Proceedings of the Governor's Workshop on the Management of Shoreline Erosion and Flood Prone Areas March 6, 1978

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

E-4

S.DEARMET F OMERE OA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER

2234 SOUTH HOBSON'AVENiJE
A ~ ~~~~~~CHARLUSTON , SC 29405-24 13

PROCEEDINGS OF THE

;14 ~GOVERNOR'S WORKSHOP ON THE

MANAGEMENT OF SHORELINE

EROSION AND FLOOD PRONE AREAS

MARCH 6, 1978

TIC
o224
r .D3
G68 Coastal zone
' 1978 Information
Center

STATE OF DELAWARE
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
PIERRE S. DU PONT D)OVER. 19901 P-El: (302) 678 -41 01
GOv--lOR
February 13, 1978
Dear Delawarean:
Coastal erosion and storm flooding have been common in Delaware
for many years. This fall the State's coastal areas were again
impacted by two destructive storms which buffeted the shoreline in
October and December and caused significant erosion and damage to
beachfront structures. While these storms were considered by experts
to be only moderate, they nevertheless underscore the continuing
vulnerability of Delaware's coast.
Recent research conducted under the auspices of the Delaware
Coastal Management Program has raised a number of questions
about our governments' abilities to deal with these natural processes.
The issues involved are complex, and the problems transcend
political boundaries. Ultimately, all citizens of the State are affected
by the physical and financial consequences of coastal damage. In the
past several years the State alone has invested $3 million to repair
eroded beaches, and current estimates for "permanent" protection
run into the hundreds of millions.
The State's Executive Branch cannot develop and implement a
sound policy for proper management of coastal areas without the help
of other branches and levels of government and without the
understanding and support of the taxpaying public. In order to share
some of these problems with those most immediately affected by
coastal damage, I am convening a Workshop on The Manaaement of
Shoreline Erosion and Flood Prone Areas to which you are cordially
invited. The Workshop is being co-sponsored by the Office of
Management, Budget and Planning and the Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control, as part of the Delaware Coastal
Management Program. It will be held in the Rehoboth Beach
Convention Hall on March 6, 1978 between the hours of 9:00 and 5:30.
Please respond by telephone (678-4271) or mail the enclosed card to
OMBP by February 24. I look forward to seeing you there.

Sincerely,

Pierre S. duPont
Governor

AGENDA~~~62

A G E N D A

GOVERNOR'S WORKSHOP ON THE MANAGEMENT
OF SHORELINE EROSION AND FLOOD PRONE AREAS

9:00 - 9:15 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS - Governor du Pont Page 1

9:15 - 12:00 THE PROBLEMS OF EROSION AND FLOODING

a. Coastal Erosion Process-Dr. John Kraft,
Chairman, Dept. of Geology, U. of D. Page 5

b. Coastal Storm Experience-Mr. Robert Henry
Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control Page 25

c. Corrective Approaches, Pro & Con -
Dr. Robert Dean, School of Engineering
University of Delaware Page 35

12:00 - 1:30 LUNCH AND WALKING TOUR TO SOUTH BETHANY

(Weather permitting conducted by Dr. Kraft) Page 51

1:30 - 3:00 CURRENT APPROACHES TO THE PROBLEM

a. Overview of the State Program - Operations
and Regulations-Sec. Austin P. Olney, DNREC Page 53

b. Fiscal Issues in Beach Erosion Control -
Nathan Hayward III, Director, OMBP Page 57

c. Federal Shore Protection Programs -
Colonel Harry Dutchyshyn, Phil. District
Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Page 61

3:15 - 4:30 DISCUSSION PERIOD

Panel - Moderator. Sec. Olney (with Messrs.
Dean, Ratledge, Henry and Hayward; Senators
Zimmerman and Knox; and Representatives
Miller and Vernon) Page 65

This document is financed in part through a federal grant from
the Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA under the provision
o of Section 305 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
__ (Public Law 92-583)

Third Year Grant

04-7-158-44037 Document #1003-78-08-06

Acknowledgements

On behalf of Governor du Pont and Delaware's Coastal Management
Program, I would like to express our sincere appreciation to
the workshop participants for taking the time to come to
Rehoboth Beach and impart their valuable knowledge on the
problem of storm flooding and beach erosion. I would also
like to offer special thanks to those who worked behind
the scenes and made the workshop a success.

To Mayor Miriam Howard, Mary Fizpatrick, and the
City of Rehoboth Beach for -making Convention Hall
and the staff available to us;

To Ernest Smith and his crew for their work in
preparing the hall;

To May Felerski and the Town of South Bethany for
arranging our visit; and

To -Ralph Williams of the College of Marine Studies,
whose help with transportation and lunch arrange-
ments proved invaluable.

Again, thank you very much.

Benjamin Coston
Office of Management, Budget and Planning
Workshop Coordinator

Coastal Management Program Staff:

Dave Hugg - Program Manager
John Sherman - Planner
Ken Bessinger - Planner
Ben Coston - Planner
Jerry Homer - Consultant
Steve Corazza - Planning Assistant
Janice Durham - Secretary
Beth O'Neal - Secretary
Nancy Pleasanton - Secretary

Produced by: Delaware Coastal Management Program
Office of Management, Budget and Planning
Townsend Building, Dover, DE
July 1978.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

Governor Pierre S. duPont IV

It is my pleasure to welcome you this morning to hopefully add
some emphasis to the need for coming to grips with one of the
most difficult problems that is plaguing coastal Delaware, and that
is what to do about the fact that as the years go by the shoreline
'is changing; in some places very rapidly, and in other places more
slowly, but nevertheless changing. That change is putting some
difficult burdens on State government, on the Army Corps of Engineers,
on private property owners along the beach, and on the general public
that uses our beaches. It was 16 years ago today that we had
the tremendous storm of 1962. It was not as nice that day as it
sthis morning. The ravages of that storm in many areas are
still with us, and I think that was the first time the people of
N Dlaware had come to focus on the problem that the ocean was
causing us. Of course, even though we do not have a storm like
that every year, the problem of beach erosion and shifting coast-
lnes continues every year, though in not such a dramatic fashion.

benchanging. It has been changing with the tide, with the wind,
wihter stomindeedt the levelin of tiethe ceaslne. ofDeawreha
utlrecent years that did not cause a problem for people in

S~Delaware, because it was not until the last 50 or 60 years
that the build-up in coastal floodpl-ains- really began. Until
that time we had undeveloped are~as; and, if the beach shifted
a little, nobody really cared. But now as more and more houses
have been built, as civilization has advanced to the water's
edge, the problem of beach erosion has become very severe. In
1972, the General Assembly passed the Beach Preservation Act.
The purpose of that Act was to regulate development of the area
and guard against man-induced increases in beach erosion- or dune
damage. In addition, that Act established a one million dolla-e
revolving fund to protect the beaches. The fact is, of course,
that a million dollar revolving fund is nowhere near adequate
to protect us from the problems we face. Nor, does that Act
address itself to the problem of storm damage. No act of the
legislature could ever do that; and 'it is, of course, storm
damage that causes the major problems along our-coastline.
Delaware's Coastal Management Program has recently completed a
study which indicates that expenditures in the range of a million
dollars a year are totally inadequate to do the job.

In the last few years-, we've spent about 3 million dollars in
State funds on coas-tal protection, but if we were to do a
complete job and build groins or bulkheads or make significant
improvements along our coastline all the way from Cape Henlopen
to the Maryland line, or indeed all the way from Cape Henlopen
north to perhaps the Dover area, it would cost us tens of
millions of dollars just in State funds. in fact, the estimates
are that over a ten-year period, adequate beach protection
efforts would cost in the hundreds of millions of dollars. I
think we all recognize we do not have hundreds of millions
of dollars to spend, and so the question is, what are the
alternative management policies. Since 1843, beach erosion in
Delaware has ranged from three to 12 feet per year, depending
upon the location. In some areas, the Lord has created land and
the beach has moved out into the ocean, but by far most of
our shoreline has experienced erosion between 3 and 12 feet per
year, and that is the problem we are addressing this morning.

The purpose of the Workshop is to try to develop a new and com-
prehensive policy that is both effective and affordable. Before
we decide on what that policy should be, it seemed to us that
we ought to ask the interested people of the State and shore
communities to come together to spend a day looking at the problem,
and listen to those people in Delaware who have devoted their
lifetimes as professionals to study of the problem. It is my hope
that out of the meeting will come a new beach erosion policy
for our State. A policy that the homeowners, the taxpayers, and
the Department of Natural Resources can all live with simultaneously.
That is not an easy task, but I believe we have to try. Let me
just lay out for you four or five of the questions that are facing
us which are indicative of the difficult problems we face in
managing this area. First, should the State allow new construction
or rebuilding along beaches that are subject to storm waves
and repeated damages? If the answer to that question is "No",
how are we going to protect the rights of private property owners
along the shorefront? Second, is it physically and economically
feasible to protect shoreline property? Third, what responsibility,
if any, do state taxpayers have to protect private beachfront
property? Fourth, should those who locate in hazard areas bear
the risk and the financial burden for that decision? Fifth, if
the state undertakes protective measures that benefit flood prone
property owners, should the state recoup some of all of those
costs from those property owners? If the answer is no, we must
ask why -not? If the answer is yes, we might ask how are we going
to do it? Finally, is the'present state authority adequate to deal
with these problems;-and if not, what kind of statutory action
should be taken in our General Assembly to give the state

the necessary power to do the job? The answers to those questions
are difficult; in fact, some of them make you uncomfortable just
thinking about them, but that's the nature of the beast. We have a
very difficult problem'in front of us and we have-to bring the
best analytical tools we have to bear on that problem. To
help us, we have six distinguished individuals with us who are
going to talk about various aspects of the problem. We have
with us Dr. John Kraft, Chairman of the Geology Department of
the University of Delaware. He is a nationally recognized
expert in the coastal processes. We have Dr. Robert Dean with
the Department of Ocean Engineering at the University of Delaware.
He is a leading authority on engineering approaches to beach
erosion and flood control. Robert Henry, a geohydrologist with
the Division of Soil and Water Conservation is here and he is
responsible for the administration of the Beach Preservation
Act. Nathan Hayward is the Director of the Office of Management,
Budget and Planning, which has jurisdiction over the Coastal
Management Program and the Federal Flood Insurance Program.
His office is responsible for analysis of the problem and
recommendations for its solution. Austin P. Olney'is'Secretary
of the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control.
Before becoming Secretary, he was Minority Counsel to the House
Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries iA~ Washington and there
helped to draft many of the federal coastal protection acts that
we have in place today; the Ocean Dumping Act, the Coastal Zone
Management Act, etc. Finally, we have Colonel Hlarry Dutchyschyn
of the Philadelphia District Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps
is the federal agency which actually helps us build the structures
we decide to put in place. So, it is my hope that with this
distinguished group of people, we can bring to bear all the
expertise we have in Delaware on this difficult problem. In
addition, we have invited everyone from the public sector who
might be interested as well as town councils from coastal
communities, environmental groups, and property owners.

The first thing we need, of course, is some understanding of the
problem. It is my hope that the panelists this morning will
provide us with that understanding. Second, we have to understand
that you cannot solve th'e problem at one level of government
alone. No one would suggest, I suppose, that the town of Bethany
Beach or Fenwick Island try to undertake the financial program
to stabilize the shorefront in front of their own communities.
They obviously do not have the resources to do that. Well, it's
just as absurd to suggest that the State of Delaware can do it
alone, or that the Federal Government can do it alone. We must
have the cooperation of local, state and federal officials, if
we are to get the job done. And most importantly, we need the
cooperation of the General Assembly. Our objective this
morning is to come up with a solution that is workable, affordable
and politically practical. That sounds very simple to say, but
very difficult to achieve. Thank you very much and have a good day.

PHOTO 1

PHOTO 2

PHOTO 3 '

COASTAL EROSION PROCESSES

Dr. John-Kraft, Chairman
Department of Geology, University of Delaware

1. First of all, let us examine the Delmarva Peninsula and its
relationship to the so called "ice age" in which we still exist.
About 14,000 to 18,000 years ago, the continental ice sheet
covered part of North America and is shown in gray on the slide.
At that time, sea level was about-350 to 500 feet below its
present elevation. In other words, 14,000 to 18,000 years ago
the sea shore was near the edge of the continental shelf. Since
that time, continuous melting of the polar ice caps has caused
sea level to rise to its present position. The same geological
processes which have caused this rise in sea level are continuing
today.

2. This is a topographic map which shows elevations both above and
below sea level. About 14,000 to 18,000 years ago the configuration
of the Atlantic Shoreline approximated the minus 600 foot contour.
As sea level rose, the shoreline at various times approximated
these other contours. Note the configuration of the minus 90
foot contour. It approximates the shape of the present shoreline
with the existance of a deeply incised river valley which has
evolved to the present Delaware Bay.

If the present rate of rise of sea level continues over the
next 5,000 to 10,000 years then, based upon the best geological
evidence, the shore of the Delmarva Peninsula will approximate
the plus 50 foot contour and the Peninsula will become a series
of isolated islands.

3. Most geological cross section maps of the coastal plain are
distorted vertically, so that vertical detail is more readily
apparent. This is a cross section of a profile across the
Delmarva Peninsula to the Atlantic Shoreline and out into
the submarine area to a depth of 600 feet below sea level.
This profile is drawn to scale and is meant to show the flatness
of the Delmarva Peninsula. A rise of 25 to 30 feet in sea level
would flood across to the Chesapeake Bay. Based upon past trends,
such an event should be anticipated in the future.

kD PHOTO .
PHOTO 4

PHOTO 5

PHOTO 6

4. In addition to the absolute rise in sea level, there is
another geological phenomenon affecting coastal change in
Delaware. This map shows areas of the United States which
are subject to various rates of tectonic rise and fall of the
land surface. Delaware happens to be "blessed" with the fact
that it is located in one of the sinking or subsiding areas.
The entire Northeast coast is subsiding at a rate of about
5 to 10 millimeters per year. Therefore, it is not just the
absolute rise in sea level that is of concern, but rather
it is the relationship between absolute sea level rise
and land subsidance. This is commonly referred to as the
relative rise of sea level.

