The Future of Coastal Restoration
The history of coastal restoration on the Gulf Coast has been written largely by USACE and its partners, but its co-authors include the names of storms unlikely to be soon forgotten – Andrew, Ike, Katrina, and others. The future, given data about the increasing frequency and severity of these storms, seems unlikely to make coastal restoration easier along a coastline that looks much different than it did in 1880.
In the fall of 2012, to ensure the future economic and ecological health of the region, USACE, in partnership with the Texas General Land Office, launched the Sabine to Galveston (coastal Texas has not been funded) Study, to gather and analyze data that will enable a comprehensive strategy for storm damage reduction and ecosystem restoration along the upper Texas coast.
Coastal risk reduction projects, in a time of constrained budgets, are undoubtedly expensive, but their front-end costs may seem miniscule when compared to the costs, in lives and dollars, of the post-storm relief and recovery efforts that have followed storms such as Katrina and Sandy.
In the Northeast Atlantic area, a storm such as Sandy – already known in the region as the “Storm of the Century” – is a milestone event, one bound to recalibrate mindsets along the Eastern Seaboard. Coastal restoration is not a new concept in the region, but Sandy introduced devastation on a scale that must now, inevitably, be a factor in the calculations of decision-makers.
Scientists test the Half Moon Reef Restoration site in Matagorda Bay, Texas, for suitability of various construction materials for collecting spat (small oyster larvae). The materials were tested three times over the course of a year (seen here during a 2011 test) and included limestone rock, crushed concrete, and dead oyster shells – all of which proved adequate for collecting oyster spat. Photo by Associate Director of Coastal Restoration Mark Dumesnil; The Nature Conservancy
Congress’ 2013 disaster-relief legislation directs USACE to submit plans for reducing the threats of future flooding in the northern Atlantic Coast area. The law appropriates up to $20 million ($19 million after sequestration) to “address the flood risks of vulnerable coastal populations in the areas that were affected by Hurricane Sandy within the boundaries of the North Atlantic Division of the Corps.” The deadline for submitting this report is January 2015.
Joe Vietri, director, National Planning Center for Coastal Storm Risk Management for USACE, said that while the area encompassed by the study is extensive – 31,000 miles of ocean, bay, and riverine shoreline – the heavy concentration of damage near New York Harbor and the Jersey Shore offers a logical focal point, with personnel working largely out of two field offices in the area. “This has allowed us to develop a pretty robust team of people, made up of both the federal family as well as nonfederal partners, to look at what worked and what didn’t work,” Vietri said, “and to come up with suggestions for solutions on scale that would improve the long-term resiliency of the area.”
Like similar studies conducted before it – including the study that led to the construction of the Greater New Orleans’ Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction System – the North Atlantic Coast study is a deliberate process, involving public input at every step – workshops, seminars, and Web comment boards that will produce a set of preliminary suggestions likely to include both structural and non-structural solutions (coastal home elevations, for example) for reducing coastal damage and flood risk.
The structural recommendations ultimately generated by the North Atlantic Coast study will likely include both “gray” infrastructure (hard-engineered structures such as seawalls and floodgates) and “green” or use nature and nature-based materials – managing sediment and creating wetlands, dunes, barrier islands, and other natural landforms that will protect coastline from storm surges and benefit ecosystems.
“While our current focus is on the near-term restoration of previously constructed projects, in the long term, USACE’s goal is to implement holistic and sustainable risk reduction mechanisms, to ensure we’re providing the layers and types of risk reduction that will leave communities less vulnerable and more resilient than they were prior to Sandy,” said Durham-Aguilera.
In a future likely to involve sea level rise and worsening storm surges, these solutions will be more important than ever – and their continued implementation will require a more proactive approach to disaster relief. Coastal risk reduction projects, in a time of constrained budgets, are undoubtedly expensive, but their front-end costs may seem miniscule when compared to the costs, in lives and dollars, of the post-storm relief and recovery efforts that have followed storms such as Katrina and Sandy.
“I think the Corps has struggled for many years to get that message out,” said Forcina. “Some people think we put sand on these beaches for recreational reasons – for example on Fire Island, which many see as a playground for the affluent. But what people don’t realize is that Fire Island is a barrier island. It provides risk reduction to millions of people on the south shore of Long Island. Without these projects in place, you can certainly see a scenario where damages to the mainland and these low-lying communities would be a lot more significant. It really has very little to do with recreational benefits – it’s about life, safety, and economics.”
This article first appeared in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Building Strong®, Serving the Nation and the Armed Forces 2013-2014 Edition.