Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seawalls and Signage: How Beach Access Management Affects Rip Current Safety

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Beach Management Tools - Concepts, Methodologies and Case Studies

Part of the book series: Coastal Research Library ((COASTALRL,volume 24))

Abstract

Rip currents are concentrated flows of water flowing out to sea faster than the surrounding waves. These currents form as a result of alongshore variations in wave set-up driven by variable nearshore morphology or hard structures that interrupt the longshore current. Recent research from the United States, Costa Rica, Australia, and the United Kingdom suggests that the beach going public is mostly unaware of how to identify, avoid, and escape rip currents. As a result, hundreds of rip current related deaths occur worldwide each year, making rip currents a global health hazard. While an increasing number of programs are created in coastal countries, many aimed at increasing public awareness and education, signage, or improving lifeguard programs, there is increasing evidence that existing warning systems and signage are ineffective because beach users are unable to translate the warning into a real-world feature. Further evidence suggests that beach access management can inadvertently steer unsuspecting beach users towards rip-prone areas, increasing the chances of a drowning occurring on that beach. For example, alongshore variations in the offshore bathymetry at Pensacola Beach, Florida responsible for semi-permanent rip-prone sections of the beach are also responsible for the development of relatively small dunes in the backshore. Beach access points were preferentially built in the areas with smaller dunes, thereby focusing beach-users towards the most rip-prone sections of the beach. In another example from Jaco Beach, Costa Rica, public beach access points are adjacent to stream outlets that are responsible for creating a nearshore terrace and rip morphology, and are focusing beach users’ access and activity towards rip-prone sections of the beach. In contrast, the evenly spaced beach access ramps from the seawall down to the sand of Australia’s famous Bondi Beach in Sydney do not focus beach-users and activity towards rip-prone sections of the beach. However, the placement of a popular bus stop and hostels invite the most vulnerable and unaware beach users swimmers towards the southern end of the beach with a large semi-permanent rip current called the “Backpacker’s Express.” Through these examples, we conclude that when developers do not consider beach and nearshore geomorphology in their designs for beach access management, they may lead unsuspecting and unaware beach users towards the rip hazard and increase the potential for drownings.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Drowning is defined as “the process of experiencing respiratory impairment from submersion/immersion in liquid” (WHO 2014). Technically, a person can experience drowning and not die as a result; for that reason we refer throughout this chapter to both drowning and fatal drowning.

References

  • Angelou Economics (2008) Galveston Island: tourism economic impact analysis (unpublished report)

    Google Scholar 

  • Arozarena I, Houser C, Echeverria AG, Brannstrom C (2015) The rip current hazard in Costa Rica. Nat Hazards 77(2):753–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arun Kumar SVV, Prasad KVSR (2014) Rip current-related fatalities in India: a new predictive risk scale for forecasting rip currents. Nat Hazards 70:313–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashley WS, Black AW (2008) Fatalities associated with nonconvective high-wind events in the United States. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 47(2):717–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes PH (2002) Approaches to community safety: risk perception and social meaning. Aust J Emer Manag 1(1):15–23

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen AJ (1969) Rip currents: 1. Theoretical investigations. J Geophys Res 74(23):5467–5478

    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

    Google Scholar 

  • Brander RW (1999) Field observations on the morphodynamic evolution of a low-energy rip current system. Mar Geol 157(3):199–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brander RW, Short AD (2000) Morphodynamics of a large-scale rip current system at Muriwai Beach, New Zealand. Mar Geol 165(1):27–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brander RW, Short AD (2001) Flow kinematics of low-energy rip current systems. J Coast Res 17(2):468–481

    Google Scholar 

  • Brander R, Dominey-Howes D, Champion C et al (2013) Brief communication: a new perspective on the Australian rip current hazard. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13(6):1687–1690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brannstrom C, Trimble S, Santos A et al (2014) Beach user ability to identify a rip current and hazardous surf conditions. Nat Hazards 72:1123–1138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brannstrom C, Houser C, Lee H et al (2015) “you can’t see them from sitting here:” evaluating beach user understanding of a rip current warning sign. Appl Geogr 56:61–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brighton B, Sherker S, Brander R et al (2013) Rip current related drowning deaths and rescues in Australia 2004–2011. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13(4):1069–1075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brilly M, Polic M (2005) Public perception of flood risks, flood forecasting and mitigation. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5(3):345–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell N, Houser C, Meyer-Arendt K (2013) Ability of beach users to identify rip currents at Pensacola Beach, Florida. Nat Hazards 68:1041–1056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carey W, Rogers S (2005) Rip currents: coordinating coastal research, outreach and forecast methodologies to improve public safety. In: Wallendorf L, Ewing L, Rogers S et al (eds) ASCE: solutions to coastal disasters. Charleston, South Carolina, pp 285–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson-Arnott R (2010) Introduction to coastal processes and geomorphology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Drozdzewski D, Shaw W, Dominey-Howes D et al (2012) Surveying rip current survivors: preliminary insights into the experiences of being caught in rip currents. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12(4):1201–1211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espluga J, Gamero N, Prades A et al (2009) El papel de la confianza en los conflictos socio ambientales. Política y sociedad 46/1(2):225–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Fédération Internationale de Natation (August 3 2016) 50 m–pool World Records

