U)                                                       21-
                0        21                        0
                <        22                      0                              22-
                M                                                               Z 3                   0
                a      z
                CD     c 24                     0*                           c  24-
                       C3 25                       0                         3  25-
                        r                                                    cr
                <        26                      0                              26-
                0                                                               27-
                         27
                         28                     0                               28.                   0
                (a       29                                                     29-
                         30                     0                               30
                C:       31                                                     31                    0*
                9        32                                                     32
                U)       33                                                     33
                         34                                                     34
                                                                                                   04
                (D       35                                                     35
                         36                                * 0                  36
                         37                      0                              37-
                                                           -n ca
                (D       38                         0                           38-
                         39                 0                                   39-                     0
                                                              =3
                         40                                   19                40-
                         41                                                     41
                         42                                                     42
                         43                                                     43
                         44                                                     44
                         45                                                     451







              The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab  28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5



                     Balsillie used the following scale for determining the nature of the profile from
              the Erms value:


                                       Erms                     Description

                                     0.0 - 1.0                     Smooth

                                     1.0 - 2.0                 Slightly Barred
                                     2.0 - 3.0               Moderately Barred

                                     3.0 - 4.0                Strongly Barred
                                       > 4.0                       Suspect


              The use of this scale required that the linear correlation coefficient exceeded 0.95 and
              that the Erms value was less than 4.0. The linear correlation coefficient was calculated
              by the following equation:
                                                      Xi dmi - N 3E am-

                                     rid.





               where N is the number of depth measurements, _x is the average distance and dm is the
              average depth.


                     The analysis was performed for the full surveyed profile for two reasons. The
              first was to facilitate comparison with Balsillie's results. The second reason was because
              the surveys were designed to extend to the depth of closure for the Great Lakes, hence any
              shoreward limit such as that suggested by Hughes and Chiu (1978) could yield
              unreliable results. The correlation coefficients for the entire surveyed profile were
              generally above the 0.95 limit set by Balsillie (see Figure 10). Most of the UM profiles
              were slightly to moderately barred as exhibited in Figure 10. The temporal constancy
              of the Erms values shows that the barred profile is a stable feature of the Great Lakes
              coastline. The barred nature of most of the profiles renders the power law unsuitable
              for modelling processes which are strongly dependent upon the smaller scale features of
              the profile. The general shapes of the entire surveyed profiles are modelled accurately
              by the two-thirds power law.
                     The model gives very consistent results for UM1-UM25, the best fit shape
              coefficients in Figure 11 show that the profiles maintain the same general shape over



                                                       40








                                                                                                                                                                    Erms
                                             CORRELATION COEFFICIENT



           (D                 a                                                                                                   0
                              :-4                    bD
           -&                                         1                                                                           1                      M+
        (D                   0                                                                                                    2                       04*
        .0                   1                                                               OAM                                  3                              wo
           3)                2                                                                NN                                                                 &        +
           0                                                                                                                      4
        cr 0                 3                                                                                                    5                              +oft
                             4             x   p                                            00              z                     6                              0 be
           3                 5                                                                              m                     7                              *+
           (D                              -n  -o  cp   Ti -a  cp
                                           P3  (40 "o      fj) 'D                    mo xu                  >                                           Dow*
                             7                     =                                    I I "
        0                                  00  OD  = , 00  OD                                               m                                            +
                                               0   (D  00  OD                                                                     10
                           10                                                                               0                     12                     8    so 0
                                                                                                            m                     13
        0  (D              12
        CL -,                                                                                               m           c         14
        (D                 13                                                                *M             m           K         15                              @10
                           14                                                              0 4xm            r-          c/)       16                         m 4
                           16                                                                               >
           m                                                                                                            ar        17                                W*
           OL     c:       Is                                                                               -4                    1a                    *+
                           17                                                        mm                                 z
                  K                                                                                         F)          a         19                 Of. So
    A.                     is                                                                    ON                     3
           (D     U)                                                                                        z                     20                          M         00
                           19                                                                  am                       47
                                                                                                                        (D        21                     eon 4
                  CMD      20                                                                               0                     22
                  z        21                                                                               0                     23                                     oq@
           0      c
           -4     3        22                                                                 x a           m                     24                                  0
           (D     CT       23                                                                               In                    25                                    910
                  (D
                           24                                                                                 n
           0               25                                                                                                     26                                   400
                           26                                                                                                     27
                                                                                                            m                     28
           0               27
           (D              28                                                 a x                           z                     29
                           29                                                00 m             x                                   30                          +
                                                                                                                                  31
           CD              30                                                                                                     32-
                           31                                                     IDM
                           32                                                                                                     33,
                                                                                                                                  34 "
                           33                                                                                                     35-
                           34                                                               ow                                    36-
                           35                                                                                                     37
           0               36                                                                                                     38
                           37
           =r                                                                                                                     39
                           38                                                                                                     40
                           39
           W                                                                                                                      4;                                       Ell
           'a              40     ly
           0                                                                                                                      4             0        m
                           41                                                               me                                    43
                           42
           (D                                                                                                                     44
                           43                                                              mxw                                    46                        E*
                           44                                                                   mm
                           45













           EQUILIBRIUM PROFILE SHAPE COEFFICIENTS                             0 Spring 88
            0.4-                                                              0  PS 88

                                                                              K  Fall 88
                                                                              a  Spring 89
                                                                              2  PS 89
            0.3-
                                                                              A  Fall 89
        A
        Q


        0
        0   0.2-
        0
        CL


        to







            0.0               1 1 1 1Is oil 111 11111.11 111 111 gill         Ia
                              abo- Cum* Me?, Cabo -Cy",* OWN 0.00 -(M" Ittew  1, 40 . . . I . . I
                                - - - - - - - - - -N N W " N N " W N M " ""0 " " M " " 0 V V V V V V    I
                                            UM Site Number




                     Figure 11. Equilibrium profile shape coefficients for UM survey sites.




















