This document discusses the current regulatory practices for monitoring hard bottom communities impacted by beach nourishment projects and proposes alternatives. It notes that hard bottoms are unique ephemeral ecosystems worthy of protection. Current practices require assessing primary and secondary impacts, adjusting projects to avoid impacts, and long-term physical and biological monitoring, which is costly. However, monitoring plans do not account for natural variability and may lack sufficient baseline data. The document proposes alternatives like re-examining risk and mitigation, using remote sensing, establishing a task force, or combining approaches to improve protection of hard bottoms while ensuring efficient use of nourishment funds.
1. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
THE VALUE OF HARD BOTTOM
AND HARD BOTTOM MONITORING
DIPPING OUR TOES INTO
THE NEARSHORE
Eric Summa
Chief, Environmental Branch
Jacksonville District, USACE
Patrice Morey
Sr. Planner, Jacksonville District
Dr. Clay McCoy
Coastal Engineer,
Jacksonville District
2. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
OVERVIEW
Are hardbottom communities unique and
worthy of regulatory oversight?
If so, are the current regulatory mechanisms
overseeing hardbottoms effective in assuring
their continued existence and proliferation?
Are taxpayers and communities getting good
value for their dollars spent?
Are there other methodologies which can both:
BUILDING STRONG®
2
assure the continued existence of
hardbottom communities, and
ensure efficient use of beach
renourishment dollars?
4. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
HARDBOTTOMS…UNIQUE?
BUILDING STRONG®
4
They are also Ephemeral
5. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
HARDBOTTOMS…UNIQUE?
BUILDING STRONG®
5
They are also Ephemeral
6. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
HARDBOTTOMS…UNIQUE?
BUILDING STRONG®
6
They are also Ephemeral
7. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
HARDBOTTOMS…UNIQUE?
BUILDING STRONG®
7
They are also Ephemeral
8. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
HARDBOTTOMS…UNIQUE?
BUILDING STRONG®
8
They are also Ephemeral
9. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District9
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
APPLY FOR THE PERMIT:
Current practices require a beach nourishment proponent to approach
the Regulatory Agencies with a plan to nourish.
10. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District10
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
1) ASSESS THE IMPACT:
Demonstrate through a functional assessment
the primary and secondary impacts
11. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District11
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
2) ASSESS THE IMPACT:
The results of this analysis will provide a functional deficit
(a loss of habitat function) from the proposed project
IMPORTANT: This primary and secondary analysis must be reviewed
& approved by the Regulatory entity (they have the last word)
PRIMARY
IMPACTS
SECONDARY
IMPACTS
EQUILIBRIUM TOE OF FILL (ETOF)
OUTSIDE OF PROJECT
INFLUENCE: NO IMPACTS
seaward limit of fill migration
DEP JURISDICTIONAL
LINE FOR FILL
12. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District12
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
2) ASSESS THE IMPACT:
Secondary Impact Analysis
SECONDARY
IMPACTS
13. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District13
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
2) ASSESS THE IMPACT:
Secondary Impact Analysis
SECONDARY
IMPACTS
INSERT YOUR FAVORITE BIG BOX STORE HERE
14. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District14
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
2) ASSESS THE IMPACT:
Secondary Impact Analysis
SECONDARY
IMPACTS
PRIMARY IMPACT AREA
15. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District15
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
2) ASSESS THE IMPACT:
Secondary Impact Analysis
SECONDARY
IMPACTS
SECONDARY IMPACT ZONE
PRIMARY IMPACT AREA
16. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District16
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
2) ASSESS THE IMPACT:
Secondary Impact Analysis
IMPORTANT: This primary and secondary analysis must be reviewed
& approved by the Regulatory entity (they have the last word)
PRIMARY
IMPACTS
SECONDARY
IMPACTS
EQUILIBRIUM TOE OF FILL (ETOF)
OUTSIDE OF PROJECT
INFLUENCE: NO IMPACTS
seaward limit of fill migration
DEP JURISDICTIONAL
LINE FOR FILL
17. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
17
ADJUST PROJECT TO AVOID AND MINIMIZE
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
REGULATORY SEQUENCING:
AVOID
YES
NO MINIMIZE
NO
COMPENSATE
YES
18. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
Mitigate for all
unavoidable impacts
Monitor the mitigation
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
18
19. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
NOW you must perform physical and biological monitoring
of the hardbottom area outside of the predicted impact area
CURRENT PRACTICES: A FINAL SUMMARY
19
MONITOR FOR ACCURACY OF
PREDICTED EQUILIBRIUM TOE OF FILL (ETOF)
Receive
Authorization
(permit) for
volume &
placement
Acquire and Expend
Funds
to build project
as authorized
in permit
Build the Project &
submit compliance
reports to
regulatory entities
1 2 3 4
Propose a project.