5. Studies of coastal Delaware have developed very precise
evidence as to how sea levels have risen over a period of
time. This is a curve based upon radiocarbon dates of marshl
peats which have been found at various levels beneath the
surface. It shows the position of sea level from 10,000
years ago, when the level was about 80 feet below the present,
and gradually rising to the present. For the past 7,000 years, the
sea had been rising at a decreasing rate. Over this period
of time, the rate of sea level rise has averaged about
one-half of a foot per century. This may not seem like a
substantial amount, but it should be remembered that this
rise in sea level is responsible for significant retreat
of Delaware's coastline.

6. There is another factor that has been measured by
Stacy Hicks with the National Ocean Survey. He noted
by studying title gauge records, the IlOng term geological
rate of sea level rise was not quite correct at all locations.
As a matter of fact, along the Northeast coast, the rate of
sea level rise has been measured at about one foot- per century.
This curve shows the average sea level rise between 1900 and 1970.
One of the more interesting observations made by Hicks, although
it does not show up very well on this curve, is that in the decade
of the 1960's, sea level took a jump in the area of Breakwater
Harbor of about 3 inches. That is catastrophic! The point
of the matter is that we know that sea level is rising, we know
that it is probably rising at an irregular rate, but we cannot
precisely know what that rate is or how it will fluctuate
in the future.

gli

PHOTO 7 PHOTO 8

PHOTO 9 PHOTO 10

7. The shoreline processes which were described earlier
are also observable over periods of time considerably less
than a millenia. This is a map of the Bombay Hook area
showing the shoreline as it existed in 1848 and again
in the early 1970's. You can see that::there has been
a catastrophic rate of coastal erosion':along this Delaware
Bay shoreline; nearly half a mile in the last 120 years.
In fact, this area has one of the highest erosion rates in
Delaware.

8. The shoreline of this area is characterized by broad
marshes against the open waters of Delaware Bay. There is
not much of a beach in this area, because of a general
lack of sand from eroding highlands. As a result, the wash-
over barriers are very small and they erode quite rapidly.

9. The shoreline erodes too rapidly for some people in some
places. This is Port Mahon. A road paralleling the shore
serves a State boat ramp, a fishing pier, a jet fuel
unloading terminal and commercial fishing facilities.
The erosion situation here is desperate as is evidenced
by the material dumped here to attempt to stop coastal
erosion. When I first came to Delaware, there was a
macadam road with a marsh to the right, which has since
been claimed by the Bay. This area happens to have the
highest erosion rate in the State of Delaware.

10. Desperate measures have been taken here by constructing
a bulkhead to stop this erosion, but as is evident from this
past winter's damage, the bulkhead has not been effective.
Failure has been caused by two things: 1) Storm waters
have washed across the bulkhead and built up a head of
water behind it, which pushed it back out to sea; and 2)
at the same time, erosion occurs in front of the bulkhead,
,because of wave scouring. In some cases, these pilings
slip or rotate in the mud that they are driven into. This
is a very difficult situation to remedy. Obviously, what
has been done here, has not handled the problem properly.
One thing that one could do here, is to drive these pilings
into firm sediment underneath the mud, but it will be very
expensive, since the muds are over 40 feet deep. This is a
case of manf trying to hold the coast against very severe odds.
It is the most rapidly eroding coastal area in Delaware Bay
and there is a serious question of whether or not the shoreline
can be maintained in this position.

PHOTO 11

PHOTO 12

PHOTO 13

10 1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

a_ I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PHOTO 13

10 1I

11. Here is a village along Delaware Bay. Both Kitts Hummock
(Photo) and Pickering Beach are cases of small Delaware Villages
that are built on low-lying, washover barriers with tidal
marsh behind them and the Bay in front. There is a small
quantity of sand here, because highlands protrude into the Bay
in this area and are subject to erosion. Erosion of these
highlands supplies the sand to these beaches. That is one of
the fascinating things about coastal erosion. If you do
not have an erodible-highland, there is no sand to form the beaches.
Highland erosion, therefore, should be considered a normal process
to maintain the beaches. These people, however, do not see
it that way. This village is in considerable trouble. There has
been an earthen dike constructed here in an attempt to stop coastal
erosion, but it will not stop it indefinately. (Note the erosional
scarp in front of the houses). It is also known that any major
northeaster moving through this area'will flood across this barrier,
because-of its very low elevation in relation to sea level.

12. This is a view of 'the barrier just south of Bowers. The
sand barrier seen here is what is called a washover barrier,
where storm waves from the Bay wash across it into the
back lying marsh. If one constructs a house in such a location,
one will have a problem. If one does not build a house here,
one has no problem. It is a normal func~tion of this beach to
move landward as a result of storm waves washing sand across the
barrier. A living, growing marsh can be seen behind the barrier
and in front of the barrier the muds of a dead marsh from just
a few years before the present can be observed. This is indicative
of the normal landward migration of all barrier beaches.

13. One of the interesting things about these washover barriers
is that the barrier is so low at South Bowers, one can go
there during a storm and watch the washover process. This phiotograpl
was taken during a minor northeaster. The beach is off to the left.
The storm surge is high enough so that very low waves are able
to wash across the barrier and into the marsh. If this were a major
storm with 10 foot waves, it would be chewing the beach up
and moving it landward a considerable distance. Even during this
storm, the beach is gradually moving in a landward direction. Un-
fortunately in Delaware, houses are still being built on barriers
like this.

PHOTO 14

PHOTO 15

PHOTO 16

12~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

14. A considerable number of geolgical studies have been
conducted of the sub-surface or the area under the coast.
This is an example of the results of one such study at
South Bowers. From these studies and from radio-carbon
dates, the rate of coastal change can be determined.
For instance, 12 feet under the Bay surface and 16 Kilometers
seaward of the shoreline, marsh peat has been found dated
at 2700 years before the present. That means that this
marsh surface was in this location 2700 years ago and the
sea level was below that. The shoreline of the sand barrier,
if it existed, was even somewhat further seaward from there.
So in several thousand years then, movement in terms of miles
has occured in this area.

15. This a view of Broadkill Beach. Broadkill Beach is an
anomaly along Delaware's coastline. An examination of the
maps of this area made 150 years ago show that this Beach
did not even exist. The remants of dunes along the old shoreline
are visable in the lower-center of the photograph and the slough
to their right is the channel of the old Broadkill River.
Years ago, before Cape Henlopen had extended into Lewes Harbor
and construction of the breakwaters, sand from the Atlantic Shore
moved in the littoral drift stream around the Cape up to Broad-
kill Beach. This process created the formation of a spit at the
mouth of the Broadkill River and continually deflected the River
to the North. (Slide 21 shows the progression of this spit over
time). The change in littoral drift, which resulted from the
advance of Cape Henlopen and construction of the breakwaters,
eventually cut off most of the sand supply which created Broadkill
Beach and a cycle of erosion set in.

A portion of the Town is protected by a groin field. This
groin field, however, is causing increased erosion at both the
north and south ends of the Beach. This is shown in the upper
portion of the photograph where the shoreline suddenly curves
inland. Eventually the ends of the barrier will migrate in the
slough and Broadkill Beach will become an island. Maintenance of thE
Beach in its present position will require, inspite of groins, the
replacement of hundreds of thousands of cubic feet of sand on a 2,
3 or 4 year basis forever. The frequency of replacement, of course,
depends upon the magnitude and frequency of storms. Despite these
storms, however, sand will continue to be eroded from this beach
every day of the year.

16. Roosevelt Inlet is a man-made Inlet that provided a new outlet
for the Broadkill River and Lewes Creek. It was stablized with a
pair of jetties, which have since become severely corroded. Despite
this corroded condition, the west (right) jetty still traps a con-
siderable amount of sand moving in the littoral drift stream in
an easterly (right to left) direction. Sand which is washed over thE
jetty on the flood tide is forming an Inlet shoal which can be seen
on both sides of the Inlet mouth.

PHOTO 17

PHOTO 18

On the ebb tide, there may be a minor ebb tidal shoal at the
seaward end of the jetties, but it has not presently been
identified. As--a result of the entrapment of sand at the west
jetty and inside of the Inlet, there is a deficiency of sand
on Lewes Beach and strong erosion occurs. This erosion problem
is aggravated because of the corroded nature of the jetties.
Strong winds blowing out of the north and northwest are able
to travel over the jetties largely unimpeded. These waves,
now devoid of their normal sand content, are responsible
for severe erosion. This problem is wellknow~ and frequently
action is taken to pump sand from the inlet shoals onto Lewes
Beach.

17. This is the way Lewes Harbor was seen by an engineer named
William Strickland who designed the first breakwater at Lewes
Harbor. He drew this picture about 1829. At that time, the
breakwater was built to protect sailing ships from northerly
winds until they could make the trip up the Delaware Bay to
Wilmington, Philadelphia and Camden. Cape Henlopen Lighthouse
is visable at the extreme left in the background and another beacon
that was constructed on the spit is seen in the foreground. This
spit had been advancing to the north and eroding westward ever
since man arrived here. As a result, this beacon had to be moved
repeatedly because of the erosion until it was finally rebuilt
on the breakwater, where it is today. At the time the breakwater
was constructed, the Harbor was 30 to 35 feet deep. That is
considerably deeper than it is today.

18. Looking at a modern photograph of Cape Henlopen, several
things can be observed. Firs t, is the relationship between
Cape Henlopen spit and the inner breakwater. Note the difference
between this photograph and the previous one. The Spit has moved
between the inner and outer breakwaters and cut off the eastern
end of Lewes Harbor. Massive erosion has been occurring along the
Atlantic Shor e and is documented to aver-age about 10 feet per year
over the long term. A massive amount of sand is disappearing
from this shoreline. Some of this sand is going into the develop-
ment or building of this spit in a northwesterly direction; some of
it is moving offshore onto Hen and Chickens shoal; some of it
is entering Lewes Harbor; and some of it is moving directly offshore
This picture, more than any other, shows the effects of coastal
erosion. Ancient shorelines can be seen as white lines intersecting
the Atlantic Coast and then being sharply cut off. These shores
are the tips of old recurved spits and are lined by trees going into
Lewes Creek marsh. It is known from studies of this area that these
spit tips confined a small bay where Lewes Creek marsh is today.
A great amount of land has been added to the area of the State
of Delaware by this process in the past few thousand years.

PHOTO 19 PHOTO 20

PHOTO 21 PHOTO 22

16
_ * <8::i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a~~~

In fact, this new land area encompasses the entire triangle
from Lewes to the tip of Cape Henlopen and southeast to the
vicinty of North Shores.

19. This photo is a very good illustration of a spit moving between
two breakwaters and tending to inf ill or recurve. It has been
estimated that this spit will someday curve around to join
the breakwater and shoal up the harbor, The timing is the only
thing that is in doubt, not the process.

20. Precise knowledge of the rates of erosion of the Atlantic
Coast and the advancement of Cape Henlopen spit exists from the
1700's onward. Erosion along Cape Henlopen has been as high as
6 meters per year from 1903 to 1917. The rate of advancement
of the Cape has ,been as high as 30 meters per year. Where does
this sand come from? The primary source of 'sand is definitely
Atlantic coastal Delaware and it is moving from South
of Bethany Beach northward in a continual stream to this location.

21. This is a map which shows Cape Henlopen when 'the Dutch first
came to this area. It shows a broadly rounded cape that is about
in the position of the great dune of Lewes and, of course, with the
shoreline much further eastward, Next is a map of the area
about 1801 in which there was broadly-blunted cape. This is important
because there was a lighthouse built at the Cape in the 1750's.
The lighthouse was built a quarter of a mile from the sea, but has
since been destroyed because of erosion. This provides a very good
measure of coastal erosion in this area. In 1842, the lighthouse
is closer to the sea; the Cape is starting to evolve; sand is starting
to move into the region of Broadkill Beach; and Broadkill Beach,
as we know it today, began to evolve. In 1882, the lighthouse was
ve-ky close to the shoreline. In 1910, the lighthouse was on the beach
and in the present map the lighthouse would have been out to sea
a slight distanc6 at the edge of the great dune. What this light-
house has done is to provide a very precise measure of rates of
erosion, since it is a surveyed site.

22. This is a photograph of Cape Henlopen Lighthouse in 1910.
It should be remembered that when this lighthouse was built it was
constructed about a quarter of a mile from the sea. This photograph
provides an idea of what was instore for the lighthouse. This dune
is eroding very rapidly landward and there were primitive attempts
to trap sand here with a groin.

PHOTO 23 PHOTO 24

PHOTO 25 4

PHOTO 26

PHOTO 27 18

23. This is a view of the Cape Henlopen Lighthouse in 1926,
the year it fell into the sea. Comparison of this photograph
and the previous one provide ample evidence of the rapid
rate at which the Atlantic shore of Cape Henlopen was eroding.

24. This is a view of the washover barrier at Whiskey Beach.
During storms, waves removed sand from the beach and washed
it across the barrier. The washover of fans just west of the
road are evidence of this process. Such washovers are the
result of the combination of storms and a continuing rise
of relative sea level and are a part of the process which
results in landward retreat of the shoreline and the build-up
of the surface of the barrier.

25. Unlike most of the Atlantic Coast of Delaware, Rehoboth
Beach is situated on a highland adjacent to the sea, rather
than on a barrier beach. Here, a groin field has been
constructed to hold the shoreline in position and a slight
bulge in the coastline is evident as a result of it. Had this
groin field not been built, the shoreline would have been
fairly straight and the beach would have been somewhat landward
of its present position.

26. This is an aerial view of the results of the washover process
following the March 6, 1962-storm. It illustrates dramatically
the landward retreat and upward build-up of barrier islands.
Here, sand has been removed from the beach and primary dune
and thrown across the barrier into the back barrier marshes.

27. This is a view of Delaware Seashore State Park between
the Indian River Inlet and Dewey Beach. The large back
barrier marshes are indicative of the existance of an inlet
at this location in times past. These marshes were created
on flood tidal shoals which are characteristic of inlets. Inlets
are known to open, close and re-open in other locations. They
also tend to migrate up and down the coast unless they are stablized
by a pair of jetties.

The elements of a linear barrier can also be observed in this
photograph and consist of the beach face and berm, dunes and a
few washover fans seen as light patches extending across and behind
the dune line. Dunes provide major protection during storms.
Natural breaks in dunes on a wide, low-dune washover barrier allows
some water to flow through during storms preventing major water
build-up on the seaward side. Maintenance of a high, narrow dune
can lead to catastophic flooding during storms. Removal of dunes
guarantees a washover.

PHOTO 28 PHOTO 29

PHOTO 30 PHOTO 31

PHOTO 33

PHOTO 32 2

28. Many of the storms that erode the Atlantic Coast of the
State uncover tree stumps in the surfi Using the radio
carbon dating technique, these trees have been determined to be
about 250 to 300 years old. Such trees, however, can only exist on
the backside of a barrier, and of course,. must be above
sea level. This photograph was taken in Delaware Seashore
State Park, south of Dewey Beach at low tide. This indicates that
the sea level has risen relative to the level of this barrier
and it also indicates that the sand barrier was much further seaward
of this at one time.

29. Following any -storm, which has resulted
in beach erosion, there is an almost instantaneous repair
process which begins. Some of the sand that is transported
onto the offshore bar migrates landward and it can be seen
happening here. This sand ridge is gradually migrating land-
ward.

30. Completion of this repair process results in the re-establishment
of a normal beach.

81l. This is a view of the backside of the barrier just south
of Dewey Beach. After the 1962 storm washed across this barrier,
a dredge was used to dig up material to -place on the beach and
repair the road bed. The project was conducted on an emergency
basis and created the trenches visable on the nearshore area.
Several people have drowned in these trenches while clamming.
This exuergency project has cost as many lives as were lost
during the storm of 1962. It indicates some of the problems of acting
to hastily to repair the beaches. These holes have since been filled
in.

32. This is a view of the Indian River Inlet and illustrates
the so-called jetty effect. In this area, the net littoral
drift is from south to north (top to bottom in this photograph).
The updrift jetty traps a massive quantity of sand and prevents
it from reaching the north beach. Moreover, sand bypassing the
south jetty on the flood tide is swept into the inlet and
deposited as a flood tidal shoal. Upon reversal of the tide,
sand bypassing the jetty is swept offshore and deposited in an
outer bar. The cut off of sand supply to the north beach causes
massive erosion, as is evident in the photograph. Without the
nouisbment of the large quantities of sand on this beach, it would
have eventually retreated an undermi-ned-,the foundation of the bridge
approach and highway.

33. This is Indian River Inlet after the 1962 storm. The barrier
has been deflated or lowered by storm waves which washed across
the highway and then into the marshes just north of the Indian
River. This should be considered a normal event for storms
of this magnitude and it should be expected to happen again.
The old Indian River Inlet Bridge, shown here was structurally
damaged during the 1962 storm. It has since been replaced
by two new bridges, which have been constructed seaward of this
location. If we were to experience another 1962 type storm,

PHOTO 34 PHOTO ~35

PHOTO -36

PHOTO 37

PHOTO 38 22

it is evident what will happen, because serious erosion problems
have been experienced here even during very minor storms. No
one has considered what migit happen if a hurricane would hit
the coast here. It can safely be said that a hurricane with
maximum force winds from the northeast would destroy the footings
of the bridge and take the highway away.

34. This is another view of Indian River Inlet following the
recent storms of the fall of 1977. Note the proximity of the dune
scarp to the bridge approach.

35. Another major problem facing some residents of Delaware
is illustrated in this photograph at South Bethany. These
houses have been constructed on what is called the berm or
beach face and remnants of the dune can be seen landward of
the first row of houses. The 1962 storm destroyed the
entire front row of houses on this breach, and even though the
beach retreated substantially, the houses were reconstructed
in the same location.

36. This is another recent photograph taken in South Bethany
Beach. It illustrates severe beach and dune erosion and the
vulnerability of beachfront structures to storm damage.

37. In summary then, rising sea level has caused a continuous
landward retreat of the shoreline. There was a time about 7,000
years ago when the present Delaware Bay was a river estuary.
About 5,000 years ago, the Delaware Bay became larger, about half
of its present size as shown by the light gray. Around 3,000 years
ago, Delaware Bay looked similar to its present configuration,
but the shoreline was still miles from its present position.
What this illustrates is that there is an inevitable continuous
motion of the shoreline in a landward direction. These processes
can be expected to continue into the indefinte future.

38. If one examines the configuration of the Mid-Atlantice Coast
6,500 to 7,500 years ago, one finds that the Atlantic Coast
of Delaware was much further seaward than at present and was
located on the shores of Delaware Bay. Since that time, the
shoreline has retreated 25 to 50 kilometers.

The purpose of my presentation this morning is to illustrate
the continuing advance of the sea over the land. This rate of
advance is not uniform all along the coast. At Cape Henlopen,
the retreat of the shoreline averages about ten f eet per year.
Along the remainder of the Atlantic coastline, erosion averages
about 3 feet per year and occurs at highly variable rates
along the Delaware Bay. If I leave you with one idea,
then it is that coastal erosion is really not a problem; it's
a very -normal thing and the only problem is man's intrusion into
the coastal zone.

COASTAL STORM EXPERIENCE

Robert D. Henry, DNREC

Erosion of coastal areas in Delaware is generally caused by
one or a combination of the following:

1. Longshore or littoral drift currents generated by waves
striking the shoreline at an angle to t~he beach.

2. A relative rise in sea level caused byr melting of polar
ice masses or gradual settling of the land or both, and

3. Storms generating high waves combined with high tides.

Certainly all three contribute to the erosion that plaguds
Delaware's beaches, but none is more obvious or dramatic and
of such an immediate concern to the user of the coastal zone
as are storms.

The subtle changes in the shoreline caused by less dramatic,
but unceasing normal wave action and slight changes in sea level
often set the stage for the rapid change~s noticed during a storm.

Storms of two basic types combine with high tides to promote
flooding and create serious erosion problems in coastal areas.
Tropical storms formed over the warmer ocean waters of the Gulf
of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean are best known. Hurricanes, which
are tropical storms characterized by winds of 75 mph or greater,
usually are accompanied by heavy rains, and are mostly limited
to summer and fall.

It is interesting to note that, in the last fifty years, the coast
of Delaware has not experienced a direct hit by a hurricane; most
such storms pass by offshore as they move northward. Virtually
none of the present coastal dwellers of Delaware, therefore,
have experienced the damage and destruction of a severe hurricane.

Extratropical storms, often called "northeasters", present a
particular problem to the Atlantic Seaboard. Such storms may
develop as strong, low pressure areas and move slowly offshore
into the Atlantic Ocean. The winds, though not of hurricane
force, blow onshore from a northeasterly or easterly direction
for sustained periods of time. The damage wrought by these storms
may ultimately far exceed the destruction from a hurricane. The
March,1962 "northeaster" proved that point decisively. Flood
height and duration for extratropical storms have equaled or exceeded
those of hurricanes brushing Delaware. Although hurricanes are
significant to Delaware, the extratropical storms are equally
25

important as damage and flood producing events.

The major causes of erosion and flood related damage to coastal
areas during storms are storm surge and wave action.

In shallow coastal waters, the storm winds can produce a surface
current that flows in the direction of the wind. The wind-
produced current produces a "pilling-up" of water against the
exposed coast and produces considerable flooding of low-lying
areas. This is a simplified description of a storm surge.
A significant rise in water level also accompanies the marked
reduction in atmospheric pressure that occurs. with tropical
hurricanes. It has been determined that a one-inch drop of
mercury in the barometer results in a 13-inch rise in sea level.
A two-inch difference from normal barometric pressure is not
uncommon for the eyes of tropical storms and hurricanes. Thus
a 26-inch rise in sea level can result from this factor alone.

The term storm surge, when associated with a hurricane, includes
the rise of water level due to both the wind stress on the water
and the rise due to atmospheric pressure reduction. The effect
of the storm surge on the coast depends on the interaction between
normal tidal action and the storm-produced water level rise.
For example, if the time of normal high tides coincides with the
surge, the overall effect will be greater. If the surge occurs
at low or falling tide, the impact will likely be lessened. Slowly
moving "northeasters" may continue to build a surge that lasts
through several lunar high tides. Such a condition occurred
during the March 1962 storm. That storm lasted for five high
tides with a devastating effect on the coast.

Storm damage to a shoreline is primarily the result of wind-
generated waves riding landward on the elevated water surface
of the storm surge. Storm waves develop from the high velocity
winds blowing over open stretches of the water. Huge destructive
waves can be generated by extreme storms. As waves move into
the shallow waters long the coast, they steepen and "break",
and expend a tremendous amount of energy against whatever is in
their way. Waves traveling at thirty to fifty miles per hour
in storms are not uncommon. One cubic yard of seawater weighing
in excess of a ton and a half and moving at thirty miles per
hour presents an obvious destructive potential to beaches,
houses, bridges, roads and other structures in its path.

The erosion of Atlantic'beaches and damage to property during the
storm of March 1962 left no.doubt of the forceful action of winds
and waves. Storm damage to the shoreline was dramatic both in
its intensity and in the short time in which the destruction was
wrought.

important as damage and flood producing events.

The major causes of erosion and flood related damage to coastal
areas during storms are storm surge and wave action.

The term storm surge, when associated with a hurricane, includes
the rise of wat~erle-vel due to both the wind stress on the water
and the rise due to atmospheric pressure reduction. The effect
of the storm surge on the coast depends on the interaction between
normal tidal action and the storm-produced water level rise.
For example, if the time of normal high tides coincides with the
surge, the overall effect will be greater. If the surge occurs
at low or falling tide, the impact will likely be lessened. Slowly
moving "northeasters" may continue to build a surge that lasts
through several lunar high tides. Such a condition occurred
during the March 1962 storm. That storm lasted for five high
tides with a devastating effect on the coast.

Storm damage to a shoreline is primarily the result of wind-
generated waves riding landward on the elevated water surface
of the storm surge. Storm waves develop from the high velocity
winds blowing over open stretches of the water. Huge destructive
waves can be generated by extreme storms. As waves move into
the shallow waters long the coast, they steepen and "break",
and expend a tremendous amount of energy against whatever is in
their way. Waves traveling at thirty to fifty miles per hour
in storms are not uncommon. One cubic 'yard of seawater weighing
in excess of a ton and a half and moving at thirty miles per
hour presents an obvious destructive potential to beaches,
houses, bridges, roads and other structures in its path.

The erosion of Atlantic'beaches and damage to property during the
storm of March 1962 left no~doubt of the forceful action of winds
and waves. Storm damage to the shoreline was dramatic both in
its intensity and in the short time in which the destruction was
wrought.

The entire mid-Atlantic coast suffered an estimated $200 million
in damages and a loss of 22 lives.

While no trend has been found to indicate an increase in the actual
number or severity of coastal storms in Delaware, there has
been apparent increase in the frequency of damaging storms.
This is probably related to the increased coastal development
combined with more accurate reporting.

While the loss of life from hurricnaes and other coastal storms
has been greatly reduced over the past few decades, largely as
a result of better storm warning systems, communications, and
transportation routes, property losses from such storms have
greatly increased as a result of the building boom that has
occurred in the coastal area.

.During the period from 1960 to 1970, the population of the
United States increased by about 12 percent, while the population
of beach subdivisions increased by some 42 percent. Such a
trend is likely to continue, at least in the near future, as incomes
and leisure time increase.

The natural response of the coastline, as Dr. Kraft pointed out,
is one of landward retreat. Unless the present trend of sea
level rise stops or reverses, this landward retreat ultimately
collides with the more or less fixed line of human development
with obvious consequences.

Storm waves and surges punctuate the normal slow coastal erosion
with periods of intensive energy, and bring major changes to the
coast regardless of whether man's works are present or not. Thus
periodic devastation of portions of the Atlantic coast is a
certainty not just a probabilty. When the situation is viewed
over the long-term (50-100 years), storms will likely have
an increasingly profound effect as encroachment by the sea continues.

PHOTO I PHOTO 2

1.View of the Delaware Bay just north of Kitts Hummock during
the storm of October 14, 1977. The elevated storm surge has
completely removed the beach and is eroding the base of the
dune.
28

PHOTO 3 PHOTO 4

PHOTO 5 PHOTO 6

2. View of the southern end of Kitts Hummock during the
October storm. This beach was nourished in 1974 and much of
that material has been washed away by coastal storms in only
three years. Flood waters at the right resulted from a
break in the dune.

3. This house in Broadkill Beach was built in'an area that under-
went rapid coastal change following the December 1974
storm. The beach has been seriously deflated, several feet
of beach surface were lost and the shoreline retreated
20 feet.

4. Dune breach at Slaughter Beach during the December 1974
storm. A washover fan and remnant flood waters are evident
it the foreground.

5. View of the house shown in photo 2 following the December
1974 storm. A considerable quantity of sand had been pumped
onto this beach as a protection measure earlier that year.
That sand has been washed over the dune and deposited in
the house and on surrounding property.

6. View of the more intense energy situation characteristic of
the Atlantic Coast. These are storm waves along Fenwick
Island during Hurrican Belle (August 1976). The combined
effect of storm surge, tide and waves have covered the beach
surface and threaten to breach the dune.
29

PHOTO 7 PHOTO 8

PHOTO 9 PHOTO 10

PHOTO 11 PHOTO 12

7. View of the primary dune just north of Indian River Inlet
during the December 1977 storm. The combination of storm
waves and reduced sand supply caused by the inlet jetties
has created severe dune erosion. The fence posts in the
foreground are remnants of repair works following the 1962
storm and were uncovered by storm waves. This illustrates
that dune stabilization will not prevent beach retreat.

8. Minor dune breach, December 1977. Such events are common at
weak spots in the dunes and are often the result of unauthorized
pedestrian crossings which kill the stabilizing vegetation
and permit dune "blowout". The potential consequences for
back-lying structures should be evident.

9. South Bethany Beach during the December 1977 storm. These
houses are now, through shoreline retreat, in front of
what remains of the dune.

10. South Bethany Beach during the December 1977 storm. As the
tide recedes coastal storm damage is evident; the dune has been
severely eroded and the shoreline has retreated considerably.
This is a natural process and should be expected. The debris
destroyed during the March-1962 storm and has been uncovered
by erosive waves.