                                               42







                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab   28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                time. The profiles exhibiting considerable variation are those for which the Erms values
                indicate that the two thirds power law does not adequately describe the profile shape.
                       The fall, spring, and post-storm values of As (Figure 12) were compared using
                paired sample T-tests. These tests show that despite the fluctuations in water level
                between the surveys the mean As values do not change. This indicates that the general
                profile shape is not changed by water level fluctuations; it is shifted landward or
                seaward while maintaining the same general form. Therefore models that utilize this
                assumption to predict recession due to water level changes should be useful on the Great
                Lakes (Bruun, 1962)
                       The sediment size distributions were obtained as described in the Year One
                Report. The mean Phi values acquired at 3 ft depth intervals were averaged for each
                profile. Comparison of mean sediment diameter with best fit As values (Figure 13)
                shows that there is no direct relationship. Moores' relationship between sediment
                diameter and shape coefficient was based on a wide range of sediment sizes, however, all
                of the profiles had mean sediment size of medium to fine sands. The variations in mean
                sediment diameter occurred on too small a scale to allow the use of Moores' empirical
                relationship. It is therefore recommended that As values be computed directly from
                profile data if available.




























                                                           43








                                      LIM 29 Spring 88
                                  10


                                   0


                                -10


                                                                                                 DCALC
                         CL     -20
                                                                                                 DMEAS
                                -30


                                -40


                                -50
                                    0    1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

                                               DISTANCE OFFSHORE


















                                   UM 1 Spring 88

                                10-


                                01



                              -10-
                       CL                                                                      DCALC
                                                                                               DMEAS
                              -20-



                              -30-



                              -40-
                                   0           1000           2000           3000
                                                 Distance Offshore


              Figure 12. Examples of two thirds power law equilibrium profile fit to data. UM29 is a poor
                       fit. UMI is a good fit.


                                                       44














              Sediment Diameter vs. Best fit Shape Coefficient
                                                                                         0   Spring W
                 0.4-                                                                    *   PS 88
                                                                                         +   Fall 88
                                                                                         0   Spring 89
                                                                                         0   PS 89
                 0.3-                                                                    11  Fall 89



          LU
                 0.2-

          U-





                 0.1 -
                                                                           N9





                 0.0
                     0                            1                            2                            3

                                               AVERAGE SEDIMENT DIAMETER (PHI UNITS)




                           Figure 13. Mean sediment diameter vs. best fit shape coefficients.



















                                                         45







                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab     28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                lConclusions


                       Through the support of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and the
                people of the State of Michigan, The University of Michigan Ocean Engineering
                Laboratory has completed two years of a study of the long term response of the lower
                peninsula coastline to changes in wave climate and mean water level. In addition to
                providing insight into the physical processes shaping the coastal zone, this research
                effort has provided a large portion of the data necessary for evaluation of shoreline
                evolution models for use in the Great Lakes.
                       The study encompassed a period of falling mean water levels throughout the Great
                Lakes. It was found that the conceptual model proposed by Weishar and Wood (1983) is
                an accurate characterization of the changes of the nearshore region in response to
                falling mean water level. In general, the model suggests that as water level falls, the
                outer bar will migrate offshore and the inner bar will remain sensitive to storm
                influence. However, it was found that in regions exposed to large structural impact,
                onshore transport may be affected to the depth of the outer bar. This may produce
                onshore migration of that bar, which greatly outweighs the effects of falling water
                levels. In addition to coastal readjustment, the nearshore zone, in some cases, exhibited
                net volume loss with falling lake levels, contrary to the belief that lower water levels
                will halt erosion. This is due to the fact that the coastal zone always strives for a
                balanced sediment budget. If bluff erosion Is discontinued due to falling lake levels, this
                sediment source must be shifted to another area of the profile, specifically, the
                nearshore zone. The erosion rate may decrease, but will probably not stop altogether.
                       In an effort to gain insight into shoreline evolution modelling, it was found useful
                to examine the conformation of the coastal bathymetry to an equilibrium profile. The
                popular two-thirds power law of Dean (1977) was tested for the profiles in this
                database. In general, it was found that the two-thirds power law equilibrium profile
                worked well for the open coast profiles, indicating that profile shape does not change in
                response to water level changes, rather the profile is shifted landward or seaward. In
                the past the shape parameter was determined by an empirical relation with the mean
                sediment grain size. This study indicates that the range of sediment sizes in the study
                region is too narrow for Moores' relationship to adequately characterize the shape
                parameter. It is suggested that this value be determined from a best fit to the profile
                data when available, as recommended by Balsillie (1987).