    Google Scholar 

  • Gensini VA, Ashley WS (2010) An examination of rip current fatalities in the United States. Nat Hazards 54(1):159–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green CH, Tunstall SM, Fordham MH (1991) The risks from flooding: which risks and whose perception? Disasters 15(3):227–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall TE, Slothower M (2009) Cognitive factors affecting homeowners’ reactions to defensible space in the Oregon coast range. Soc Nat Resour 22(2):95–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haynes K, Barclay J, Pidgeon N (2008) Whose reality counts? Factors affecting the perception of volcanic risk. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 172(3):259–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heitz C, Spaeter S, Auzet AV et al (2009) Local stakeholders’ perception of muddy flood risk and implications for management approaches: a case study in Alsace (France). Land Use Policy 26(2):443–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houser C (2009) Geomorphological controls on road damage during Hurricanes Ivan and Dennis. J Coast Res 558–568

    Google Scholar 

  • Houser C (2012) Feedback between ridge and swale bathymetry and barrier island storm response and transgression. Geomorphology 173(174):1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houser C, Barrett G (2010) Divergent behavior of the swash zone in response to different foreshore slopes and nearshore states. Mar Geol 271:106–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houser C, Hamilton S (2009) Sensitivity of post-hurricane beach and dune recovery to event frequency. Earth Surf Process Landf 34:613–628

    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 (2011) Alongshore variation in the rip current hazard at Pensacola Beach, Florida. Nat Hazards 57:501–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houser C, Arnott R, Ulzhöfer S et al (2013) Nearshore circulation over transverse bar and rip morphology with oblique wave forcing. Earth Surf Process Landf 38:1269–1279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houser C, Murphy T, Labude D (2015) Alongshore correspondence of beach users and rip channels at Pensacola Beach, Florida. Nat Hazards 78:2175–2183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huntley DA, Short AD (1992) On the spacing between observed rip currents. Coast Eng 17(3):211–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Life Saving Federation (2004) International Standards. Beach Safety and Information Flags. Headquarters for World Water Safety, Gemeenteplein 26, 3010 Leuven, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • International Visitors Survey (YE June 2009 to YE June 2014) and National Visitors Survey (YE June 2009 to YE June 2014) Tourism Research Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Jóhannesdóttir G, Gísladóttir G (2010) People living under threat of volcanic hazard in southern Iceland: vulnerability and risk perception. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 10(2):407–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser G, Witzki D (2004) Public perception of coastal flood defence and participation in coastal flood defence planning. In: Schernewski G, Dolch T (eds) Geographie der Meere und Küsten Coastline, pp 101–108. ISSN 0928-2734 S

    Google Scholar 

  • Karanci AN, Aksit B, Dirik G (2005) Impact of a community disaster awareness training program in Turkey: does it influence hazard-related cognitions and preparedness behaviors? Soc Behav Personal Int J 33(3):243–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kates RW (1962) Hazard and choice perception in flood plain management. Illinois, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapinski M, Viken G (2014) Great Lakes swim safety risk communication for 18–24 year-old males: review of key literature and results of a focus group study final report. Michigan State University. Michigan. http://www.miseagrant.umich.edu/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/02/14-207-Lapinski-Viken_RiskReport_July-2014.pdf

  • LeDoux J (1996) Emotional networks and motor control: a fearful view. Prog Brain Res 107:437–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lushine JB (1991) A study of rip current drownings and related weather factors. In: National Weather Digest. National Weather Service Forecast Office, Miami, Florida

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMahan JH, Reniers AJ, Thornton EB et al (2004) Infragravity rip current pulsations. J Geophys R Oceans 109(C1)

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMahan JH, Thornton EB, Stanton TP et al (2005) RIPEX: observations of a rip current system. Mar Geol 218(1):113–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacMahan JH, Brown J, Thornton E et al (2010) Mean Lagrangian flow behavior on an open coast rip-channeled beach: a new perspective. Mar Geol 268(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mael F, Seck M, Russell D (1999) A work behavior-oriented job analysis for lifeguards (final technical report). American Institutes for Research, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews B, Andronaco R, Adams A (2014) Warning signs at beaches: do they work? Saf Sci 62:312–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarroll RJ, Brander RW, MacMahan JH et al (2013) Assessing the effectiveness of rip current swimmer escape strategies, Shelly Beach, NSW, Australia. J Coast Res 1(65(sp1)):784–789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarroll RJ, Brander RW, MacMahan JH et al (2014) Evaluation of swimmer-based rip current escape strategies. Nat Hazards 71:1821–1846

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarroll RJ, Castelle B, Brander RW et al (2015) Modelling rip current flow and bather escape strategies across a transverse bar and rip channel morphology. Geomorphology 246:502–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKay C, Brander RW, Goff J (2014) Putting tourists in harms way – coastal tourist parks and hazardous unpatrolled surf beaches in new South Wales, Australia. Tourism Mgmt 45:71–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miceli R, Sotgiu I, Settanni M (2008) Disaster preparedness and perception of flood risk: a study in an alpine valley in Italy. J Environ Psychol 28(2):164–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mileti D, O’Brien P (1993) Public response to aftershock warnings. US Geol Surv Prof Pap 1553:31–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Mollen S, Rimal RN, Ruiter RA et al (2013) Healthy and unhealthy social norms and food selection: findings from a field-experiment. Appetite 65:83–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) (2015) “The NOAA coastal hazards resilience workshop: rip currents and wave runup. Virginia Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation Center, Suffolk, 14–16 April 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen-Gammon J (2001) Initial modeling of the August 2000 Houston-Galveston ozone episode. Report to the Technical Analysis Division, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, 19 December 2001

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan D, Ozanne-Smith J, Triggs T (2009) Self-reported water and drowning risk exposure at surf beaches. Aust NZealand J Pub Health 33(2):180–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Museum of Australia (last modified 30 June 2015) The birth of surf lifesaving. In between the flags: 100 years of surf lifesaving. Accessed 19 October 2016. http://www.nma.gov.au/exhibitions/between_the_flags/the_birth_of_surf_lifesaving

  • Nesbitt R, Ross L (1980) Human inference. Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Njome MS, Suh CE, Chuyong G et al (2010) Volcanic risk perception in rural communities along the slopes of mount Cameroon, west-Central Africa. J Afr Earth Sci 58(4):608–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice H (2012a) Huge holiday crowds cause traffic headaches in Galveston. Houston Chronicle, 29 May

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice H (2012b) Crowds spell strong finish to Galveston’s tourist season. Houston Chronicle, 4 September

    Google Scholar 

  • Scolobig A, De Marchi B, Borga M (2012) The missing link between flood risk awareness and preparedness: findings from case studies in an alpine region. Nat Hazards 63(2):499–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard F, Emery K, La Fond E (1941) Rip currents: a process of geological importance. J Geol 49(4):337–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard FP, Inman DL (1950) Nearshore water circulation related to bottom topography and wave refraction. Eos Trans Am Geophys Union 31(2):196–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherker S, Williamson A, Hatfield J et al (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(1–2):47–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short AD (2007) Australian rip systems – friend or foe? J Coastal R 50:7–11

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G (2000) Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal 20(5):713–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegrist M, Gutscher H (2006) Flooding risks: a comparison of lay people’s perceptions and expert’s assessments in Switzerland. Risk Anal 26(4):971–979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonu CJ (1972) Field observation of nearshore circulation and meandering currents. J Geophys R 77(18):3232–3247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terpstra T (2011) Emotions, trust, and perceived risk: affective and cognitive routes to flood preparedness behavior. Risk Anal 31(10):1658–1675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terpstra T, Lindell MK, Gutteling JM (2009) Does communicating (flood) risk affect (flood) risk perceptions? Results of a quasi-experimental study. Risk Anal 29(8):1141–1155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trimble S, Houser C, Brander R (2017) An evaluation of beach user knowledge and chosen swimming location within Bondi Beach. New South Wales, Australia. (in review)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psych 5(2):207–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Lifesaving Association (2015) 2015 Annual Report. Published online 31 December 2015. http://www.usla.org/?page=ANNUALREPORTS

  • Williamson A, Hatfield J, Sherker S et al (2012) A comparison of attitudes and knowledge of beach safety in Australia for beachgoers, rural residents and international tourists. Australian NZ J Pub Health 36(4):385–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward E, Beaumont E, Russell P et al (2013) Analysis of rip current incidents and victim demographics in the UK. J Coastal R 1(65(sp1)):850–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward E, Beaumont E, Russell P, MacLeod R (2015) Public understanding and knowledge of rip currents and beach safety in the UK. Int J Aquat Res Educ 9(1):6

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization (2014) Global report on drowning: preventing a leading killer. ISBN 978 92 4 156478 6 (NLM classification: WA 292)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright LD, Short AD (1984) Morphodynamic variability of surf zones and beaches: a synthesis. Mar Geol 56(1–4)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright LD, Chappell J, Thom BG et al (1979) Morphodynamics of reflective and dissipative beach and inshore systems: southeastern Australia. Mar Geol 32(1–2):105–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    Sarah Trimble

  2. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON, Canada

    Chris Houser

Authors
  1. Sarah Trimble
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chris Houser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Trimble .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law Universidad Sergio Arboleda, Santa Marta, Colombia

    Camilo M. Botero

  2. Facultad de Ciencias Marinas, University of Colima, Manzanillo, Colima, Mexico

    Omar Cervantes

  3. Coastal Education and Research Foundation (CERF), Fletcher, North Carolina, USA

    Charles W. Finkl

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Trimble, S., Houser, C. (2018). Seawalls and Signage: How Beach Access Management Affects Rip Current Safety. In: Botero, C., Cervantes, O., Finkl, C. (eds) Beach Management Tools - Concepts, Methodologies and Case Studies. Coastal Research Library, vol 24. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58304-4_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation