Evaluation of Shorelines and Legal Boundaries Controlled by Water Levels on Sandy Beaches

Integration of beach profiles and water-level measurements at three sites on a microtidal, wave-dominated coast reveals that tide-gauge records systematically underestimate the actual elevations and horizontal positions that water reaches on the beach as a result of wave runup. On low-gradient sandy beaches, natural morphological beach features, such as the erosional scarp and vegetation line accurately reflect the positions of frequent maximum high water levels and the berm crest reflects the position of more frequent ordinary high water levels, whereas tide-gauge records consistently predict lower maximum and average levels of beach flooding. The discrepancies between predicted and actual water positions on the beach have important scientific and legal implications. The scientific implications involve the need to map shoreline features that closely track the long-term trends in beach movement, but are insensitive to short-term fluctuations in water level. Neither the instantaneous high water line (wet beach-dry beach boundary) or the berm crest satisfy this requirement, and therefore, they are not recommended for monitoring shoreline position either in the field or interpreted from aerial photographs unless there is no reliable alternative. The legal implications pertain to land ownership and property boundaries in the United States that currently are surveyed from tide-gauge records but were originally defined by common law on the basis of high water levels that leave physical marks on the upland property. Because water levels are actually higher on the beach than predicted by tide gauges, land surveys based on a tidal datum allocate more littoral property to the upland owner than is justified by the physical facts or was intended by law. Consequently, the publicly-owned state submerged lands encompass less of the beach than that area which is regularly flooded by marine water.

[1]  W. Fox,et al.  Process-response patterns in beach and nearshore sedimentation; I, Mustang Island, Texas , 1975 .

[2]  R. A. Morton,et al.  Shoreline and vegetation-line movement, Texas Gulf Coast, 1974-1982. , 1989 .

[3]  George L. Smith,et al.  Calculating Long-Term Shoreline Recession Rates Using Aerial Photographic and Beach Profiling Techniques , 1990 .

[4]  E. Robert Thieler,et al.  Historical Shoreline Mapping (II): Application of the Digital Shoreline Mapping and Analysis Systems (DSMS/DSAS) to Shoreline Change Mapping in Puerto Rico , 1994 .

[5]  B. Thom,et al.  Behaviour of beach profiles during accretion and erosion dominated periods , 1991 .

[6]  D. Inman,et al.  Description of seasonal beach changes using empirical eigenfunctions , 1975 .

[7]  J. V. Beek,et al.  Systematic Beach Changes on the Outer Banks, North Carolina , 1971, The Journal of Geology.

[8]  R. Morton Gulf Shoreline Movement Between Sabine Pass and the Brazos River, Texas: 1974 to 1982. Geological Circular 97-3, Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin. , 1997 .

[9]  D. B. Stafford An Aerial photographic technique for beach erosion surveys in North Carolina , 1971 .

[10]  Robert A. Morton,et al.  Accurate Shoreline Mapping: Past, Present, and Future , 1991 .

[11]  Matteson W. Hiland,et al.  Accuracy Standards and Development of a National Shoreline Change Data Base , 1991 .

[12]  Mark P. Leach,et al.  Monitoring beach changes using GPS surveying techniques , 1993 .

[13]  P. Nielsen,et al.  Wave Runup Distributions on Natural Beaches , 1991 .

[14]  M. Fenster,et al.  Temporal analysis of shoreline recession and accretion , 1991 .

[15]  R. F. Edwing Next generation water level measurement system: site design, preparation, and installation. , 1991 .

[16]  M. Hayes Hurricanes as geological agents: case studies of Hurricanes Carla, 1961, and Cindy, 1963. , 1967 .