                                                            46







                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab      28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5



                        The water level history of the past two years has provided the OEL with a unique
                 opportunity to study the response of the shoreline to falling mean lake levels. Historic
                 studies in the Great Lakes region have typically characterized periods of rising lake
                 levels, or have concentrated on the short term effects of storm induced waves. As sited
                 by Hails (1974), the long term commitment of funds to monitor changes throughout a
                 lake level cycle are not readily available, and many historic studies reflect this lack of

                 commitment.



























































                                                             41







               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab     28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                 Acknowledgernents

                       Our thanks to the State of Michigan, Department of Natural Resources for
                 responding to need through not only financially supporting the coastal monitoring
                 program but also by providing the MDNR survey crews, and State Parks access and
                 logistic support (Van Buren, P.J. Hoffmaster, Ludington, Petoskey, and Tawas Point).
                 In particular, thanks to Mr. Martin Jannereth, Mr. Chris Shafer, Mr. Gary Bilow, and
                 Mr.John Spencer.
                       In addition, the understanding and support of the people of the State of Michigan
                 who allowed us the opportunity to conduct this study on their property was essential and
                 invaluable.
                       UM02        -  Mr. Eric Hamburger, Grand Beach
                       UM03        -  Mr. Roland Oselka, Dunewood Development Co., New Buffalo
                       UM04        -  Mr. Steve Hahn, Superintendent, New Buffalo
                                      Mr. Tom Johnson, City Manager, New Buffalo
                                      Mr. William Geislet, Park Director, New Buffalo
                       UM05        -  Ms. Dorothy Kriz, New Buffalo
                                      Mr. and Mrs. Bethel, New Buffalo
                       UM06        -  Mr. Eric Berman
                       UM07        -  Ms. Phyllis Rieves, Resident Manager, C halet-o n-the- Lake,
                                        Stevensville
                       UM08        -  Mr. Frank Vitale, Hagar Township Board
                       UM1 1       -  Mr. Bill Campion, Village of Douglas
                       UM12        -  Mr. Stuart Visser, Park Township
                       UM13        -  Mr. Jerry Postema, Grand Haven Township
                       UM18        -  Summit Township
                       UM19        -  Ms. Connie Anderson, Treasurer, Pere Marquette Township
                                      Mr. Frank Schubert
                       UM20        -  Mr. and Mrs. Ptaszenski
                       UM21        -  Mr. Gerald J. Richards, City Manager, Ludington
                       UM24        -  Dr. Ronald Hutchinson, Foundation for Behavioral Research
                                      Mr. and Mrs. Ed Hallin, Big Sable Point Conference Center
                                      Mr. and Mrs. Dick Smith, Big Sable Point Lightkeepers Assn.
                       UM30        -  Mr. and Mrs. Howard Saidla, Sunset Valley Resort
                       UM32-33     -  Mr. Allen Hansen, Dir. of Parks and Recreation, City of Petoskey
                       UM34        -  The Bayview Association
                       UM37        -  Dr. Leslie A. Lambert, Tawas
                       UM38        -  Davison and Son Builders, Inc., Tawas
                       UM42        -  Mr. Paul Weeman, Pon Sanilac
                                      Mr. and Mrs. Wallaert, Port Sanilac
                       UM43        -  Mr. Don Dharte, Warren
                       Finally, this work could not have been accomplished without the dedication of the
                 members of the Ocean Engineering Laboratory of The University of Michigan.
                       Dr. Guy A. Meadows, director          Mr. Gary Root
                       Mr. Tony Bromwell                     Ms. Jennifer Saltzman
                       Mr. Messon Gbah                       Mr. Steve Sharples
                       Mr. Erik Gottlieb                     Mr. Roger Shugart
                       Mr. Matthew Halpin                    Ms. Anne Smith
                       Mr. Brian Haus                        Ms. Debby Weir Adler
                       Ms. Lorelle Meadows                   Ms. Mary Wise
                       Mr. Jeff Pazdalski                    Mr. Phil Wrzesinski
                       Ms. Terra Reno                        Ms. Suzette Zick




                                                           48







                The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab     28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                lReferences

                  Armstrong, J.M., et al. (1975) "Great Lakes shoreline damage survey: Muskegon,
                    Manistee, Schoolcraft, Chippewa, Alcona and Huron Counties, Michigan," App. 111, US
                    Army Engineer Division, North Central, Chicago, Illinois.

                  Bailard, J.A. (1981) "An energetics total load sediment transport model for a plane
                    sloping beach," Journal of Geophysical Research, 86, C1 1, pp 10938-10954.

                  Ballard, J.A. (1982) "A model for on-offshore sediment transport in the surfzone,"
                    Technical Report N-1649, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme,
                    California.

                  Bailard, J.A. (1983) "Modeling on-offshore sediment transport in the surfzone,"
                    Proceedings of the 19th Coastal Engineering Conference, American Society of Civil
                    Engineers, pp 1419-1438.

                  Bailard, J.A. (1985) "Simple models for surfzone sediment transport," Technical Note
                    N-1740, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, port Hueneme, California.