11. No man is an island, but this house in South Bethany Beach
is rapidly becoming one.

12. In South Bethany Beach numerous attempts have been made to
protect property from natural erosive and storm forces, but
without success. Bulkhead failure is quite common in this
area and even though these structures are elevated, debris in
the surf is capable of destruction. Note the sheared
support pile above the man's shoulder.

13. Remnants of a bulkhead destroyed during the March 1962 storm
can be seen in the right-center of the photograph. This
provides evidence of shoreline retreat since 1962. This
bulkhead approximates the dune crest at that time. The
present dune is located out of the picture to the left.

POTO 13

PHOTO 14 PHOTO 15

Irisfl

PHOTO 16 PHOTO 17

PHOTO 18 PHOTO 19

3 2

THE GREAT STORM OF 1962

14. The Henlopen Hotel in Rehoboth Beach.

15. The Atlantic Sands Motel in Rehoboth Beach.

16. Dolle's in Rehoboth Beach. Unlike most of Delaware's
coastline, Rehoboth Beach sits on a Pleistocene highland and
as a result wave overwash does not occur here. The damage
shown in these three photographs is caused not by direct wave
action upon the structures, but rather by wave scouring of the
foundation material. As this material is removed the
weight of the structure causes it to fall forward into the
sea.

17. This view of the beach north of Indian River Inlet illustrates
the massive amount of washover that occurred during this storm.
The dunes have been completely leveled and the sand has
been deposited on top of the barrier and in Rehoboth Bay.
This is dramatic evidence of the l&tdward and upward migration
of barrier beaches in responce to rising sea level.

18. When structures are placed in the path of wave overwash, the
consequences can be devastating to their owners. This is
Nomad Village south of Indian River Inlet. The structures
evidently were not adequately anchored and flood waters
washing over the dunes carried them from their foundations
into the roadway and into the marsh.

19. This is an aerial view of the barrier just north of Indian
River Inlet during the peak of the storm and illustrates
the massive washover and bay flooding. Delaware Route 1 has
been obliterated. Note the numerous small inlets that have
been cut through the barrier.

20. This is an aerial veiw of Fenwick Island and illustrates the
extent of washover and flooding. The houses in the lower-
center are under several feet of water.

21. This is an aerial view of Slaughter Beach and illustrates the
problem of washover, but on a smaller scale vis-a-vis the
ocean coast. Flood waters have broken through the barrier
and cut new inlet channels into the backlying marsh. Here
homes were picked up from their foundations and floated
into the marsh. Note the house in the upper left of the
picture. One life was lost here.

PHOTO 20

PHOTO 21

CORRECTIVE APPROACHES - PRO AND CON

Dr. Robert G. Dean
Department of Civil Engineering
.University of Delaware

Good morning. My name is Bob Dean from the University of
Delaware. I am in the Department of Civil Engineering and College
of Marine Studies. This morning I would like to continue the
discussion which Dr. Kraft and Bob Henry initiated with primary
emphasis now on corrective approaches to beach erosion.

INTODUCTION

Dr. Kraft and Bob Henry have presented what we might term the
"forces" which are active Iin-th~e coastal zone and which cause beach
erosion. If I might summarize these briefly, they are: (1)
the very slow and persistent rise in sea level which causes the
response in the shoreline to be a landward retreat, and (2) the
storms which occur and cause rather sudden shoreline recessions.
Today I would like to provide the'best information possible
relating to both the effectiveness and cost related to beach
erosion control. I would like nothing better than to appear
here and tell you of an -inexpensive and effective solution to
beach erosion control. Unfortuwaately, that is not the case, so
I'll try to provide my best perception as to what structures
may be effective in certain locations and other approaches,
namely, beach nourishment.

Perhaps before starting it would be worthwhile to mention
that we are not able to predict, with confidence, the relative
merits of a particular methodology or design of beach erosion
control. We do have quite a bit of background and information
gained, to a great extent through experience, which will prevent
spending monies and efforts in wrong ways.

There are a few principles that I'd like to list before looking
at some illustrative slides. The first of these is that beach
erosion control is quite expensive. I think we'll touch more
on that this afternoon, Beach erosion control is not a one-time
solution. I think Dr. Kraft and Bob Henry indicated to us the
persistence of the forces which are brought to bear on the shoreline
and even if we are able to, with large expenditures of money,
control beach eros-ion for some time, we would find that there
are maintenance measures also requited. Secondly, perhaps an
obvious point, but one which may not be adequately recognized;
Structures such as groins or seawalls will not somehow "encourage"
more sand into the coastal zone. The picturethhat's been portrayed
to us so far this morning really has been one 'of a lack of sand.
The shoreline keeps retreating because of these forces noted,
and if we want to stabilize the shoreline, which is one of the
reasons we're here today, we need to consider adding more sand
to the coastal zone. It is most important to recognize that no
35

PHOTO 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

36~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

matter what structure we put out there, we will not have more
sand in the coastal zone. We can, however, control the distribution
of the available sand. For example we may put in groins that
will collect some sand, but inevitably the sand that is collected
by a single groin or a groin field will result in a deficit of
sand and, therefore erosion, elsewhere. Thirdly, I think it's
worth noting that beach erosion control should not be approached
on a piecemeal basis; that is, with the possible exception of
emergencies. The overall problems of beach erosion in a city,
municipality or county will usually not be most effective if
they are carried out by individual homeowners. -Rather, the
plan which recognizes of the overall longshore sediment t ransport
processes will be most effective. Another point worth noting is
that the problems of beach erosion control are more than just
finding the best technical solution. The technical solution is
an important element, but I think we will find in the program
to be presented this afternoon that both economics and, to some
extent, politics are important. For example, if the economic
basis is strong, as it may be in ~a very developed area, it could
be possible for the local upland owners to completely finance
the beach erosion control project. Generally, that iS not the
case because the costs are quite substantial. With regard
to beach nourishment projects, which is one method we'll discuss,
the costs generally range from $1 million per mile upward. The
Miami Beach project which encompasses ten miles of beach is
probably the most expensi ve project constructed to date and is
a $40 million project; that is, $4 million per'mile. Generally
such projects cost somewhat less--about $1 million to $2 million
per mile.

The remedial measures to control beach erosion that I'll present
will include both structures, such as groins or seawalls, or
beach nourishment or a combination of structures and beach
nourishment, which is probably the most effective approach. I'd
like to attempt to put things in perspective in the following
way. This morning the long-term picture of the geologist has
been effectively presented, i.e. a picture of a very definite
erosive trend. The problem, as I see it posed for me today,
is to indicate what types of effects we might expect if we
attempt to forestall that trend; that is, hold the line against
beach erosion. What types, of problems will we encounter both in
terms of methods and cos-ts?

1. I will start with a slide which poses the problem reasonably
well. This first slide is to-some extent an extension of Dr. Kraft's
discussion . The upper part of the slide shows the response of
a low lying barrier island that normally occurs due to the sea
level rise. The sea level rise is shown here, and as a rough
rule-of-thumb, the sea level rise amounts to about one foot per
century. This may not seem very rapid, but if we realize that
the response of the shoreline has to be s-uch that it maintains
about the same relative position vertically, then I think we
recognize that a foot per century can amount to quite a bit of
vertical migration of the barrier island, and even substantially
more horizontal migration. A foot per century would amount to
something like three feet of horizontal beach recession per year.
37

PHOTO 2 PHOTO 3

PHOTO 4

PHOTO 5-

This is a natural response; that is, barrier islands tend to
migrate upward and landward as a result of the rising sea level.
The question which we're trying to answer today is: What kinds
of control would we have to exert if we decide to stabilize the
shoreline; that is, to hold the beach where it is presently
located? There are two types of control that we could consider.
One would be beach nourishment, the placement of large quantities
of sand on the beach and the sand would, in part, be carried
offshore to establish the beach profile that was in accordance
with the sea level rise. I think we should also recognize that
if we simply tried to stabilize the beach position but didn't
allow the barrier island to build in elevation as well, then the
susceptibility of that beach to overwash through storms, such
as Bob Henry discussed, will be much greater. The second type
of control would be through coastal structures.

2. I'd like to show a few slides of beach erosion and storm
damage. Most of my pictures will not be of Delaware (I think
you've seen quite a few slides of damage in Delaware). This
next slide is on the west coast of Florida, and it was taken
during Hurricane Agnes, about an hour after the peak of the storm
tide passed that area. There was approximately a five foot
vertical erosional scarp caused by the storm at that time. In
a distance of two miles here, there were roughly 20 summer
vacation cottages which were destroyed or severely damaged.

3. The third slide shows more damage due to the same storm. The
small structures in the surf zone are septic tanks. There was a
horizontal shoreline recession in this area due to that storm of
about 100 to 150 feet.

4. This next slide was taken by the State Highway Department
following the March, 1962 storm-in the Rehoboth Beach area.
I think you can see'the manhole cover which provides an indication
of the substantial lowering of the beach profile.

BEACH EROSION C0ONTROL BY STRUCTURES

5. One of the types of structures that might be considered is the
groin, used either singly or in a groin field; that is, a system
or series of groins. I will keep mentioning the obvious point
that structures such as this do not really add any more sand
to the entire system. They can be used as controls in redistributing
the sand present in the system or probably more effectively in
retaining sand which may be put into the system by man through
dredging from offshore sources. Suppose you are involved in a
small community project and decide to place significant quantities
of sand on the beach for erosion control. If you simply place
the sand there, you'll find that it tends to be trans-ported away

PHOTO 6

by waves and currents. Part of the sand will be lost offshore,
that's pretty much inevitable, but also quite a bit of that sand
will be lost from the ends of the system. If you don't, in a
sense, enclose the sand on the ends, it will simply be lost to the
adjacent beaches. It's not lost to the overall system, but if
relatively large expenditures are made to nourish large segments
of beach, then it may be worthwhile adding structures to stabilize
the material. Two of these structures could be placed on the
ends of these projects, (,called "terminal structures") and then
perhaps intermediate structures to further stabilize the beach.

I'd also like to indicate what approximate costs might be
involved in these different types of structures. This groin
would probably cost around $10,000.00. Some groins that have
been built in Galveston, Texas, which are very substantial and
nicely built, cost upwards of one hundred thousand dollars when
constructed ten years ago.. So, substantial beach erosion control
structures can be very expensive,. This picture of a groin
portrays well the principle that sand collected on the left-hand
side is really in a sense sand-that has been deprived from the
upland owners on the right-hand side of the photograph. These
structures can only redistribute or retain available sand.
They don't cause an additional quantity of sand to be brought
into the surf zone.

6. This is a photograph of a series of groins which, indicates
another important factor, if you are in an area where the sand
transport is occurring either up-coast or down-coast, and you
decide to stabilize the shoreline by emplacement of one or a
series of these structures. Then indeed the groins will probably
collect sand, but they will also set the stage for many of these
structures being built further down the beach. Even if one
is only considering a fairly small geographic area, it's very
important to consider the consequences of emplacing a single
structure, because, if the structure causes erosion, additional
structures may be required, and it is possible that the effect
of the structure eventually will cause effects several miles away.
In a number of places in the past, structures of this type have
been simply installed to aid the immediate area. If an area is
going to consider installing groins such as this, then the design
of the groins is very important. Also it's important to fill them
initially because otherwise they will be filled from the "littoral
stream" of sand and in the process will deprive the downdrift
area-of sand which it normally would receive.. The types of
groins which appear most reasonable are ones which are of a
fairly low profile; that is, they do not represent a severe barrier
to the longshore sediment transport processes. Perhaps it's
worthwhile noting that many individuals are convinced that if
groins or certain types of corrective actions are constructed,
a beach will be retained. A very brief story about Miami Beach
is relevant. In 1928 a very severe hurricane caused flooding
and beach erosion in Miami Beach. It was probably the worst
hurricane experienced in recorded history, and it removed a great
deal of the sand from the beaches and stored this sand in an
offshore bar. Much of the sand that is eroded from beaches and
carried offshore is then later brought back by milder wave action.
41

PHOTO 7

PHOTO 8

PHOTO 9

Shortly after the 1928 hurricane, Miami Beach initiated a groin
construction program and built many steel groins. Following
the construction of those groins, the beach started its normal,
natural recovery process and in a period of about two years most
of the sand that had been eroded reappeared on the beach. The
interpretation by many individuals was that this was "~cause and
effect"; that is, the groins resulted in the reappearance of
the beach.. Sometimes evidence can be-very misleading.

7. I'd like also to discuss seawalls and their effects on the
coastline. As an introduction let's again look at the natural
process. We know that what might be termed the normal profile
is fairly uniform and during storms we have both storm tides and
waves. These cause the beach to be cut back, and if they're
high enough, overwash may occur. Much of that sand is carried
offshore and deposited in a bar. The bar is an interesting
feature in that it represents sand that was eroded from the
beach., but in a sense it also represents a feature which limits
further beach erosion, because when the bar builds up to a height
such that the waves break on the bar, the wave action on the
beach is decreased. After enough sand has been removed from the
beach by the waves, carried offshore and deposited as a bar,
then the waves tend to break and dissipate a great deal of their
energy on the bar rather than on the beach, and eventually the
erosion will be limited by the presence of the bar as shown in
this slide.

8. Let's suppose that now we are going to install a seawall.
One of the immediate consequences of installing a seawall is that,
with the slow erosion process illustrated earlier this morning,
we can be quite sure that unless we nourish the beach, a beach will
not remain very long because it will be eroded back to the seawall.
A second important consequence has to do with the bar construction
by the storm waves. Here, we're looking down on an area that has
a seawall and with the seawall present, of course, there is not
material to be carried offshore immediately in front of it to
reside in the bar. There are two effects; one is that the beach
will tend to erode to a greater depth in front of that seawall,
simply because there is a reduced bar formed directly in front
of the seawall. Secondly, areas adjacent to that seawall will
experience more erosion than they would have had if the seawall
were not present. If the storm lasts long enough, these adjacent
areas will erode back an additional amount to provide the material
comprising the offshore storm bar in front of the seawall. This
may seem like just a concept, but in Hurricane Eloise in the
panhandle coast of Florida, there was a fairly extensive survey
which did illustrate this effect.

It might be mentioned that a substantial seawall costs a
minimum of $200.00 to perhaps $500.00 per lineal foot. That would
be a seawall built out of concrete which could withstand the
action of fairly sizeable storms.

9. In this next slide, an attempt to prevent erosion by a rock
revetment (a form of seawall) is shown. The purpose of this
slide is to illustrate that we are really dealing with a system
in which the sand transport processes are very dynamic and that
43

PHOTO 10 PHOTO 11

~ _

PHOTO 12 PHOTO 13

the system is very changeable.

10. For example, this is an area on the we'st coast of Florida
where a protuberance or bulge in the shoreline has been built in
response to an offshore shoal and part of this sand has been
drawn from adjacent shorelines. I think the moral of this is that
we should respect the fact that there are natural swings in the
shoreline and we should try to regulate our construction in
accordance with those natural oscillations in the shoreline.

The house shown in the previous slide is located just north of
the bulge in the shoreline. An attempt has been made to protect
this structure with a type of seawall that has rock fronting the
vertical concrete seawall. I think you can see that this has
placed more erosion pressure on the adjacent shoreline, simply
because when a storm occurs, there is no sand available herq to
construct the offshore bar in front of the area which has the seawall.

11. This is another series of structures in the same general area.
Because of the clear water we can see some of the effects of the
slow encroachment of the sea. Seawalls are visible which at one
time protected homes that were located on the shoreline. You can
see, I think, that the shoreline has retreated on the order of
some 300 feet. This has happened in a 20 or 30-year period. One
-of the other factors that's very important in considering beach
erosion control measures, especially structural control, is that
if the structure does fail during a storm, then the shoreline
will retreat very dramatically. For example, once the effectiveness
of the seawall is lost, usually by waves coming around and flanking
from the sides, then the erosion occurs very rapidly. So it's
not a gradual effect evident after one or two storms, following
which one would have sufficient time to take corrective measures.

12. Discussing further the effects of seawalls, it was noted that
building a seawall can also affect the adjacent shoreline. This
slide was taken in an area on the east coast of Florida which had
a long history of stable shorelines. This is a small town,
Golden Beach, north of Miami Beach and the shorelines have been
so stable that they had no seawalls, groins, or coastal structures.
The structure in the foreground is not a seawall, but a retaining
wall for a backyard that used to be located here. The condominium
which is -in the background was believed to be built illegally;
that is, too far seaward in relation to the building code at the
time and the effects on the downdrift beaches which are to the
south were both immediate and dramatic. Over a period of about
three months, the beach profile lowered about five feet vertically
and the retaining wall failed within a very short time. The
effects were felt some distance to the south.

13. Another type of structure that might be appealing is that of
an offshore breakwater. This is being considered quite a bit in
this country now, and has been used in other areas of the world,
primarily Japan, Singapore, and some of the Caribbean countries.

This slide shows an offshore breakwater and the accumulation of
sand that has occurred landward of the structure. It is evident that
45

PHOTO 14 PHOTO 15

PHOTO 16

offshore breakwaters do tend to shelter the shoreline and tend to
collect sand behind them. Again, it should be noted that these
offshore breakwaters do not add any sand to the system, but they
simply provide a sheltered area that causes sand to gather in the
region of greatest sheltering, and they do form quite nice
beaches. The sand collected behind the structure provides a
very usable recreational area in the sense that away from the
breakwater, the waves are the same height as they would be without
the structure present. In the'lee of that structure there is a
wide range of wave heights. This type of structure is quite
expensive, if built in water depths as shown here, and would
cost on the order of $5,000-$7,000 per front foot of beach. They
are quite expensive and probably most areas don't have the financial
capability of installing these. Such structures can be justified
economically only in densely populated resort areas which, through
federal ownership, qualify for expenditure of federal funds.

14. This is an area in southern California where an offshore
breakwater was constructed. It's not a breakwater which
completely shelters the beach. It's quite -permeable during
periods when there is wave action. Some wave energy penetrates
through the breakwater and impinges on the shoreline. The effect
of modifications on the shoreline is much less severe than in
the previous photograph.

15. This slide is included to show some of the types of structures
that can be used, and how structures can be used to form shorelines.
This is an offshore "island" built for recreational purposes.
Incidentally, it is evident that this structure was slightly
mis-oriented, Ideally the beach would be designed to be perpendicular
to the incoming predominant waves. Structures such as these
rock structures on the-ends of the beach are used to
retain sand. This principle should be effective for retaining
beach nourishment sand.

16. One of the final methods that has not been used very much in
this country, but has been used elsewhere and I think has a
potential of being a very innovative, effective and relatively
inexpensive means of erosion control, is the use of structures
which are spaced on the order of several hundred feet apart to
form "crenulate" or "spiral" bays. Basically these have many
of the features discussed previously for offshore breakwaters.
That is, they provide a sheltered area safe for children to play
and then more exposed areas for those interested in surfing or
other activities. These structures would be built in much
shallower water than the offshore breakwaters, and hence would
not be nearly as expensive. Although these structures have not
been used widely, they do offer an attractive potential for beach
erosion control. There is the problem mentioned earlier, that if
during a storm the connection between the structure and beach is
lost, or in effect the structure is flanked by waves, then, of
course, the shoreline would recede very-rapidly. Furthermore,
it is important to note that, as discussed this morning, sea
level is rising and the result will be continual deepening of
the profile on the seaward side of the structures. Storm waves
47

will always tend to cause erosion in front of that structure
and to cause it to fail. This kind of a combination of structures
with the addition of sand could conceivably provide an attractive
approach to a partial remedy of Delaware's beach erosion problem.
Consider the case for this type of structure where the transport
of sand under the natural wave system would be from right to left.
Sand carried around these structures would be transported into
the bay and then into the next bay and so on. If enough sand is
provided initially then any interference with the natural supply
to some downdrift area is minimized.

BEACH NOURISHMENT

Beach nourishment is important because it is a procedure which
will be the dominant approach in most future beach erosion control
projects. As noted earlier, beach nourishment costs on the order
of $1 million a mile and probably is most effectively carried
out in conjunction with structures to retain the sand. Sand for
beach nourishment is usually obtained from offshore sources.
In very early projects, sand was obtained from bays; however,
present strong environmental concerns rule out this as a possibility.
Moreover, sand from offshore areas is usually more compatible.
The cost is about $l-$5 a cubic yard. It's important when
considering a beach nourishment project to be sure that good
quality sand i's used, i.e. sand that is'as coarse or coarser than
the sand on the beach. Projects constructed with very fine sand
usually have a very short life. Such material tends to be put
into suspension by the waves and carried offshore. Generally,
substantial beach nourishment projects require on the order of
five years or so to be implemented. Perhaps some of the other
speakers from the Corps of Engineers this afternoon can discuss
this aspect in greater depth.

SET-BACK LINES

One final approach, which I haven't mentioned but was briefly
discussed this morning by Governor Du Pont, is that of a set-back
line. The entire State of Florida at the present time has initiated
a so-called set-back line, which simply represents the seaward
limit where construction can occur without a variance being
obtained from the State. The set-back line is established in
proper recognition of shoreline processes and the storm tides that
would occur with a certain return period (the State of Florida
has elected to use a 20-year return period for the storm tide
which they consider in their set-back line establishment).

SUMMARY

I'd like to conclude by mentioning that at present we really do
not adequately understand the degree of protection or effectiveness
to expect from particular beach erosion remedial measures. More
studies and monitoring are needed in this area. I think a
particular example noted in some of the presentations has been
48

that a considerable number of beach nourishment projects have
been conducted in Delaware Bay, but their effectiveness has not
really been studied adequately. Moreover, most of these projects
were relatively short, and there will be fairly high losses from
the ends of such projects. These projects, unless carefully
interpreted, are not really a fair test of the effectiveness of
nourishment as a control measure. Unless terminal structures,
the retaining features mentioned earlier , are installed,
the duration of short projects will be extremely limited and the
sand will be lost from the ends of the project.

PHOTO I PHOTO 2 PHOTO 3

PHOTO 5

PHOTO 4

50 PHOTO 6

WALKING TOUR OF SOUTH BETHANY

Durini the lunch break, Dr. Kraft conducted a tour of South
Bethany Beach so that the workshop participants could view first
hand the effects of coastal processes on development.

The consequences of a "parade" of relatively mile "northeasters"
were still quite evident; destroyed bulkheads, uprooted septic
tanks, sheared support pilings, beach deflation and dune erosion.
Remmants of damage from the March 1962, uncovered by the recent
storms, were also visable. Dr. Kraft reiterated the geological
processes responsible for barrier beach movement and described
the futility of attmepting to protect structures such as these
from rising sea level, washover and flooding. He also illustrated
how these houses actually contribute to their own destruction.
It was his opinion that it was only a matter of time, and a short
time at that, before the sea would claim these structures as it
had in 1962.

Some participants expressed concern that, despite the unstable
nature of this area and the obvious effects of recent storms, two
new houses were under construction.

1-3 The storms of October and December, 1977., destroyed or
damaged numerous bulkheads and removed fill material behind
them.

4 Peter A. Larson, Executive Vice President of the Greater
Wilmington Development Council and member of the Council on
State Planning illustrates the degree of beach deflation
following this past winter's storm.

5 Walter Pierson, Regional Director of the Federal Insurance
Administration, flanked by Paul Jensen of the Marine
Advisory Service and John Hill of WBOC TV.

6. Representative Gwynne Smith.

7 Senator Andrew Knox (L) and William Gaither, Dean of the
College of Marine Studies.

8 Col. Harry Dutchyshyn, Philadelphia District Engineer,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

9 From left to right, Dr. John Kraft, Chairman of the
Department of Geology at the University of Delaware;
John Huges, Commissioner, Rehoboth Beach; Robert Henry,
Beach Preservation Section, DNREC; and Austin Olney,
Secretary, DNREC.

10 William Ratledge, Director of the Division of Soil and Water
Conservation, DNREC flanked by Mrs. Lu Gonzalez (L) and
Mrs. Alice Kaiser, both residents of Kitts Hummock.

PHOTO 7 PHOTO 8

PHOTO 9 PHOTO 10

OVERVIEW OF THE STATE PROGRAM-
OPERATIONS AND REGULATIONS

Austin P. Olney, Secretary
DNREC

One of the frustrating things about our beach program,
after having listened to three hours of instructional
material on how fast we are losing the battle, is that
fighting erosion is a little bit like fighting a forest fire
with a water pistol, I'm afraid. But, in any event, even
though we have water pistols to work with I would like
to describe what they can do. The Legislature, very
wisely in 1972, passed the Beach Preservation Act. Recognizing
the important aspects of beaches in Delaware, not only as
an important part of the tourist industry and part of our
recreation amenities, but also as an important part of the
system of protecting our coastline from storms, the Beach
Preservation Act provided, in part, the establishment of
a beach preservation fund with an annual balance of
$1,000,000. That fund was established to enhance and
preserve our beaches by means of preventing and repairing
beach erosion. In addition, the Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control was designated as the
sole agency to carry out the provisions'of that act.
Moreover, the authority was given to the Department to
promulgate regulations in order to further carry out the
purposes of the Act. Basically, as our program has
evolved, there are two principle parts: (1) a regulatory
part; and (2) a beach maintenance part. As far as the
beach maintenance part is concerned, I think most of you
are quite familiar with our activities. In the past
five years, the State has spent nearly $2,000,000 to nourish
beaches and perform mechanical work to restore beaches to
a contour and dimension that will not only withstand
storms better, but also to provide a recreation resource.
In addition to that, under this beach program we have also
carried out an extensive program to plant dune grass;
about 600,000 dune grass plants were planted in the last
fiscal year. I know that this does not sound like much,
but it is absolutely a vital part of our beach program,
aside from the nourishment work and the mechanical
work that is performed by the State. Planting of dune grass
helps stabilize the dunes and prevents accelerated erosion
which would otherwise be caused not only by wind, but also
by water. In the last fiscal year we have also erected
nearly 40,000 linear feet of snow fence in an attempt to
hold the dunes in place and prevent further erosion. I
am also sure you have all seen our crews, under the direction
of John Hughes, carrying out work to provide the proper
dune shape wherever a dune has a face too steep that it
would excelerate erosion. His crews are out reshaping the
53

beach so that it will have a contour that will be more able
to absorb the energy of the waves and provide a better
barrier to storm erosion. The Department also participates
in Corps of Engineers projects to do beach nourishment and
restoration work. Colonel Harry Dutchyshyn will talk to you
in more detail about the federal program in which we participate.
I will leave that part of it aside. I think one of the most
important parts of our program, which I alluded to earlier,
is the regulatory work. One of the most destructive forces
to a beach and dune system is man himself; either by walking
on dunes to create crossovers which in turn contributes to
breeching of dunes during storms; construction of housing
on the dune line, which accelerates the destruction of the
dune; and by simply trampling on dunes in such a fashion
that they loose their shape and are more susceptible to
storm flooding. Under the authority granted to us by the
Legislature, the Department enforces a beach crossover
program where the number of places pedistrians can cross
dunes is substantially reduced. We have thus eliminated all
other areas for pedistrian traffic which in the past has
accelerated dune erosion. This program has enabled the
State to reduce the excessive-number of breeches that were
being caused by random pedistrian crossovers.

By far the most significant part of our regulatory program,
aside from keeping vehicles and pedistrians off the dunes,
is the regulation of construction of houses on the dunes .
I think it was very apparent today in South Bethany that we
have not been able to stop construction altogether, but
what may be less apparent is that we have put construction
standards into effect for the houses that are built. Those
standards will better enable those houses to withstand storms
and also provide better protection for the people who have
residences behind those houses. In particular we have a
policy which states that -anyone, who has a lot which does
not enable him to build on the landward side of the dune,
must come to the Department of Natural Resources for a permit.
This enables us to apply conditions to the construction of
houses. We can require pilings to be driven to certain
depths, and require certain types of construction methods
to be used so that the structure will be able to withstand
certain design storms, specifically a 100 year storm. This
has been our principle method of regulating indiscriminate
construction on the dune. In the past fiscal year seven
permits were issued for construction of this sort. I think
we do not have the records to know how much building was
done before, but I think this would give an indication of
how we have managed to at least put the lid on the type of
building practices that took place in the past. The State
does not have the authority, in the opinion of the
Attorney General's Office, to prohibit construction
altogether. There has been a lot of debate on this issue
in other states and it is generally construed to be a
54

"taking" in the constitutional sense, if construction were
absolutely prohibited. The primary thrust of our regulatory
program, therefore, is not to stop construction, but to
ensure that construction which does take place is done in
the soundest manner possible and in a manner that will
provide maximum protection for those residents who live
behind those houses.

