US Army Corps of Engineers Beach Erosion Study April 2016

In 2010 & 2011, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) proposed a study  and requested $800,000 of Federal funds to assess Oceanside's beach erosion and provide recommendations.  The study was never funded.  Another attempt is being made now, and a public input meeting was held on March 17th.  Edward Sifuentes wrote a good article in the San Diego Union Tribune that summarizes the meeting.  See this Link --
Every winter the City of Oceanside's beaches have lost more sand.  Each summer much of the sand comes back --but we have continually lost more than we've gained.  Our beaches, as they are today are almost gone, and recreation on the sand is very limited.  Because there is no sand on the beach, waves are eroding around our beach playground, and undercutting streets and palm tree roots.  Some palms have had to be cut down.

We really need to do something to restore our beaches and protect them from further erosion due to rising oceans.  I hope this study is successful in coming up with a good set of recommendations.  As part of the study, the USACE team leader, Lawrence J. Smith, requested input from the public prior to kicking off the study.

In response to his request, I emailed my recommendations to him (below in this post) at: lawrence.j.smith@usace.army.mil

I encourage anyone with thoughts on the project to either email him or write to him at: 

US Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District

915 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 930 Los Angeles CA 90017-3401

I would be very interested in hearing from anyone else with thoughts on the subject.

BELOW IS WHAT I SENT TO HIM

Larry,

Reference your public outreach meeting held in Oceanside on 17 March 2016.

I own a condo and have lived for 20 years on the beach in Oceanside, just south of the harbor.  As a retired engineer and USAF Colonel, I have been interested in the beach erosion situation and have tried to observe what is happening on the beaches.  I attended the USACE meeting 5 or 6 years ago, when the beach erosion study was originally attempted.  I have also tried to learn more about what is being done at beaches in other states and countries to maintain sand.  It’s clear that with rising oceans, the problem is occurring all over the world, and will only get worse.  Solutions and recommendations you provide as a result of this study will likely be replicated elsewhere.

In response to your request for written comments on the study, I would like to submit my thoughts and recommendations.

• CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION: Any recommendations made as a result of this study need to be somehow consistent with the philosophy of the California Coastal Commission (CCC).  If not consistent, then the study needs to provide a solid argument for the Commission to change their philosophy and guidelines.  If USACE spends all of this time and money on the study, but then the recommendations can’t be implemented due to CCC rules, the study, in effect, will be a total waste of resources. Any of your recommendations should cite comparable efforts done in other states and countries and how well they worked.  If an effort works in North Carolina, why wouldn’t it work in Oceanside?
• NATURAL SAND FLOW?  Sand flow along our Oceanside/Camp Pendleton coast does appear to collect on the North side of groins, which makes it look like the harbor sea wall stops the “natural flow” of sand.  But I’m not sure that is true.  Beaches far below Oceanside have lost a lot of sand also, and the total amount of sand lost is huge compared to the relatively small amount north of the harbor.  Yes the Camp Pendleton Del Mar beach is wide -- but it also lost a tremendous amount of sand this past winter.  Where does the sand that is lost actually go?  Does it just move offshore?  Or does it end up sinking into deep trenches off the coast?  I think, as part of the study, USACE needs to provide some sort of tracking of where sand comes from and where  it goes.  Is there some sort of “marker sand” that can be placed at different locations along the beach. (I’m thinking of unique quality or colors of sand)  Then periodically take samples from the beach at many locations and see how much sand from each of the various marker types has moved from/to those locations.  Possibly a few locations offshore should also be taken. I believe a good, scientific analysis and report on sand flow could finally resolve this question, and could also be used to help define cost sharing for future improvements or sand replenishment. That portion of the study needs to be done in a well-disciplined way, that can be peer reviewed and easily analyzed or repeated, if necessary.
• NATURAL SEA LIFE PROTECTS BEACHES?  Beach grooming appears to hurt the beach due to loosening sand, and disrupting nature. Over the years, we’ve seen that almost all of the various types of clams and other sand-dwelling organisms are now gone from our beaches.   It might be good for the study team to compare the marine life in the sand on Oceanside’s beaches, with the marine life in the sand along some of the protected sections of Camp Pendleton’s beaches to see if there is a difference.  I believe that a lot of the little mollusks and other creatures who live in the sand help to hold the sand in place.  Those organisms feed on decaying pieces of kelp and materials that are washed back and forth in the surf.  If this premise is true, maybe one solution to sand retention is to set aside 20 yard sections of the beach as “preserves” with no trespassing and no grooming --to serve as a natural reservoir for the sea life.  Also, if so, driving on the beaches should be restricted.  Police and lifeguards routinely drive up and down the beach and crush the nascent life.
• SEPARATION OF RECREATION TYPES:Beaches as “sand recreation” areas, and surf/swim areas could be separated, in concept. There are distinctly different types of recreation on the beach:
• FLAT BEACH:Sunbathing, Picnics, Playground, Volleyball, frisbee play, needs flat, relatively clean sand that can be easily groomed
• SURFLINE:Children digging in wet sand, small children playing and wading
• SHALLOW SURF: Children and adults swimming, body surfing and boogie boarding
• DEEPWATER SURF: Surfers, Expert boogie boarding and body surfing,stand-up paddleboarding, kayaks, kite surfing
• It seems to me that beach could be designed to have a large flat beach area pushing out the shoreline with an artificial reef-line that goes about a foot above the high tide line.  Then add more sand in front of the wall that would create a beach area ahead of the wall.  That portion of the beach may need replenishment, but the portion behind the wall would remain relatively permanent.
• UNDERWATER ARTIFICIAL REEFS: Underwater artificial reefs serving as surf breaks could help retain sand, and provide valuable source of recreation,  One of the objections raised by Surfrider foundation is that seawalls and groins destroy good surf breaks.  I believe that artificial reefs built as a diagonal to the beach would create good surf breaks that would be better than any of the current “natural” breaks.  If the artificial reefs were made using nylon sandbags, I believe they would last for many years, and would have the additional effect of reducing sand loss if placed properly with respect to local tides and currents. The USACE study results should address the costs & benefits of various forms and types of artificial reefs.
• DUNES AND SAND COLLECTORS:Dunes with vegetation works to protect property, and help retain sand.  It also provides separation of recreational areas from residences. US East Coast beaches have used dunes for years with significant success. However, I have seen no attempt at building dunes in Southern California. Likewise low walls back from the shoreline seem effective in locations like Hermosa Beach in collecting sand and creating a natural slope that retains sand and protects the beach. It seems that most of the San Diego County beaches do not have such walls. When we have storms, sand blows into the streets and is swept up and carried away.
• HARBOR DREDGING: Oceanside’s annual harbor dredging project appears to be expensive and frustrating.  It is done every year for the safety of boaters using the harbor, and is critical to their safety.  Some years, it has been done more than once, including during peak summer tourist season at the beginning of August.
• It seems that this harbor needs dredging more frequently than many other harbors along the coast.  Is there something about the design that could be changed to prevent sand from filling in -- or at least slow down the process? Does all the sand come into the harbor through the mouth?  Or does some come through the relatively porous riprap walls of the harbor? Is it possible that a few subtle redesigns of the harbor could reduce or eliminate the need for annual dredging?
• The dredged sand is dumped onto the beaches South of the harbor.  The sand seems to be very fine and lightweight and appears to wash away soon after the dredging equipment is removed.  Is that effort worthwhile?  I would suggest that your study team come to Oceanside during the next few weeks, make sand measurements, watch the dredging process, and then make sand measurements weekly for a month or so following the process to see if putting that sand on the beach is worthwhile.  Since the study continues to 2018, you could also do the same thing in Spring 2017 to get another “sample” of the data,
• The process of installing a pipeline down the coast from the harbor to pump sand onto the beach south of the Oceanside pier is very labor intensive.  The pipeline is ugly on the beach, and the heavy equipment disrupts beach recreation. In addition, the digging and sand moving related to placing the pipeline seems to loosen up the sand so it erodes more quickly.  Wouldn’t it make more sense to install a relatively permanent pipeline far underground -- or underwater further offshore, and then not have to expend the labor to install and remove it each year?  I do understand it could be an artifact of the way USACE contracts for the job.  However if USACE, or City of Oceanside paid and installed the permanent bypass, the contractors would then only have to hook up to the pipe when they arrive to do the job.
• ECONOMICS: Whatever recommendations result from this study, I’m sure it will require significant resources to implement them.  Because of the country-wide perspective USACE has, as well as a view of what worked in other cities and states, you are in a position of being able to provide recommendations on how the study’s recommendations and improvements should be paid for.   I would think that funding for any recommendations such as sand pumping or construction would be funded using a combination of federal, state, county, city and possibly beachfront landowners in some reasonable share ratio. Cities may be able to also impose user fees to help maintain the beach sand.  Any such USACE recommendation would probably become a yardstick used by all stakeholders when discussing funding. Of course, the USACE recommendation should reference cost sharing for similar projects around the country and include amounts, and percentages paid by the various interests.