                  Bajorunas, L. and Duane, D.B. (1967) "Shifting offshore bars and harbor shoaling,"
                    Journal of Geophysical Research, 72, p 6195-6205.

                  Balsillie, James H. (1987) "Nearshore Profiles: Geometric Prediction, Spatial and
                    Temporal Sampling Adequacy," Florida Department of Natural Resources, Beaches and
                    Shores Technical and Design Memorandum No. 87-2, 40 p.

                  Berg, R.C. and C. Collinson (1976) "Bluff erosion, recession rates and volumetric
                    losses on the Lake Michigan shore of Illinois," Environmental Geology Notes, no. 76.

                  Berquist, C.R. and W.F. Tanner (1974) "Analysis of Water-Level Rise Effects on
                    Littoral Transport," Transactions of the Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies,
                    XXIV: 255-256.

                  Birkemeier, W.A. (1980) "The effect of structures and lake level on bluff and shore
                    erosion in Berrien County, Michigan 1970-74," Miscellaneous Report No. 80-2, US
                    Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

                  Birkemeier, W.A. (1981) "Coastal changes, Eastern Lake Michigan, 1970-74,"
                    Miscellaneous Report 81-2, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Fort
                    Belvoir, Virginia.

                  Birkemeier, W.A. (1984) "A User's Guide to ISRP: The Interactive Survey Reduction
                    Program Instruction Report CERC-84-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
                    Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
                  Birkemeler, W.A., N.C. Kraus, N.W. Scheffner and S.C. Knowles (1987) "Feasibility
                    Study of Quantitative Erosion Models for Use by the Federal Emergency Management
                    Agency in the Prediction of Coastal Flooding," Technical Report CERC-87-8, US Army
                    Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.




                                                             49







               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                Bowen, A.J. (1980), "Simple Models of Nearshore Sedimentation; Beach Profiles and
                 Longshore Bars," in McCann, S.B. ed., The Coastline of Canada, Geological Survey of
                 Canada, Paper 80-10, pp 1-11.

                Bruun, P. (1954) "Coast Erosion and the Development of Beach Profiles," Technical
                 Memorandum No. 44, Beach Erosion Board, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

                Bruun, P. (1962) "Sea-level Rise as a Cause of Shore Erosion," Journal of Waterways,
                 Harbors and Coast Eng Div, 88, p. 117-130.

                Buckler, W. R. (1981) "Rates and implications of bluff recession along the Lake
                 Michigan shoreline of Michigan and Wisconsin," Michigan State University Ph.D.
                 Dissertation, pp. 206.

                Buckler, W.R. and H.A. Winter (1975) "Rates of bluff recession at selected sites along
                 the southern shore of Lake Michigan," Michigan Academian, Vol. 8, No. 2.

                Dally, W.R., and R.G. Dean (1984), "Suspended Sediment Transport and Beach Profile
                 Evolution," Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Engineering, Vol 110, No.
                 1, pp 15-33.

                Davidson-Arnott, R.G.D. and M.N. Law (1989) Impact of Great Lakes Water Levels on
                 Shore Processes, Workshol2 5ummaly, International Joint Commission Workshop,
                 October 1988.

                Davis, R.A., Jr. (1976) "Coastal changes, Eastern Lake Michigan, 1970-73,"
                 Technical Paper 76-16, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,         Fort
                 Belvoir, Virginia.

                Davis, R.A., Jr., W.G. Fingleton, and P.C. Pritchett (1975) "Beach profile changes, east
                 coast of Lake Michigan, 1970-72," Miscellaneous Paper 10-75, US Army Engineer
                 Waterways Experiment Station, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

                Davis, R.A. and W.T. Fox (1971) "Beach and Nearshore Dynamics in Eastern Lake
                 Michigan," ONR Tech Rept 4,142 p.

                Davis, R.A. and W.T. Fox (1974) "Simultaneous. Process-Response Study on the East
                 and West Coasts of Lake Michigan," ONR Tech Rept 13, 61 p.

                Davis, R.A., Jr., and D.F.R. McGeary (1965) "Stability in nearshore bottom topography
                 and sediment distribution, southeastern Lake Michigan," Proceedings of the Eighth
                 Conference on Great Lakes Research, International Association for Great Lakes
                 Research, pp. 222-231.

                Dean, R. G. (1977) "Equilibrium Beach Profiles and Response to Storms," Coastal
                 Engineering Abstracts American Society of Civil Engineers, pp 140-141.

                Dragos, P.M. (1981), "A Three Dimensional Numerical Model of Sediment Transport in
                 the Vicinity of Littoral Barriers," M.S. Thesis, University of Delaware, Newark,
                 Delaware.

                Evans, O.F. (1940) "The Low and Ball of the East Shore of Lake Michigan," Journal of
                 Geology,   48, p. 476-511.



                                                          50







               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab    28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-IOC-5



                 Fox, W.T. and R.A. Davis Jr. (1970) "Profile of a storm: wind, waves and erosion on
                   the southeastern shore of Lake Michigan," Proceedings of the 13th Conference on
                   Great Lakes Research, International Association for Great Lakes Research, Vol 1, pp.
                   233-241.