Include
solid calculations
(the “what & how”)
to regulatory
entities
20. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District20
CURRENT PRACTICES: A QUICK SYNOPSIS
2) ASSESS THE IMPACT:
Secondary Impact Analysis
IMPORTANT: This primary and secondary analysis must be reviewed
& approved by the Regulatory entity (they have the last word)
PRIMARY
IMPACTS
SECONDARY
IMPACTS
EQUILIBRIUM TOE OF FILL (ETOF)
OUTSIDE OF PROJECT
INFLUENCE: NO IMPACTS
seaward limit of fill migration
DEP JURISDICTIONAL
LINE FOR FILL
21. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
Few other resource protection program require you to:
WHERE THIS PROGRAM DIFFERS
FROM OTHER RESOURCE PROTECTION PROGRAMS
21
Continue to affirm your predictions
(the predictions which were already affirmed
through the regulatory community)
In such a detailed manner
(physical and biological monitoring protocols)
Within a known dynamic environment
with several outside variables
For multiple years
after the nourishment event
22. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District22
We are trying to assure that the projects work
as intended via physical and biological monitoring.
But we can’t get there from here….
THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE
23. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
Reasons WHY Current Practices will NOT Work:
1. Lack of accounting for known variability in the monitoring plans*
*L.K.B. Jordan et al/Marine
Pollution Bulletin 60 (2010)
261-271
THE VALUE OF HARDBOTTOM
PHYSICAL & BIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS
23
24. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
**Peterson, C.H., Bishop,
M.J., 2005. Assessing the
environmental impacts
of beach nourishment.
BioScience 55, 887–896
Reasons WHY Current Practices will NOT Work:
2. Lack of Sufficient Baseline**
THE VALUE OF HARDBOTTOM
PHYSICAL & BIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS
24
25. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
Approximate costs and expenditures of physical and biological
monitoring (active beach nourishment projects):
25
COSTS OF HARDBOTTOM
PHYSICAL & BIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS
PHYSICAL MONITORING
$125,000 to $300,000/year
MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION AND
MONITORING
$675,000 to $1,000,000/acre
BIOLOGICAL MONITORING
$350,000 to $500,000/year
26. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
ALTERNATIVES TO THIS
ADDITIONAL MONITORING
26
27. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
Idea 1: Re-examine Risk Enhance Mitigation
ALTERNATIVES TO THIS
ADDITIONAL MONITORING
27
28. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
ALTERNATIVES TO THIS
ADDITIONAL MONITORING
28
Idea 2: Adopt Remote Sensing surveys - long spans, each year, during spring
and fall. Combine with known meteorological data to determine coastal
movements on scales better suited to beach management.
LIDAR
29. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
ALTERNATIVES TO THIS
ADDITIONAL MONITORING
29
Idea 3: Use the FSBPA as a platform to develop a
Task Force to examine the current monitoring program
& develop alternative solutions
30. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
ALTERNATIVES TO THIS
ADDITIONAL MONITORING
30
Idea 4: A combination of
all of the prior three ideas
31. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
SUMMARY
Goals for Projects:
A long design life
With great profiles just as readily used by nesting turtles
& piping plovers as by tourists & recreationalists
Equally effective at protecting the coastal community
as it is at ensuring the existing & continued proliferation
of nearshore HB communities
31
32. BUILDING STRONG® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS | