Encyclopedia of Coastal Science

2019 Edition
| Editors: Charles W. Finkl, Christopher Makowski

Monitoring Coastal Geomorphology

  • Andrew MorangEmail author
  • Laurel T. Gorman
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93806-6_219

Coastal engineering and research, management of natural resources, beach and wetland restoration, navigation improvements, and military operations all share the need for copious amounts of data. These data typically are used to evaluate and monitor a specific reach of the coast. Ideally, a coastal monitoring program employs a multidiscipline approach in diagnosing the beach and nearshore zone. Many large programs such as the US Army Corps of Engineers’ Shinnecock Inlet Study (Morang 1999; Militelo and Kraus 2001; Pratt and Stauble 2001) or the Kings Bay Coastal and Estuarine Physical Monitoring and Evaluation Program (Kraus et al. 1994) collect data for a range of physical conditions such as wave climate, the morphology of the beach and nearshore surface, and accretion and erosion trends across and along the shoreline (high-tide line or coastline) under investigation. These collections allow scientists and engineers to understand the coastal processes and their variability in response...

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

Bibliography

  1. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2001) Annual book of ASTM standards, section 4, construction, vol 4.08, soil and rock: D 420–D 5779. American Society for Testing and Materials, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  2. Appell GF, Curtin TB (eds) (1990) Proceedings of the IEEE fourth working conference on current measurement, current measurement technology committee of the oceanic engineering society. Current measurement technology committee of the oceanic engineering society. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Technical report CHL-98-32Google Scholar
  4. Bates RL, Jackson JA (eds) (1984) Dictionary of geological terms, 3rd edn. Anchor Press/Doubleday, Garden CityGoogle Scholar
  5. Belderson RH, Kenyon NH, Stride AH, Stubbs AR (1972) Sonographs on the sea floor. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  6. Bos WG (1990) A comparison of two doppler current profilers. In: Appell GF, Curtin TB (eds) Proceedings of the IEEE fourth working conference on current measurement. Current measurement technology committee of the oceanic engineering society. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, pp 207–214Google Scholar
  7. Bouma AH (1969) Methods for the study of sedimentary structures. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. British Standards Institution (1990) Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. BS 1377-1, 2, 3, and 4. British Standards Institution, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Clausner JE, Birkemeier WA, Clark GR (1986). Field comparison of four nearshore survey systems. Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Miscellaneous Paper CERC-86-6Google Scholar
  10. Coordinating Committee on Great Lakes Basin Hydraulic And Hydrologic Data (1992) IGLD 1985 brochure on the international Great Lakes datum 1985. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  11. Cowls S (2000) How to choose a multibeam. Int Ocean Sys 4(4):4–6Google Scholar
  12. Crowell M, Leatherman SP, Buckley MK (1991) Historical shoreline change: error analysis and mapping accuracy. J Coast Res 7(3):839–852Google Scholar
  13. Crowell M, Leatherman SP, Buckley MK (1993) Shoreline change rate analysis: long term versus short term data. Shore Beach 61(2):13–20Google Scholar
  14. Daniels J (1989) Ground penetrating radar. In: SAGEEP ‘89–proceedings of the symposium on the applications of geophysics to engineering and environmental problems. Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Society, Englewood, pp 62–142Google Scholar
  15. Dugan JP, Vierra KC, Morris WD, Farruggia GJ, Campion DC, Miller HC (1999) Unique vehicles used for bathymetry surveys in exposed coastal regions. In: U.S. Hydrographic conference 99. The Hydrographic Society of America, RockvilleGoogle Scholar
  16. Earle MD, Bishop JM (1984) A practical guide to ocean wave measurements and analysis. Endeco Incorporated, MarionGoogle Scholar
  17. Earle MD, Mcgehee D, Tubman M (1995). Field wave gaging program, wave data analysis standard. Vicksburg, Mississippi: US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Instruction Report CERC-95-1Google Scholar
  18. Estep LL, Lillycrop WJ, Parson LE (1994) Estimation of maximum depth of penetration of a bathymetric lidar system using a Secchi disk database. Mar Technol Soc J 28(2):31–36Google Scholar
  19. Fish JP, Carr HA (1990) Sound underwater images, a guide to the generation and interpretation if side scan sonar data. American Underwater Search and Survey, Ltd, CataumetGoogle Scholar
  20. Fitzgerald, D.M., Baldwin, C.T., Ibrahim, N.A., Humphries, S.M., 1992. Sedimentologic and morphologic evolution of a beach-ridge barrier along an indented coast: Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts. In Fletcher, C.H. III, Wehmiller, J.F. (eds.), Quaternary coasts of the United States: marine and lacustrine systems, Special publication no 48. Tulsa: Society for Sedimentary Geology, pp. 65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flemming BW (1976) Side-scan sonar: a practical guide. Int Hydrogr Rev 53(1):65–92Google Scholar
  22. Fuller JA, Meisberger EP (1982a) A simple, ship-based vibratory. J Sediment Petrol 52(2):642–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fuller JA, Meisberger EP (1982b) A lightweight pneumatic coring device: design and field test. Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Coastal Engineering Research Center, Miscellaneous Report No. 82–8Google Scholar
  24. Gorman LT, Morang A, Larson RL (1998) Monitoring the coastal environment; Part IV: mapping, shoreline change, and bathymetric analysis. J Coast Res 14(1):61–92Google Scholar
  25. Griffiths DH, King RF (1981) Applied geophysics for geologists and engineers – the elements of geophysical prospecting. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Henderson FM, Lewis AJ (eds) (1998) Manual of remote sensing, volume 2, principles and applications of imaging radar, 3rd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Horikawa K (ed) (1988) Nearshore dynamics and coastal processes: theory, measurement and predictive models. University of Tokyo Press, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  28. Hunt RE (1984) Geotechnical engineering investigation manual. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. IAHR Working Group on Wave Generation and Analysis (1989) List of sea-state parameters. J Waterw Port Ocean Eng, Am Soc Civ Eng 115(6):793–809Google Scholar
  30. IHO (1998) IHO standards for hydrography and nautical cartography, 4th edn. International Hydrographic Bureau, Monaco. Ref. S-44 (Available in English, French, Spanish)Google Scholar
  31. IHO (2001) Reference texts for training in hydrography, 3rd edn. International Hydrographic Bureau, MonacoGoogle Scholar
  32. Ingle JC Jr (1966) The movement of beach sand. Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Irish JL, McClung JK, Lillycrop WJ (2000) Airborne lidar bathymetry: the SHOALS system. PIANC Bulletin, No. 103-2000, pp 43–53Google Scholar
  34. Judge EK, Overton MF (2001) Remote sensing of barrier island morphology: evaluation of photogrammetry-derived digital terrain models. J Coast Res 17(1):207–220Google Scholar
  35. Kraus NC, Gorman LT, Pope J (1994). Kings Bay coastal and estuarine physical monitoring and evaluation program: coastal studies. Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (in 2 volumes), Technical Report CERC-94-9Google Scholar
  36. Leenhardt O (1974) Side scanning sonar – a theoretical study. Int Hydrogr Rev 51(1):61–80Google Scholar
  37. Lillesand TM, Kiefer RW (1999) Remote sensing and image interpretation, 4th edn. Wiley Interscience, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Lillycrop WJ, Banic JR (1992) Advancements in the U.S. army corps of engineers hydrographic survey capabilities: the SHOALS system. Mar Geod 15:177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mazel C (1985) Side-scan sonar training manual. Klein Associates, SalemGoogle Scholar
  40. McAndrew R (2001) Data processing – real time and post. Int Ocean Sys 5(5):17–19Google Scholar
  41. McCullough JR (1980) Survey of techniques for measuring currents near the ocean surface. In: Dobson F, Hasse L, Davis R (eds) Air–Sea interaction – instruments and methods. Plenum Press, New York, pp 105–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Militelo A, Kraus NC (2001) Shinnecock Inlet, New York, site investigation, Report 4, Evaluation of flood and ebb shoal sediment source alternatives for the west of Shinnecock interim project, New York. Vicksburg: US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report CHL-98-32Google Scholar
  43. Moore LJ (2000) Shoreline mapping techniques. J Coast Res 16(1):111–124Google Scholar
  44. Morang A (1999) Shinnecock Inlet, New York, site investigation, Report 1, Morphology and historical behavior. US, VicksburgGoogle Scholar
  45. Morang A, Larson RL, Gorman LT (1997a) Monitoring the coastal environment; part III: geophysical and research methods. J Coast Res 13(4):1964–1985Google Scholar
  46. Morang A, Larson RL, Gorman LT (1997b) Monitoring the coastal environment; Part I: waves and currents. J Coast Res 13(1):111–133Google Scholar
  47. Morang A, Rahoy DS, Grosskopf W (1999) Regional geologic characteristics along the south shore of Long Island, New York. In: Proceedings of coastal sediments ‘99. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, pp 1568–1583Google Scholar
  48. Morton RA (1997) Gulf shoreline movement between Sabine pass and the Brazos River, Texas: 1974 to 1996, Geological circular 97-3, Bureau of Economic Geology. The University of Texas at Austin, AustinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. National Ocean Service (1988) Fantastic tidal datums. Department of Commerce Physical Oceanography Division, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  50. Philipson W (ed) (1997) The manual of photographic interpretation, 2nd edn. American Society for Photogrammetry & Remote Sensing, BethesdaGoogle Scholar
  51. Pratt T, Stauble D (2001) Shinnecock Inlet, New York, site investigation, report 3, selected field data report for 1997, 1998, and 1998 velocity and sediment surveys. Vicksburg: US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Technical Report CHL-98-32Google Scholar
  52. Reed M (2000) Shore and Sea Boundaries, vol 3, The development of international maritime boundary principles through United States practice. Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. US Government Printing Office, 432 pGoogle Scholar
  53. Reed TB (2001) Drinking from the fire hose – stop worrying and love the byte, a review of how to deal with seafloor mapping, data- overload, greater resolution, and bandwidth. Sea Technol 42(6):16–25Google Scholar
  54. Rencz AN, Ryerson RA (eds) (1999) Manual of remote sensing. Remote sensing for the earth sciences, vol 3, 3rd edn. Wiley Interscience, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  55. Resio DT, Hands EB (1994) Understanding and interpreting seabed drifter (SBD) data. Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report DRP-94-1Google Scholar
  56. Sellmann PV, Delaney AJ, Arcone SA (1992) Subbottom surveying in lakes with ground-penetrating radar. Hanover, NH: US Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions Research & Engineering Laboratory, CRREL Report 92-8Google Scholar
  57. Shalowitz AL (1962) Shore and sea boundaries, volume 1, Boundary problems associated with the submerged land cases and the submerged lands acts. Publication 10–1, US Department of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 420 pGoogle Scholar
  58. Shalowitz AL (1964) Shore and sea boundaries, volume 2, interpretation and use of coast and geodetic survey data. US Department of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey US Government Printing Office, Publication 10–1, Washington, DC, 749 pGoogle Scholar
  59. Sheriff RE (1977) Limitations on resolution of seismic reflections and geologic detail derivable from them. In: Payton CE (ed) Seismic stratigraphy – applications to hydrocarbon exploration, Memoir 26. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, pp 3–14Google Scholar
  60. Sieck HC, Self GW (1977) Analysis of high resolution seismic data. In: Peyton CE (ed) Seismic stratigraphy – applications to hydrocarbon exploration, Memoir 26. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, pp 353–385Google Scholar
  61. Stauble DK (1994) A physical monitoring plan for northern Assateague Island, Maryland. US Department of Interior, National Park Service, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  62. Umbach MJ (Commander, NOAA) (1976) Hydrographic manual, 4th edn. National Ocean Survey, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, US Department of Commerce, Washington, DC (updates 1979, 1980, and 1981)Google Scholar
  63. US Army Corps of Engineers (1990) Survey markers and Monumentation. Engineer manual EM 1110–1-1002. Headquarters, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  64. US Army Corps of Engineers (1994) Hydrographic surveying. Engineer manual EM 1110–2-1003. Headquarters, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  65. US Army Corps of Engineers (1996) Soil sampling. Engineer manual EM 1110–2-1907. Headquarters, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  66. US Army Corps of Engineers (2002) Coastal engineering manual engineer manual EM-1110-2-1100. Headquarters, US Army Corps of Engineers (in six parts), Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  67. van Heteren S, FitzGerald DM, McKinlay PA (1994) Application of ground-penetrating radar in coastal stratigraphic studies. In: GPR ’94 – proceedings of the fifth international conference on ground penetrating radar. Canadian Geotechnical Society and Waterloo Centre for Groundwater Research, Waterloo, pp 869–881Google Scholar
  68. Weggel JR (1995) A primer on monitoring beach nourishment projects. Shore Beach 63(3):20–24Google Scholar
  69. West GR, Lillycrop WJ, Pope B (2001) Utilizing airborne Lidar bathymetry technology for REA. Sea Technol 42(6):10–15Google Scholar
  70. Whitehead EJ, Cooper PS (2001) An acoustic approach to seabed discrimination and classification. Int Ocean Syst 5(4):16–21Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CERC, US Army Waterways Experiment StationVicksburgUSA
  2. 2.Information Technology LaboratoryUS Army Waterways Experiment StationVicksburgUSA