                 Fox W.T. and R.A. Davis (1971) "Computer Simulation Model of Coastal Processes in
                   Eastern Lake Michigan," ONR Tech Rept. 5, 111 p.

                 Fox W.T. and R.A. Davis (1973) "Simulation Model for Storm Cycles and Beach Erosion
                   on Lake Michigan," Geological Society of America Bulletin, 84, p 1769-1790.

                 Hails, J.R. (1974) "A Review of Some Current Trends in Nearshore Research," Earth-
                   Science Reviews, Vol. 10, pp. 171-202.

                 Hands, E.B. (1976) "Observations of barred coastal profiles under the influence of
                   rising water levels, eastern Lake Michigan, 1967-1971," Technical Report 76-1,
                   US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

                 Hands, E.B. (1979) "Changes in rates of shore retreat, Lake Michigan, 1967-76,"
                   Technical Paper 79-4, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Fort
                   Belvoir, Virginia.

                 Hands, E.B. (1980) "Prediction of Shore Retreat and Nearshore Profile Adjustments to
                   Rising Water Levels on the Great Lakes," Technical Paper No. 80-7, US Army
                   Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

                 Hands, E.B. (1983) "The Great Lakes as a Test Model for Profile Responses to Sea Level
                   Changes," CRO Handbook of Coastal Processes and Erosion, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL,
                   p 167-190.

                 Hanson, H. (1987) "GENESIS, A Generalized Shoreline Change Numerical Model for
                   Engineering Use," Report No. 1007, Lund University, Institute of Science and
                   Technology, Lund, Sweden.

                 Hawley, E.F. and C.W. Judge (1969) "Characteristics of Lake Michigan bottom profiles
                   and sediments from Lakeside, Michigan to Gary, Indiana," Proceedings of the Twelfth
                   Conference on Great Lakes Research, International Association of Great Lakes
                   Research, pp 198-209.

                 Hughes, S. A. and Chiu, T. Y. (1978) "The Variations in Beach Profiles When
                   Approximated by a Theoretical Curve," Technical Report No. 039, Department of
                   Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering, University of Florida.

                 King, C.A.M. and W.W. Williams (1949) "The Formation and Movement of Sand Bars by
                   Wave Action," Geogr Jour, 113, p 70-80.

                 Kriebel, D.L. (1982) "Beach and Dune Response to Hurricanes," M.S. Thesis,
                   Department of Civil Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware.
                 Kriebel, D.L. (1984a) "Beach Erosion Model (EBEACH) Users Manual, Volume 1:
                   Description of Computer Model," Beaches and Shores Technical Design Memorandum



                                                           51






              The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab  28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                No. 84-5-1, Division of Beaches and Shores, Florida Department of Natural
                Resources, Tallahassee, Florida.

              Kriebel, D.L. (1984b) "Beach Erosion Model (EBEACH) Users Manual, Volume 11:
                Theory and Background," Beaches and Shores Technical Design Memorandum No. 84-
                5-11, Division of Beaches and Shores, Florida Department of Natural Resources,
                Tallahassee, Florida.

              Kriebel, D.L. (1986) "Verification study of a dune erosion model," Shore and Beach,
                Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 13-20.

              Kriebel, D.L. and R.G. Dean (1985a) "Beach and dune response to severe storms,"
                Proceedings of the 9th Coastal Engineering Conference, American Society of Civil
                Engineers, pp 1584-1599.

              Kriebel, D.L. and R.G. Dean (1985b) "Numerical simulation of time-dependent beach
                and dune erosion," Coastal Engineering, 9, pp 221-245.

              Larson, M. and N.C. Kraus (1989) "SBEACH: Numerical model for simulating storm-
                induced beach change," Technical Report No. CERC89-9, U.S. Army Corps of
                Engineers, Coastal Engineering Research Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

              LeMehaute, B. and M. Soldate (1977) "Mathematical Modeling of Shoreline Evolution,"
                Miscellaneous Report No. 77-10, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Engineering
                Research Center, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

              LeMehaute, B. and M. Soldate (1980) "A Numerical Model for Predicting Shoreline
                Changes", Miscellaneous Report No. 80-6, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal
                Engineering Research Center, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

              Maresca, J.W. (1975) *Bluffline recession, beach change and nearshore change related
                to storm passage along southeastern Lake Michigan," Ph.D. Dissertation, The
                University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

              Meadows, G.A. (1982) "Development of a predictive model for Lake Erie shoreline
                stabilization structures as part of the implementation of the Pennsylvania Coastal
                .Zone Management Program," Technical Report, Coastal Dynamics, Incorporated, Ann
                Arbor, Michigan.

              Michigan Department of Natural Resources (1975) "1975 Erosion Areas: Western
                Michigan," Lansing, Michigan.

              Moore, B. (1982) "Beach Profile Evolution in Response to Changes in Water Level and
                Wave Height," unpublished M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University
                of Delaware, Newark, Delaware.

              OEL (1989) "Coastal monitoring program and shoreline evolution model year one:
                Report to the State of Michigan," OEL Report No. OEL-8901-LWMD-10C-5, The
                University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

              Perlin, M. and R.G. Dean (1983) "A Numerical Model to Simulate Sediment Transport
                in the Vicinity of Coastal Structures," Miscellaneous Report 83-10, US Army Corps
                of Engineering, Coastal Engineering Research Center, Fort Belvoir, VA.