One thing I hope we do this afternoon is to discuss ways
in which the regulatory program can be improved. I think
it was apparent today, as Dr. Kraft pointed out in South
Bethany, that building on the dune line continues to
accelerate the erosion around the houses. That construction,
in fact, can only help to contribute to flooding and breeching
of the dune line on either side of the house and further
jeoparidize property owners behind that dune line. I
think the State has an obligation, not only to protect
the houses by insisting on high construction standards,
but has an equal responsibility to see that the interests
of property owners behind the dune line are also adequately
protected. Our regulations now, frankly, are not detailed
enough and they need to be amplified. Perhaps we could
learn from other states. So I am hoping, as we get into
the question and answer session later this afternoon, that
we will be able to discuss some ideas about how to improve
the regulatory program and to see that the interests of all
property owners in the area are better protected.

FISCAL ISSUES IN BEACH EROSION CONTROL

Nathan Hayward III, Director
Office of Management, Budget and Planning

Well it always seems to fall to somebody to have to bring
up the difficult, but nevertheless necessary subject of
money. Since that seems to be part of my responsibility, I
guess the job has to fall to me. What has been discussed
so far this morning and this afternoon are really the
problems of dealing with nature; nature in a very fluid
and a very destructive mood. We must face the fact that
there is absolutely no way we can control nature to the
degree necessary to remove all risks. Work at the beach,
whether public or private, is risky business. I do not
think there is anyone in this room or anyone in the coastal
communities that does not recognize that. The tradeoff,
of course, is that there is both public and private pleasures
to be derived from using beaches for recreational purposes,
as well as pleasures for those home owners living there and
the obvious financial advantage of an investment, which
if properly constructed and located, can be a tremendous
financial benefit to the individual owners. I think we
all recognize the escalation in beach property value over
the last 20 years, and I think that the statistics that
were quoted earlier about the relative growth in the size
of the beach area population vis-a-vis population growth in
general are reflected in these values. Over the last decade,
while the national population grew by 12%, coastal jurisdictions
grew at three times that rate. There is clearly a financial
benefit there and the question, of course, is what can or
should the State, or what can or should the County, or
other local governments do to protect this investment.

One way of looking at the problem is to begin by reviewing
very quickly where the State is at the present time. The
Beach Preservation Act established a revolving fund of
$1,000,000 for maintenance and preservation of the beaches,
but it is bond money which has been borrowed over a 20
year period. I think you have all gained some appreciation
today for the very short life of many of these beach erosion
control and preservation projects. For example, last year
we were faced with an emergency condition on part of Lewes
Beach and the State invested, albeit a small sum of money
(about $15,000) relative to the total cost of what these
projects can cost, to replace some of the lost sand on that beach.
Today that sand is all gone. Likewise money has been invested
in beach nourishment on a number of other beaches, both on
the Bay and here along the oceanfront. In some cases the
sand has lasted two years, in other cases three years and
in others four, but nevertheless, you, the taxpayers, are
57

paying the interest on 20 year bonds to essentially maintain
a short-term program. We have a very difficult financing
choice to make, because it is a great deal easier in many
respects to go out and borrow the money today and worry
about paying it back tomorrow. It is a great deal more
difficult when those in the General Assembly are asked to
make the difficult tradeoff between paying the current costs
of a maintenance project with current dollars, than it
is to worry about borrowing it and paying it back over the
long-term. Those costs are escalating all the time. You
heard Dr. Kraft and Dr. Dean allude to that fact that the
cost of a cubic yard of sand is anywhere from $2-$5, depending
first of all where the sand has to come from and secondly
where it has to go. The cost of dredging is very expensive,
because it is expensive equipment and the overhead that is
associated with that equipment is very high. Sources of
suitable beach sand are very scarce in the state and we
have very strict environmental requirements so that you
cannot strictly look for any location for sand, since
you have to consider both the navigation and the environmental
aspects of it. The structural approaches which Dr. Dean
mentioned are also very expensive. A linear foot of
bulkheading, as he pointed out, could run $200 to $400.
The groins which he mentioned are also very expensive.
Well, within the last five years the State has spent more
than $3,000,000 of its own money towards a program of beach
restoration. I think if you were to examine all of the
beaches, you would realize that that is just a beginning. As
the Governor pointed out in his opening remarks, the estimates
of permanent placement of beach control projects reaches
well over $100,000,000 at today's prices. So the costs
are substantial and they have to be weighed of course, not
only against the relative means of financing - do we pay
for current maintenance projects out of current tax revenues,
or do we try to bond those?--but also weighed against other
state priorities. Beach erosion control must compete with
many other projects within the State; the construction of
highways, the construction of hospitals, the maintenance of
a correctional facility, provision of education. All of
these are very complex and obviously very controversial
subjects sometimes and one of the major concerns and issues
that we want to discuss this afternoon is the degree to
which government, whether it is the federal state, county
or local, has res~ponsibility for the maintenance of
private property. When you think for a minute that the State
of Delaware is financing this activity, and yet at the same
time the benefit to private property owners accrues to
those property owners and to the county or to the jurisdiction
which is exercising a property tax on the value of that
property, there seems to be a little inequity there. If a
private property holder benefits from the investment of
public dollars, then clearly, there ought to be some
means for them to share in the cost of that protection.

Now one other issue that I hope we will get into later is the
issue of flood insurance. As most of you know, the State
participates with the federal government in a program of
federally subsidized flood insurance. Well, we all Day
federal taxes as well, and again the question which comes to
mind is: To what extent is the cost of that program being
borne by those people who actually benefit? One other point
I would bring out deals with the question of what is the
State's responsibility to property that is not clearly
State owned. We have a system of State Parks throughout
Delaware and clearly one of the major tourist attractions
is the public beaches, which we maintain and in which
we place great value. There are a very complicated set of
problems dealing with the question of who owns beach rights.
Some beaches are clearly State owned. Other beaches, by
virtue of historical accident or deeds which have been
passed down between families, are clearly private, and
yet at the same time there is public access to that beach
too. Beach rights and, therefore, responsibility for
maintenance and protection is a very complicated issue.

Lastly, I would mention the inevitable, which is always on
people's minds: what if, or what happens if, the 1962
storm was to recur. You have seen some minor evidence of
the potential consequences today; the undermining of foundations
and the destruction of not only private property, but public
property also. The State has an enormous investment, for
example, in coastal highways and the bridge over the Inlet at
Indian River. Those are investments that must be protected.
The analysis completed after the 1962 storm estimated erosion
and flood damages at $22,000,000 in 1962 prices. If you
were to take that number and assume that there had been no
development at all along the beach since that time, it is my
suspicion that the damage figure would be almost twice that
today. The major difference today, however, is that
the area has grown and developed substantially since 1962.
The best guess we can make is that, if a storm approximating
the 1962 severity were to hit today, the damage would be
well over $100,000,000. This is only an estimate. Actual
damages, of course, would be difficult to assess. Think for a
moment what the costs would be to private and State property
if a storm of that magnitude were to recur. unfortunately, we
know it will someday. In the discussion this afternoon, I hope
everyone will concentrate on those questions of costs and try
to balance the public and private benefits and costs, and the public
and private notion of responsibility,

FEDERAL SHORE PROTECTION PROGRAMS

Col. Harry Dutchyshyn
Philadelphia District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

The Corps gets involved in projects or appears to be involved in
projects in three general categories: (1) The traditional
ones, where we conduct studies and yoti see the Corps of
Engineers through a contractor actually constructing some
type of a facility; (2) Maintenance of projects that were
built some time before, such as a periodic dredging of a
navigation channel into a particular port or maintenance
of a jetty or a flood control structure; and (3) Emergency
work, such as the beach repair work that followed the storm
of 1962. In this last category the Corps of Engineers gets
invloved in two types of emergency work. First is repair of
Corps owned and maintained facilities. One such project
being studied in Delaware at the present time is repair of
the beach and dune system north of Indian River Inlet. The
second type of emergency follows a Presidential declaration
of a national emergency. In this case, the Federal
Disaster Assistance Administration is the responsible federal
agency for making some repairs and providing assistance and
the Corps of Engineers is really working for the FDAA in
carrying out the President's mandate of providing some
emergency assistance.

I would now like to discuss the cost to become involved
with a Corps of Engineers project. On almost all projects
we have a requirement for local assurances for participation
and financing. What are these local assurances? For most
projects we require that the non-federal interest or the
local authority, be it the State or a smaller subdivision
thereof, will provide all land easements and rights-of-way
for construction and maintenance and, if dredging is required,
d1isposal areas; hold and save the U.S. free from damages due
to the construction and maintenance work; accomplish
alterations and relocations of buildings, transportation
facilities, storm drains, utilities and other structures and
improvements made necessary by construction: and in cases where
a local cost sharing agreement is required, provide the
cash contribution for the non-federal share. Other types
of projects also require that the State maintain and guarantee
no encroachment on the waterway or stream. In the case of
water supply projects, where water supply is part of a
federal project, the entire water supply cost is reimbursed
by the water supply interest whether it is the State, the
county or a particular water basin commission. In navigation
projects, the State and/or local government provide a cash
contribution equal to 5O7% of the construction costs allocated
61

to recreational -navigation. The federal government pays
100% of the costs for those portions of a project benefiting
commercial navigation. In the last 20 years or so, states
have been required to provide the disposal area,- In -those
cases this includes not only acquiring that use of the
real estate, but also construction of the dikes to form the
containment area for the spoils from the waterway.

Today we are talking about beach erosion and hurricane
protection and the Corps has a list of assurances for these
types of projects. The first is to provide a cash contribution
for beach erosion control based on the ownership and type of
use of the shoreline. If the land being protected is
federal land, the federal government pays the entire cost of
the beach erosion control. For protection of State owned
beaches the State pays 1/3 of the cost and the federal
government pays 2/3. For other public lands where costs are
shared by local jurisdictions, such as a County or City,
the federal government pays 507% and local governments 50%.
If the project protects private lands, the federal government
contributes nothing and the State or the municipality would
have the task of paying the entire amount for that Section
of the coast. For hurricane protection aspects of a project
these same percentages also apply to the periodic nourishment
required to maintain the dune line. In most beach erosion
projects one must replenish the sand on a periodic basis
and the cost sharing of the nourishment would be on the
same order as the construction. For hurricane protection at
least 307% of the maintenance cost would be shared by the local
populace or the State. The State must also: 1) Provide
access and facilities necessary to realize public benefits;
2) Control water pollution; 3) Ensure preservation of dune
and beach areas; and 4) Prevent encroachment on protected
areas. That provides a synopsis of the type of local
assurances that are required. At the conclusion of a federal
project it is inspected both for maintenance and for compliance
and in those cases where a local authority has been found to
be in non-compliance it receives letters and reminders about
local assurances. A few years ago some questions were
raised over this issue, so Congress passed a law requiring
binding contracts with the State and ensuring that it was
signed by a representative of the state who could be sued
in the case that local assurances were not lived up to.

Secretary Olney asked for a couple of comments regarding
existing beach erosion projects. We have a project at
Indian River Inlet. With monies from the storm damage law
(P.L. 94-99) plus some funds from the State of Delaware,
we intend to make restitution of the dune line on the north
beach. We are presently working on the design specifications
and hope to bid the project shortly. In the past, the Corps
in conjunction with the State has worked on Broadkill Beach
and Lewes Beach; both of which are beach erosion projects.
62

Secretary Olney also mentioned the shoreline erosion control
demonstration program. Presently we are planning to let a
contract for the use of a floating scrap tier breakwater
at Pickering Beach. We are working on plans for a perched
beach at Kitts Hummock using three different types of
materials as well as a fixed offshore breakwater at
Slaughter Beach. The Pickering Beach proposal has been approved
and is nearing the construction stage; construction is
scheduled for completion some time in July or August of
this year. The Kitts Hummock perched beach and the
Slaughter Beach offshore breakwater have been proposed and
approved and construction is expected in the very'near
future. Construction of these last two proposals is
scheduled for completion in September 1978. Then all six
sites, the three I named above. and three others-Broadkill,
Lewes and Bowers Beach-are scheduled to be monitored over
the next two to three years. The products of this particular
effort would be a report evaluating the cost and effectiveness
of different types of relatively inexpensive beach erosion
control structures for use by various municipalities and
counties.

PANEL AND AUDIENCE DISCUSSION

Panel Members

Senator Jacob Zimmerman
Senator Andrew Knox
Representative Karen Miller
Representative William Vernon
Colonel Harry Dutchyshyn
Secretary Austin Olney
William Ratledge
Nathan Hayward
Dr. John Kraft
Dr. Robert Dean
Robert Henry

Audience Participants

Vernon-Dibeler, Commissioner, Bethany Beach
A. J. Cullen, Waples Mill Pond
Philip Short, Bethany Beach
Paul Jensen, Delaware Sea Grant Program
Joseph Skelly, Millville
Jay Wingate, Rehoboth Beach
Adel Vignola, Rehoboth Beach Chamber of Commerce

Secretary Oleny-1 think the best place to start might be some
comments on what we've seen this morning. From DNREC's stand-
point I think that the magnitude of the problem that we face is
extremely serious. It appears that with the resources that we
have in the State, we will have to be selective about how we
approach this problem. Certainly one place we can start is whatI
do we do about new activity in the beach zone. In effect, much
of what you have already seen at South Bethany is past history;
it is there; the damage caused by constructing on dune lines will
continue. The question we have to consider now is; how far
can the State go and how far should the State go in regulating
any new activity? Moreover, if there is a repeat of 1962 storm
and we lose a significant number of houses in areas like this,
how much rebuilding should we allow? So the question I pose to
the panel members and the audience is: Should the State allow
new construction or rebuilding along beaches that are subject
to storm waves and repeated damage? If you consider that, also
consider what should be done to protect the property owners who
may be subject to any adverse impact of building in front of the
building line along the coast. So with that I would like to
ask the panel to comment on whether the State should allow any
new construction or rebuilding.

Senator Zimmerman-I don't know. I didn't come prepared to
direct myself to a question such as that, because I think that is
a policy decision that the State administration and local governments
must get together and make. It is a serious question and, as
Chairman of the Natural Resources Committee of the Senate, I
am anxiously awaiting this decision. My primary thrust in the
past several years in the General Assembly has been not in cutting
out new paths for policy, but in attempting to protect those
communities, particularly those communities in may own district.
Protecting these communities and those areas that the public is
utilizing is in the interest of the State. Insofaras your primary
questions are concerned, I think it would be best responded to by
someone else.

Secretary Olney-Thank you Senator. Again I reiterate that we
already do have a policy on that. The policy is that we are
going to allow construction with certain design standards and
the question is; does that policy adequately protect public
interests as well as interests of those people behind houses
that are built 'on the dune line? Perhaps Senator Knox you could
comment on that.

Senator Knox-Well I do agree with Senator Zimmerman that this is,
in many cases, a local option. I was a member of the General
Assembly and participated in the passage of the 1972 act. After
the inspection over the lunch hour- -and granted its dangerous to
reach conclusions from one short visit to a beachfront situation- -
I really do not feel that the intent of the General Assembly is
being met by what I saw happening on those dune lines. It was
my recollection that our intent was to prohibit the further destruction
of the dunes and beaches in the State of Delaware, particularly
with residential construction. I understand the taking issues and
66

some of the problems in not being able to enforce the act as
rigorously as we had intended, but I really was somewhat surprised
with what I saw. I had heard about it, but that is nothing like
seeing structures actually stradling the dunes and contributing
to their own destruction. I know this is very difficult
legislation to write because of private property rights, but I
personally think the Legislative Branch, with the assistance of
the Department and local government, should take another look
at that legislation and see if there is anything that should
be changed. Are we meeting the intent of the citizens? As one
legislator, I will conclude by saying that I do not think 'that
what is happening is meeting the intent of the General Assembly
when it passed that law.

Representative Miller-I do not feel we are prepared to answer
that question. In practical terms, as legislators, we have to
address it and it would seem to me that all interested parties
should work together on this issue. To work separately would be
to lose a many elements that we need to talk about. If houses
were built out of ignorance, and they probably were, we can't
wish them away with a blink. On the other hand., I think future
building should be very seriously considered and perhaps we
should concentrate on what may be done and examine those areas
where the difficulties lie. I don't think we can totally ignore
these people, but eventually the sea may very well have its own way.
Before that time, I think we have to set priorities. I think
we have to ask ourselves: What is feasible for us to do? In
terms of the human costs, I think we have to ask ourselves:
What kinds of sacrifices are we willing to make to see that our
beaches stay a place that people would like to visit or live
on?

Representative Ver-non-I would like to follow up on what Senator
Knox and Representative Miller said. First of all I disagree
that the houses were built out of ignorance, because even today
there are a number of people applying for building permits on
lots that lie totally on the dune line. They may have either
recently bought the lot or they may have owned it for 10 or 15
years, but they are well aware of the consequences. I think that
the problem lies with the fact that they have an oceanfront lot
and they want to utilize it. From a practical standpoint, I
agree with Senator Knox that there hag been some damage to the
dune because of construction. On the practical side, as far as
the State is concerned, I do not know how we can attack the
problem by either compensating someone, denying construction
altogether or allowing them to build under certain design standards.
I think most of the houses that are being built now, in fact
all of them, are being built on pilings, and as one of the few
people that experienced the 1962 storm, I can say that piling
structures now being used probably will help eliminate some of the
damage, because most of the properties that were heavily damaged
in that 1962 storm were properties that were built on masonary
foundations right on the beach and then were undermined. Of

course, utilities, driveways, and other appertenances underneath
the houses all suffer damage in storms like this. The question
is: If we prohibit building altogether, how does the State, from
a practical standpoint, compensate someone. I'd like to direct
that to Senator Knox to see if he has any thoughts.

Senator Knox-Taking without just compensation* is a critical
question that we must address in all of our environmental legislation.
It really has not been resolved in the court. I can argue,
philosophically, that any zoning law has some aspect of a taking
without compensation. As our society becomes more complex and
more and more people are affected by regulations, there is going
to be some of that. To go so far as to absolutely prohibit
somebody from building on a Piece a land that they have had in
their family for generations, may require monetary compensation
or some type of development rights program.

Secretary Olney-In carrying this a little further, we should
explore what the State might do other than what it is doing
today. I think Bob Henry or Drs. Dean or Kraft may be familiar
with what other states are doing. Do any of the three of you
wish to comment on that.

Dr. Dean-Over the past seven years or so the State of Florida has
administered the Coastal Construction Setback Line Law. Basically,
the law requires that the entire sandy shoreline be surveyed and
monumented and that a beach profile and offshore profiles be
measured. Based on studies by coastal engineers the setback line
is established and approved by the state. The essence of the
setback line itself is that seaward of the setback line no
permanent structures may be built. The state law also requires
reexamination of the setback line, county-by-county, every five
years to determine whether or not revisions are in order. If an
individual loses some property due to a storm, and his structure
is seaward of the setback line, or if he wishes to construct a
new structure seaward of the setback line, he must apply for a
variance from the State. Variances are examined on a case-by-case
basis. Originally, I had expected that there would be many many
law suits stemming from this act, but the public has come to

*Editors Note. The issue of "taking without just compensation"
is often raised in land regulation disputes. It has its genesis
in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which says, in part,
that no State shall "...deprive any person of life, liberty, or
~roerywithout due process of law..." This clause has been
interpreted to mean not only the expropriation of property without
just compensation, but also the expropriation of property rights
through strict regulation. If the police power of government
is used in a fashion to deprive a person of all reasonable economic
use of property, such regulation will be deemed a "taking", for
which compensation must be paid. The Attorney General of Delaware
has issued an opinion which says, in effect, that prohibition of
construction on the beach, where no other reasonable alternative
to such construction exists, would violate the 14th Amendment.
68

realize that the law seems to be in their own best interest. For
example, when the setback line was being considered in Bay County,
emotions ran high over the location of that line. At about that
time Hurricane Eloise came through the area and actually destroyed
houses back to the setback line. It was a rough educational
process in which the public finally realized that indeed the
setback line had some rationale to it. Many of the opponents
of the setback line at that time were claiming the damage would
never reach that far back. Hurricane Eloise, however, proved
otherwise. There are two recommendations I'd like to make for
Delaware: One, of course, is regulation and the other is education.
It seems to me that people are basically rational individuals.
If they know what kind of problem they will be encountering, I
think they will act in a rational way. Part of the problem,
which I have seen in Florida, is that people will buy a lot
in the summer time when the beaches are wide and it is difficult
for them to imagine waves that are a foot high at that time of
the year can later develop into 20 foot breakers or that the
storm tides can become 9 feet higher. I think that if people
were made aware of the hazards which they may face, including
the trend of beach erosion that was mentioned this morning,
they would be more careful in making their decision to purchase
property.

Dr. Kraft-It is very obvious to me that we need a setback line and
it should be established. We have enough information to establish
a firm setback line as opposed to a floating setback line. Such
a setback line in this State, in my opinion, should be something
like 300 feet. Now that may seem excessive to many people who
have property in the coastal zone, but if you consider what is going
to happen if we do not have such a setback' r4ling, along with the
just compensation that Senator Knox has called for, something much
worse is going to happen. Mr. Hayward brought forth the idea
that the 1962 storm damage costs were about $24,000,000 in 1962
dollars and today it might be about $100,000,000. I would
submit that in the future it is going to be much much greater
than that. If we know this, it seems to me that it must be
rational to make a decision now to do something. In a case
where there is no question what is going-t6 happen, it does seem
to me that it would be most logical to take a stand, make a
setback, and address ourselves-more to the problem of proper
compensation, zoning, State planning, development, and so on.
Moreover, we must face the problem that there are some expenditures
that must be made no matter what, forever, such as protection of
the highway at Indian River Inlet or dune maintenance. I
think a very long-term point of view needs to be taken and the
quicker it's taken the better off we will all be. If we put
it off for another five or ten years, that damage estimate of
$100,000,000 is going to be $200,000,000. Eventually it will
be $500,000,000. Can you envision our coast line for 20 miles being
developed as Ocean City? I cannot, but-it frightens me - the
concept of it. The concept of trying to hold the line because it
is, therefore, more valuable frightens me.

Secretary Olney-Again, the question we are considering is: Should
the State allow new construction or rebuilding along beaches
subject to storm waves and repeated damages? Would anyone like
to comment from the floor?

Mr. Dibeler-I am concerned about approaching the problem from
this aspect, because it might give one the impression that we have
already decided that there is no other means of improving our
beaches. So I am a little disappointed, unless I misunderstand
it. But, the other point I would like to make is that the Bethany
Beach Commissioners are not primarily concerned with the protection
of beach in front of somebodies home. Our primary concern is
that of providing a beach for some 10,000 people to sit on in the
summer time. No one wants to come down to the beach and sit
underneath somebodies porch. Therefore, we have two problems.
First, if you want to consider a setback line, well thiat's
fine; I think the State must get into this-'kind of thing and not
leave it to a local community. We have given a setback line
serious consideration from time to time, but we have felt that
we needed strong support from the State, for example, that would
assist us in establishing such a line and getting our point
across to property owners. We need help from the State.
Since we may not have any beach space for the tourists, I do
believe we not only want to think about the setback line, but we
want to think about something positive, such as protection of
the eastward side of the beach in order to reduce the damage of
waves.

Secretary Olney-1 certainly did not want to give the impression
that we already abandoned the idea of holding the beaches. I
think we can address that question next. One of the questions we
want to address is: Should there be rebuilding in areas which
have been wiped out by floods? I think that relates to your
point that, if you do allow rebuilding in an area that has been
flooded out, you may reduce the size of the recreational beach.
So the issues are, I think, related.

Mr. Cullen-My question is directed primarily to Dr. Kraft. So far
we have been speaking primarily of this ribbon of sand and human
habitation of it. What about other areas such as the Bay? Are
we not talking about possible devastation of a much larger area
than just the beach?

Dr. Kraft-Flooding, of course, would intrude very far inland
in Delaware. The problem is documented in a Coastal Management
Program publication entitled "Coastal Storm Damage." I suspect
that we have not really been addressing that problem, but storm
flooding inland, of course, is something that can hardly be
prevented. Barrier beaches, however, are your main defense. If
the barriers are not breached, the flooding behind them will
tend to be less, because the amount of water that can get
through inlets or tidal rivers is limited. If the sea breaks
over the barrier's, the amount of area flooded expands by an order
70

of magnitude. This is what happened in the storm of 1962.
During the more recent storms the barriers have not been breached
to a significant degree and the flooding, as a result, was much
less.

Mr. Short-I'm not an expert, but I question you people on some
of your recommendations. The 300 foot setback can be appropriate
in certain localities along the beach. In other areas such a
setback may be excessive based on local experiences and in others
it should be greater. In March 1962 the Corps of Engineers came
up with a recommendation of 330' of free beach to the eastern toe
of the barrier dune. This does not always work and in later
publications they have used a 10' contour line. The thing that
has not been used is the profile of the ocean's bottom in front
of the area where the setback line should be.

I feel we need a discrimanatory tax whereby the areas that reap
the benefit from the beaches bear the expense of their maintenance.
It was done years ago on the Gulf, but it has been discontinued.
In the coastal zone area from Roosevelt Inlet to the Delaware
line, there is approximately $300,000,000-$400,000,000 worth of
fixed assets. There are a large number of us that derive direct
revenue from the beach area. There are others that enjoy the
beach area. There are people that use the beach area, but contribute
very little directly or indirectly. My idea is the same as a
ditch tax - the people who live in the area appoint Commissioners
to run the project with the professional assistance from the State
and other agencies. If you take the figure I just mentioned and
mulitiply it by 10�, per $100 of assessed value you would be able to rais
$300,000 annually. We could float a bond issue to take care of our own.

Secretary Olney-There are two alternatives at opposite ends of
the spectrum. One is to do nothing and simply let nature take
its course. I do not think there is anyone who is prepared to
accept that alternative. At the other end is the alternative of
"holding the line" in its present position. We have an idea of
how much it would cost to hold the line on the Atlantic beaches.
The Corps of Engineers prepared a General Design Memorandum for
the Atlantic Coast project. If I could I'd like to call on
Bill Ratledge to briefly describe the extent of that project and
what would be involved.

Mr. Ratledge-The Atlantic Coast project began, of course, after
the 1962 storm and was handled primarily by the Highway Department.
Our division became involved with it after the passage of the
Beach Preservation Act. I happened to be involved in the final
phases of the.Atlantic Coast project, at the same time we
were developing rules and regulations having to do with setback
lines. I thought I should throw these few words in at this time
because much of what we did related to the assumption that the
Corps project was going to be constructed. Our original regulations
had written in them a reference to a setback line designed by
the Corps of Engineers and that setback line was based on a project
of considerable magnitude. The project included among other things,
millions of cubic yar-ds of beach fill along the entire Atlantic
71

shoreline. Some areas were to be protected by bulkheads* at a
cost of about $600 per foot. The Corps also required that the
State of Delaware obtain easements and rights-of-way from owners
of private land where these structures were to be built. I was
almost laughed out of the meeting in Bethany Beach when I suggested
that the private property owners should donate their land. I still
think in situations, such as you saw today at South Bethany,
property owners should donate their land in order to have the
bulkheads constructed. These, however, are not simple bulkheads
like those we saw at lunchtime. This project, if constructed,
would cost between $40-50 million dollars over a five year
period. The State would have been responsible for about 397%
of this cost.

Secretary Olney-That figure would have to be sup plemented to
include the annual maintenance costs which is in the neighborhood
of $3,000,000. Moreover, some very pursuasive evidence was
presented this morning by Drs. Kraft and Dean indicating that
that solution is simply too expensive at this stage. So, I
would like to ask the legislators to give us an idea of just
how far the General Assembly might go in supporting these beach
projects in order to give the Department an idea of how much money
we may expect. We are authorized to have a balance in the Beach
Preservation Fund at the beginning of each fiscal year of $1,000,000
and I just wonder if the legislators here would comment on just
how much more we can expect if we are going to be doing more of
this work. Given the nature of the problem, do you think there
is going to be continuing support in the Legislature for funding of
beach nourishment projects. Would you see the 'need for any major
changes or do you think funds are going to remain at the present
level. I'm just asking for a gue~ss, since you have a better feel
than I do.

Representative Miller-I 'ion't see-how we can stay exactly where
we are. We have been studying this problem for some time and we
know its going to cost more money; there is no doubt about that.
The State presently has two ways to fund beach projects and one
is through the bond bill, although I do not know whether that's
the best way to do it. The second way is through the general
fund. I think we should figure out what we have b~een spending,
both in bond and general funds and attempt to establish realistic
budget guidelines. At present, I do not think we can say how
much more money will be available, since the revenue estimates
change every day in our State. I do not think that either the
taxpayers or the legislature will be willing to spend money
unwisely without a comprehensive program. Just throwing money
at the problem on a placemeal basis would be foolish. We have

*Editors Note. The bulkheads were to be constructed at Rehoboth,
Bethany and South Bethany to an elevation of about 15 feet above
mean sea level. The bulkheads were to be made of reinforced
concrete.

a total beach line, we don't have pieces and snatches. Furthermore,
if we approach this problem in .a piecemeal fashion, I don't think
we'll get very much, if any, more ,money. I do not think that
is the approach to take, but that's probably what we've been
doing too much of.

Secretary Olney-I think what I hear you saying is that if there
is going to be more support from thie Legislature, we would have
to develop priorities so that the Legislature knew the money
was going into the areas that needed it the most and that we have
to have a comprehensive plan which does not just d1eal with the
problem on an adhoc basis.

Senator Zimmerman-The question is; How much money would the
General Assembly be willing to appropriate for beach preservation?
Well, I just happened to come prepared for that today. Since
1972 there have been about p3.2 million appropriated in the bond
bill for beach preservation by the General Assembly. Our trouble
is the Department, over the years, has refused to spend it.
Today, there is authorized, but unspent, $575,000 from previous
bond bills even though. there are projects yet needed to be done.
With this money you could take care of many of the needed projects
in Delaware Bay. These are the. areas that the funds are directed
towards, but you, Mr. Secretary Iand Mr. Hayward have been very
relunctant to approve funds for use on these beaches. I feel
that the General Assembly will meet the problem and their
obligations, provided there is some .input from the General
Assembly as to where the funds are going to be spent.

Secretary Olney-I think you put your finger on a problem of
priorities. We already know that you could do 56 million dollars
worth of work on the Atlantic Coast, for example, but we're
talking about a State. fund that is $500,000. As one who has to
administer that beach fund, the biggest problem I have is that we
don't yet have a good idea where that money should go first. We
could probably spend all that money in just a couple of projects.

Senator Zimmerman-We can give you some advice if you need any
help. (laughter)

Secretary Olney-The problem with the advice we get is it tends to
be from a rather local source and if you were administering the
p~rogram, I know where the funds would go. That is fine, you are
doing your job, but I have the whole State to worry about and I
think it would be verzy helpful if we could establish some priority
on the use of these funds.

Representative Miller-I don't think, when it comes to appropriating
the funds, that any-legislator is going to be willing to set
priorities which will negate past promises. If money has been
appropriated and promised, and the people's expectations are there,

then I think that the problem has to be taken care of. I think
in the future, however, one problem that we have had, is that too
often we have been treating the symptoms rather than the overall
problem. As legislators'. we would all be glad to set priorities
and then worry about raising the money later on. The questions
which remain are: Who are we not making headway and what kind of
headway can be made? I think there would be more cooperation
among all parties concerned, if we would sit down and haummer
some of these things out.

Secretary Olney-Again, I think we are talking about priorities.
Do you think the funds should go first to the public beaches?

Representative Miller-Of course, but first we have to define
public beaches, because I think all the shoreline is a part of the
public beach area that will have to be protected. What I think
we have to do there, is set up some way in which we have shared
private/public ownership of at least that first 300 feet or so.

Secretary Olney-I think this is probably the most difficult
question we have to face; where do the funds go first? The
problem is getting bigger and the funds are simply not adequate.
The biggest problem-I have administering this program is knowing
where to put the funds first.

Mr. Hayward-I think the point that the Secretary was trying to
make and the point which should be addressed in any State policy,
program, statute or reguilations is that there has to be so-me
concensus among the people where the priorities lie. Whether it
is beach protection, education or any other State service, there
is always a greater demand than there is a supply of both people
to manage these programs and funds to pay for them. So what we
are trying to do today, is get some feeling from people as to
where priorities really lie. We have to look at every beach and
we have to- try and make some trade off, because just as soon as
we begin investing on the basis of the "squeaky wheel gets the grease",
we wind up in competition and we do not manage our resource in
an intelligent fashion.

Representative Vernon-I want to address the question of whether,
and how much, the General Assembly would appropriate money for beach
erosion control. I think, however, that this is a backdoor
approach. I too, think we must have a comprehensive engineering
plan to address erosion to the best of our ability. Several
experts have discussed beach nourishment, bulkheads, breakwaters
and so forth, and so there appears to be a number of possible
solutions to the problem. Before one starts talking about how
much money should be appropriated, I think someone has to come
forth with a plan that would provide at least a partial solution
and then weigh that plan against the probability that it may
work.

Mr. Jensen-I'd like to make a statement that will probably be
viewed as unpopular and then ask a question. It seems to me that
the presentations made by Drs. Kraft and Dean today showed that
the beach is an integral part of the meshing of the la-ad and
water and that the beach existed several hundred feet further
east a few centuries ago. The beach would be there even if the
coastal properties along the beach were to be destroyed. It seems
to me that the effort going into 'beach preservation is done
primarily for those who own property behind the beach. The public
will always have a place to swim. That's my unpopular statement.
As you know, several plans to manage the beaches currently exist.
it seems to me that these ideas, as well as the long-term financial
implications of beach management and beach nourishment efforts,
should be looked at in a comprehensive way. Mr. Hayward, could
you give us your views on this.

Mr. Hayward-The first thing that we all need to remember is that
the Corps prepared a General Design Memorandum which dealt
with the Atlantic coast beaches. It was quite comprehensive,
but everyone realized it-was beyond the State's financial ability.
Mr. Olney and I have met with the Corps several-times and have
reassured them that there is a commitment on the part of the State
to participate in the beach preservation project. One of the
problems, quite frankly, which is encountered when discussing a
comprehensive investment, is that dollars get very big. Another
question concerns the period of time over which the funds are
to be spent. There is also a reluctance an the part of the
Legislature to make long-term financial committments. As you all
know, one General Assembly simply cannot bind another to future
commitments unless they appropriate the money today. So the
point is this, we are looking, at the State's coast as a total
resource. There are many things that we should and could do, but
the problem has to be looked at in terms of the State's ability
to pay. Mr. Sho~rt has raised one point-too, which is the question
of who benefits and who pays and s~uggested a special beach tax
district. Should those who come to use the beaches in the summer
time, whether they are Delaware residents or not, and those
who live on the beaches, be the ones who pay the largest percentage
of the cost of maintenance and improvement. That is a very tough
question to answer, but clearly there is a need for a look at
the overall problem. We have done that and we have all determined
that it is too expensive. Now what we have to do is to figure
out what the State can afford, what the State is willing to
afford and how that bill should be distributed.

Mr. Skelly-It is probably politically necessary to spend some
money for beach preservation and it is humane too. The people
with the oceanfront property are in a lot of trouble and its no
fun to see other people suffer. The sea, however, is moving west
-and no matter what we do, whether we use Mr. Short's subtle
ideas about controling erosion, or we build a Corps of Engineers
bulkheads, the people are going to have to move west with it.
Sooner or later the people will give way. That lighthouse fell
in finally and the people who were living there don't live there
any more. Therefore, after we finish deciding how much is
politically necessary to spend on beach preservation, we should
75

give some thought to devising *a program which will help ease the
pain and suffering of property owners who have to pull up stakes
and* move westward.

Mr. Short-The suggestion was made to h~ave another study. Well,
studies have been conducted by recognized authorities, but have
not been adopted. The beaches are very important for tourism and
recreation, so indirectly the State has an obligation to this area.
Therefore, I challenge you to do something for the best asset
the State of Delaware has. Let's go forward and do something and
not dilly dally with it.

Mr. Wingate-First, I would like to review what we've talked
about today.. We identified the problem this morning and that,
of course, was one of erosion. We've discussed possible solutions.
We've talked about replenishment of the sands on the beach and we've
talked about construction of structures. Under structures we've
talked about groins, seawalls, and breakwaters. Finally, we
have come to the conclusion that there are two very strong
controlling factors. The first is cost, and most here agree it
is prohibitive, but not too much has been said about time. I
think we should all recognize that time is a controlling factor.
These comprehensive plans take time. We should have an overall
plan, but the idea I would like to discuss -what could be accomplished
quickly and cheaply and falls under the concept of a breakwater.
What I refer to is the sinking of old vessels along our coastline
to form an underwater breakwater. I believe it was after the
1962 storm that this idea was discussed at great length and I
think Senator John Williams act ually had arranged to have six
to eight concrete vessels made available to do just that. The
plan was dropped and I don't know if anybody can answer the
question as to why. It seems to me that there are such vessels
available. This is something that could be done with simple
towing charges. The ves'sels could be sunk and provide an underwater
breakwater at little cost. if it didn't work as far as protecting
out beach we would at least improve the local fishing industry,
because it would be an ideal place for fish. I would just like
to ask if anybody has given any thought to this in recent years
and why the plan was dropped eight or ten years ago?

Dr.. kraft-I think there is some merit to the idea of sinking a
ship in the area to control erosion, but what has to be considered
is that erosion around the ends of this breakwater will increase.
So, there may be some merit in a place like Indian River Inlet
where the erosion zone could be spread over-a broader area, but
you must have a continuing plan on down 'trhe beach, because
breakwaters are deleterious to it. I've seen two of them sunk
offshore. They are still sticking up and is an embarassment to
the qQmnmunity. So, it would have to be done very carefully so
that it was completely under water.

Dr.,nqan-I think it has considerable merit and probably should
deserve consideration or reconsideration. I do not know why it
was dropped from consideration in the past.
76

Mr1Oney-There is one other issue I would like to raise. If
teSate does undertake, with or without the assistance of the
federal government, protective measures that benefit flood prone
property owners, should the State recoup some of that investment.
We've heard some suggestions and I would like to open it up to the
panel to talk about that proposition.

Representative Miller-I'm sure that we could make arrangements with
the local governments to share costs. There is no way the State
could come up with $17 million for the Corps pr~oject. The money
is not there, but we can make plans in the future-to share costs
and that's more realistic. I'm -not prepared to say
exactly how we can do it, but we can certainly sit-down together
and begin to work something out. .1 believe the citizens would
accept that.

Senator Knox-I would agree with that. We always have to keep in
mind that there are public and private beaches. Certainly some
installation that would clearly benefit just a small group of
people, should be pai~d for, in large part, by them.

Senator Zimmerman-The various levels of government own considerable
beach front and many other areas have donated access easements.
I know of very fewr place~s where there is an exclusively private
beach. I think they are all being used by taxpayers. The
access to some may not be as great as access to others, but I
think that the State and the federal government can certainly
justify expenditure funds for many projects without necessarily
having to pinpoint which beaches are public and which are private.
I think that the beaches a-re a resource of value to the entire
State and are in the interest of all the taxpayers of the State
to support.

Representative Vernon-SI was somewhat interested in Mr. Short's
idea. The only practical problem with that is, that most of the
coastal area has been hard hit by taxes since the last county
reassessment and the new tax bills, especially in the beach.
area, where heavy. Moreover, we have several sewer districts
under construction and one completed, and that is adding a
considerable financial burden to the local people. So, I'm
not so sure that at this time the people could stand any more
local or discretionary taxes.

Ms. Vignola-I might help ypu to make up your minds. The State of
Delaware gets about $200,000,000 from these resort areas and
about $21.5 million dollars in taxes, so we' re no little part of
the State. You are getting quite a bit from us and if we don't
have a beach any more, how are you going to do without this
much money? I'm concerned about the entire coastal area. I
understand they have problems up there, (Kent County) but right
now I'm right here and I'm concerned with my area. I think
today we are putting the cart before the horse when wie say to
77

our legislators: Will you give us the money? First of all, what
are we going to do with that money? I think we have to find a
way to solve the erosion problem and then go to the legislature
and ask for the required amount to stop the erosion.

Secretary Olney-1 think one thing that was said down at the beach
by Dr. Kraft, is that the migration of the land westward and the
advancement of the water is an inevitable process. The only
variable is time and we wouldn't be here if we had the answers.
If it were simply a question of throwing money at the problem,
we wouldn't be here, because we would have done it. The problem
is the magnitude of the forces that we are trying to deal with
and as Mr. Skelly says, perhaps we should be thinking about how
to move people westward. If we could control the erosion I think
I'd feel more confident about saving the tourist industry and
keeping everything where it i.s. I think there is a real question,
after what I saw this morning, as to whether we can actually
do that.

Mr. Hayward-Let me just reemphasize that you people, who are
participating in this Workshop, are really the essence of decision
making in the State. It is from people like you from whom
Legislature receives ideas and input and ultimately takes the
necessary action to give the Executive Department of the State
the necessary authorities to carry out programs. Let me emphasize
that your thoughts and comments are extremely important to all
of us in State Government. We would like your ideas-and we would
like to hear more from you. Please direct your thoughts and
ideas either to Secretary Olney at the Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control or to myself at the Office
of Management, Budget and Planning. We are vitally concerned.

This publication is available in microfiche
from the Bureau of Archives and Records, Hall
of Records, P.O. Box 1401, Dover, DE 19901

Printed in U.S.A.