Skip to main content
Log in

Ability of beach users to identify rip currents at Pensacola Beach, Florida

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Quasi-permanent rip current hot spots at Pensacola Beach, Florida, pose a significant hazard to beach users, largely because the hot spots are located at or close to the primary access points. While an increase in the number of lifeguards has led to a decrease in the number of drownings since 2004, the number of rescues and contacts has increased to over a 30,000 year. Despite warning signs at access points along the beach, it is not clear whether beach users are able to identify a rip channel or an active rip current. To assess beach users’ knowledge of rip currents and their ability to identify rip channels and currents, 97 surveys were conducted between June and September of 2010 at Pensacola Beach. Beach users were asked to identify rip channels in oblique photographs taken on green, yellow and red flag days when the potential for rip currents is low, medium and high, respectively. A majority of participants suggested that they could identify a rip channel or current (if present), but less than 20 % of beach users were able to identify the rip channels and currents. The majority of participants identified heavy surf areas as the location of the rips versus the relatively flat water of the current or the darker color water of the channel. Results further suggest that most beach users, and particularly local participants, are overconfident in their ability to identify rip channels and currents. The focus of beach users on heavy surf as an indication of the rip current potential and the overconfidence in identifying a rip channel or current affects the spatial distribution of beach users and to some degree the location of rescues and drownings. While it can be quite difficult for the average beach user to identify rip channels and active rip currents, the results of the study suggest a need for further education efforts to reduce the rip hazard, particularly in areas where lifeguards are not permanently stationed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barrett G, Houser C (2012) Identifying hotspots of rip current activity using wavelet analysis at Pensacola Beach, Florida. Phys Geogr 33(1):32–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branche CM, Stewart S (eds) (2001) Lifeguard effectiveness: a report of the working group. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Atlanta, GA, 35 p

  • Drozdzewski D, Shaw W, Dominey-Howes D, Brander R, Walton T, Gero A, Sherker S, Goff J, Edwick B (2012) Surveying rip current survivors: preliminary insights into the experiences of being caught in rip currents. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12:1201–1211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gensini V, Ashley WS (2010) An examination of rip current fatalities in the United States. Nat Hazards 54:159–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield J, Williamson A, Sherker S, Brander R, Hayen A (2012) Development and evaluation of an intervention to reduce rip current related beach drowning. Accid Anal Prev 46:45–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houser C, Hapke C, Hamilton S (2008) Controls on coastal dune morphology, shoreline erosion and barrier island response to extreme storms. Geomorphology 100:223–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houser C, Barrett G, Labude D (2011a) Alongshore variation in the rip current hazard at Pensacola Beach, Florida. Nat Hazards. doi:10.1007/s11069-010-9636-0

  • Houser C, Caldwell N, Meyer-Arendt KJ (2011b) Rip current hazards at Pensacola Beach, Florida. In: Leatherman S, Fletemeyer J (eds) Rip currents: beach safety, physical oceanography, and wave modeling, chap 11. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 175-197

  • Livingston G, Arthur K (2002) The economic impact of Pensacola Beach. Unpublished report, Haas Center for Business Research and Economic Development, University of West Florida, Pensacola, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMahan JH, Thornton EB, Reniers AJHM (2006) Rip current review. Coast Eng 53(2):191–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rip Currents: University of Delaware Sea Grant College Program. http://www.ceoe.udel.edu/ripcurrents/Partnerships/index.html. Accessed 22 Oct 2010

  • Santa Rosa Island Authority (2010) http://www.sria-fla.com. Accessed 22 Oct 2010

  • Sherker S, Brander RW, Finch C, Hatfield J (2008) Why Australia nees an effective national campaign to reduce coastal drowning. J Sports Sci Med 11:81–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherker S, Williamson A, Hatfield J, Brander R, Hayen A (2010) Beachgoers’ beliefs and behaviours in relation to beach flags and rip currents. Accid Anal Prev 42(6):1785–1804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short AD (1985) Rip current type, spacing and persistence, Narrabeen beach, Australia. Mar Geol 65:47–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short AD, Hogan CL (1994) Rip currents and beach hazards: their impact on public safety and implications for coastal management. J Coast Res SI12:197–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Surf Life Saving Australia (2009) National Coastal Safety Report. 24 p

  • Williamson A, Hatfield J, Sherker S, Brander R, Hayen A (2012) A comparison of attitudes and knowledge of beach safety for Australian beachgoers, rural residents and international tourists. Aust N Z J Public Health 36(4):385–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Houser.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Caldwell, N., Houser, C. & Meyer-Arendt, K. Ability of beach users to identify rip currents at Pensacola Beach, Florida. Nat Hazards 68, 1041–1056 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0673-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0673-3

Keywords

Navigation