                                                       52






               The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab   28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5


                Saylor, J.H. and E.B. Hands (1970) "Properties of longshore bars in the Great Lakes,"
                  Proceedings of the Twelfth Conference on Great Lakes Research, International
                  Association of Great Lakes Research, pp. 839-853.

                Scheffner, N.W. and J.D. Rosati (1987) "A Users Guide to the N-Line model: A
                  Numerical Model to Simulate Sediment Transport in the Vicinity of Coastal
                  Structures," Instruction Report CERC-87-4, US Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal
                  Engineering Research Center, Vicksburg, MS.

                Seibel, E. (1972) "Shore erosion at selected sites along Lake Michigan and Huron,"
                  Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

                US Army Engineers (1988) "Monthly bulletin of lake levels for the Great Lakes," US
                  Army Engineer Detroit District, Detroit, Michigan, December 1988.

                Vellinga, P. (1983) "Predictive computation model for beach and dune erosion,"
                  Proceedings of Coastal Structure '83, American Society of Civil Engineers, pp 806-
                  819.

                Vellinga, P. (1986) "Beach and dune erosion during storm surges," Communications
                  No. 372, Delft Hydraulics Laboratory, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The
                  Netherlands.

                Weishar, L.L. and W.L. Wood (1983) "An Evaluation of Offshore and Beach Changes on a
                  Tideless Coast," Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 53:3, p 847-858.

                Wood, W.L. (1970a) "Horizontal particle velocity profiles beneath the crests of waves
                  breaking on a submarine bar," Technical Report No. 3, Dept. of Geology, Michigan
                  State University, 68 pp.

                Wood, W.L. (1970b) "Transformations of breaking wave characteristics over a
                  submarine bar," Technical Report No. 4, Dept. of Geology, Michigan State University,
                  114 pp.

                Wood, W.L. (1986) "Coastal response to lake-level variation and storm wave
                  occurrence in southern Lake Michigan," Proceed;ngs: Symposium on Shoreline
                  Processes, Indiana Dunes Research Conference, Gary, Indiana, pp. 23-33.

                Yang, W-C. (1981) "Surf Zone Properties and On/Offshore Sediment Transport,"
                  unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Delaware,
                  Newark, Delaware.
















                                                         53



 I
              The Univ. of Mich. Ocean Eng. Lab 28 February 1990 OEL-9001-LWMD-10C-5
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
                                              Appendix A:
 I                                            Bathymetry
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 1                                                55













          Appendix A consists of overplots of successive surveys at each site. The
          dates beneath the plot title are the actual survey dates. In general, the
          key proceeds from most recent survey through the original survey. Due to
          an error in the Excel software as provided by Excel, the key is illegible.
          Therefore, the following table will provide the key for the survey graphs.


              Line Type       UIV11-5,19-28      UIV16-1 8,29-31      UM32-45
                                 Fall '89           Fall '89           Fall '89
                                Spring '89         Spring '89      Post-Storm '89
                                 Fall '88           Fall '88         Spring '89
                             Post-Storm '88        Spring '88          Fall '88
                                Spring '88                           Spring '89


          The site names associated with each survey number are tabulated on the
          following page.







            SURVEY LINES LABEL
            ISRP CHARACTER.                               Label
            Nn-                                          NEW BUFFI
            Umol         NEW BUFFALO                     NEW BUFF2
            UM02         NEW BUFFALO                     NEW BUFF3
            UM03         NEW BUFFALO                     NEW BUFF4
            UM04         NEW BUFFALO                     NEW BUFF5
            UM05         NEW BUFFALO                     CHIKAMING,
            UM06         CHIKAMING,                      STEPHEN
            Umo?         STEpHENsVILLE                   HAGAR
            Umos         HAGARTOWNSH[P                   VAN BUREN
            Umog         VAN BUREN ST PARK               GLENN
            Umlo         GLENN                           DOUGLAS
            Umi I        DOUGLAS VILLAGE                 HOLLAND
            UM12         HOLLAND                         GRAND HAVEN
            UM13         GRAND HAVEN                     HOFFMASTER.
            UM14         HOFFMASTER ST PIC               WHITEHALL
            UM15         WHITEHALL                       CLAyBANKS
            UM16         CLAyBANKS                       LITTLESABLE
            UM17         LITTLE POINT SABLE              SUMMIT
            UM18         SUMMIT TOWNSHIP                 LUDINGTONI
            Umig         LUDINGTON                       LUDINGTON2
            UM20         LUDINGTON                       LUDINGTON3
            UM21         LUDINGTON                       LUDINGTON4
            UM22         LUDINGTON                       LUDINGTON5
            UM23         LUDINGTON ST PIC                LUDINGTON6
            UM24         LUDINGTON ST PK                 LUDINGTON7
            UM25         LUDINGTON ST PK                 LUDINGTONS
            UM26         BIG SABLE POINT                 LUDINGTON9
            UM27         LUDINGTON ST PK                 LUDINGTONIO
            UM29         LUDINGTON ST PK                 MANISTEE
            UM29         MANISTEE                        BEN21E
            UM30         BEN/MAN CNTY LINE               PT BETSIE
            UM31         POINT BETSIE                    PEMSKEYI
            UM32         PETOSKEY                        PETOSKEY2
            UM33         PETOSKEY                        pETosKEY3
            UM34         PETOSKEY                        PEJOSKEY4
            UM35         PETOSKEY ST PIC                 PETOSKEY5
            UM36         PETOSKEY                        TAWASI
            UM37         TAWAS                           TAWAS2
            UM38         TAWAS                           TAWAS3
            UM39         TAWAS ST PK                     TAWAS4
            UM40         TAWAS                           PT SANILAC I
            UM41         PORT SANILAC                    PT SANILAC2
            UM42         PORT SANILAC                    FT SANILAC3
            UM43         PORT SANILAC                    PT SANILAC4
            UM44         PORT SANILAC                    PT SANMAC5
            UN445        PORT SANILAC











                                                                       NEW BUFF1

                                                      8/9/89     5/4/89     8/28/88     7122/88    5/1/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500         1000         1500        2000         2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                         Distance (ft)











                                                                      NEW BUFF2


                                                     8/9/89     5/4/89     8/29/88    7/23/88    5/2/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560                                N



                       550




                       540

                            0          500         1000        1500        2000         2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)












                                                                     NEW BUFF3


                                                    8/9189     5/4/89     8/28/88    7/22/88    5/1/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0          500         1000        1500        2000        2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)










                                                                     NEW BUFF4

                                                     8/8/89    5/3/89     8/29/88   7/23/88    511188


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0          500         1000        1500        2000       2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                      Distance (ft)












                                                                  NEW BUFF5


                                                  8/9/89     5/8/89    8/27/88   7/24/88   5/2/88


                     600




                     590




                     580



           Depth(ft) 570



                     560




                     550




                     540

                          0         500         1000       1500        2000       2500       3000        3500       4000
                                                                   Distance (ft)










                                                                      CHIKAMINQ

                                                         - 8/9/89      5/9/89     8/26/88    5/2/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                           0           500         1000         1500        2000        2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)



                                                                         mmm







                                                                        STEPHEN


                                                                 8/9/89     5/22/89    8/30/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540

                            0          500         1000        1500         2000        2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                       HAGAR


                                                         8/10/89    5/22/89    8/27/88   5/4/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540

                           0          500         1000        1500       2000        2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                      Distance (ft)












                                                                      VAN BUREN


                                                           8/10/89   5/22/89    8/25/88    5/3/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500         1000        1500        2000        2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                         GLENN


                                                         - 8/10/89    5/22/89    8/26/88    5/4/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



            Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540  .. . . . .
                           0           500         1000         1500        2000        2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)



                                                                  mm m m = = m






                                                                         DOUGLAS


                                                            8/10/89    5122/89     8/26/88    5/5/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0           500         1000         1500        2000         2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                          Distance (ft)











                                                                       HOLLAND


                                                           8/10/89    5/22/89    8/25/88    5/4/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



            Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540  -
                           0          500         1000         1500        2000        2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)











                                                                   GRAND HAVEN


                                                          8/15/89    5/23/89    8/26/88    5/4/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540                                                     1 j     I    I I I I     I    I
                           0          500         1000        1500         2000        2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)










                                                                   HOFFMASTEIJ

                                                          8/15/89    5/23/89   8/22/88    5/4/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540  -
                           0          500         1000        1500        2000       2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                      Distance (ft)












                                                                      WHITEHALL


                                                            8115/89   5/23/89    8/21/88    516/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500         1000         1500        2000        2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)












                                                                                                               CLAYBANKS


                                                                                                       8/15/89           5/23/89           8/20/88


                                     600




                                     590




                                     580



                   Depth (ft) 570



                                     560




                                     550



                                     540                                          ---- r--7     !---!--7 --- T- 1 T     -r---T-=
                                             o                 500                1000               1500                2000                2500                3000                3500                4000
                                                                                                                   Distance (ft)



                                                          mm m mm







                                                                      LITTLESABLE


                                                            8/17/89    5/23/89     8/20/88    5/10/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500          1000        1500         2000         2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                         Distance (ft)











                                                                        SUMMIT


                                                          8/17/89    5/24/89    8/21/88    5/10/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540

                           0          500         1000         1500        2000        2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)



                                                                 =,= m = = = m =






                                                                     LUDINGTOM


                                                      8/17/89    5/24/89   8/20188    7/25/88     5/11/88


                       6oo -




                       590  -




                       580  -



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500         1000         1500        2000        2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                    LUDINGTON2


                                                     8/17/89    5/24/89   8/19/88    7/25/88    5/11/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0          500         1000        1500        2000        2500        3000         3500        4@O
                                                                      Distance (ft)






                                                                                       m












                                                                     LUDINGTON3


                                                     8/17/89    5/24/89    8/20/88    7/25188    5/11/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0          500          1000        1500        2000        2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                     LUDINGTON4


                                                     8/17/89    6/6/89     8/19/88    7/24/88    5/11/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0          500         1000         1500        2000        2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)












                                                                     LUDINGTON5


                                                     8/17/89     6/6/89     8/19/88    7124/88    5/13188


                       600




                       590




                       580



                                         "ON-1
            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                           0           500         1000        1500         2000        2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                    LUDINGTON6


                                                     8/16/89    6/6/89     8/20/88    7/26/88    5/14/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550





                           0          500         1000        1500         2000        2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)












                                                                     LUDINGTON7


                                                     8/16/89    6/6/89     8/20/88    7/26/88     5/14/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500         1000        1500        2000         2500        3000         3500         4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                    LUDINGTON8


                                                    8/16/89    6/5/89     8/19/88   7/26/88    5/14/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540

                           0          500         1000        1500        2000        2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                      Distance (ft)











                                                                    LUDINGTON9


                                                     8116/89    6/5189     8/19/88   7/26188    5/14/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



            Depth (ft) 570



                      560  -




                      550  -




                      540

                           0          500         1000         1500       2000         2500        3000        3500        4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)











                                                                   LUDINGTON10


                                                     8/16/89    6/5/89     8/19/88   7/25/88    5/14/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0          500         1000        1500        2000         2500        3000        3500        4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)












                                                                        MANISTEE


                                                            8/18/89     6/6/89     8/19/88    5/17/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500          1000         1500        2000         2500         3000        3500         4000
                                                                          Distance (ft)











                                                                        BENZIE


                                                           8/21/89    6/6/89     8/19/88    5/18/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



            Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0          500         1000         1500        2000         2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)












                                                                           BETSEE


                                                           8/22/89    6/6/89     8/18/88     5/18/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500         1000        1500         2000        2500         3000         3500        4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                    PETOSKEYt


                                                    8/22/89    7/19/89   6/7/89     8/18/88    5/17/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0          500        1000        1500        2000        2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                      Distance (ft)












                                                                    PETOSKEY2


                                                    8/24/89    7/19/89    6/7/89    8/18/88    5/18/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540 -
                           0          500         1000        1500        2000        2500        3000        3500        4000
                                                                      Distance (ft)











                                                                     PETOSKEY3


                                                     8/24/89    7/19/89    6/7/89    8/18/88    5/17/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540

                           0          500         1000         1500        2000        2500        3000        3500         4000
                                                                       Distance (ft)



                                                                          m m m m m m m






                                                                        EETOSKEY4

                                                      8/25189     7119/89    617/89     8/18/88     5/17/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0          500          1000         1500        2000         2500        3000         3500        4000
                                                                         Distance (ft)











                                                                      PETOSKEY5


                                                     8/24/89    7119/89    6/7/89      8/18/88    5/18/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



            Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540

                           0          500          1000        1500        2000         2500         3000        3500        4000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                        TAWAS1


                                                     8/24/89    7/18189    6/26189    8/16/88    6129/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0       1000      2000     3000      4000      5000      6000      7000      8000      9000      10000
                                                                       Distance (ft)











                                                                      TAWAS2


                                                    8/24/89    7/18/89   6/26/89    8/16/88    6/29/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



           Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540
                           0       1000     2000      3000     4000      5000     6000      7000      8000      9000     10000
                                                                     Distance (ft)











                                                                        TAWAS3


                                                      8124189   7118189    6126189    8116188    6129188


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540

                            0       1000      2000      3000     4000      5000      6000      7000     8000      9000      10000
                                                                       Distance (ft)











                                                                        TAWAS4


                                                      8/23/89    7/18/89   6/26/89    8/16/88    6/29/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540

                           0        1000      2000      3000     4000      5000      6000     7000      8000      9000      10000
                                                                       Distance (ft)



                                                                 mm m m







                                                                     PT SANILACI


                                                      8/25/89    7117/89    6/29/89    8/15/88    6/28/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



            Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540  -
                           0               1000            2000             3000            4000             5000            6000
                                                                        Distance (ft)











                                                                     PT SANILAC2


                                                     8/25/89     7/17/89    7/6/89     8/15/88    6/28/88


                      600




                      590




                      580



            Depth (ft) 570



                      560




                      550




                      540

                           0               1000            2000             3000             4000            5000             6000
                                                                        Distance (ft)












                                                                      PT SANILAC3


                                                      8/25/89    7/17/89    7/6/89     8/15/88     6/28/88


                        600




                        590




                        580



             Depth (ft) 570



                        560




                        550




                        540
                            0              1000            2000             3000             4000             5000            6000
                                                                         Distance (ft)











                                                                     PT SANILAC4


                                                      8/25/89    7/17/89    7/6/89     8/15/88    6/28/88


                       600




                       590




                       580



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540

                            0              1000            2000            3000             4000             5000             6000
                                                                        Distance (ft)










                                                                     PT SANELAC5

                                                      8/25/89   7/17/89    7/6/89     8/15/88    6/28/88


                       600




                       590




                       590



            Depth (ft) 570



                       560




                       550




                       540
                            0              1000            2000            3000            4000             5000             6000
                                                                        Distance (ft)




                                                                                                                        JOAA Cl       SERVICES CTR LIBRARY
                                                                                                                         11,  @ [
                                                                                                                                  1@
                                                                                                                                                                    1
                                                                                                                         3 6668 14111683 2                          1
                                                                                                                                                                    1
                                                                                                                                                                    1
                                                                                                                                                                    1
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                    I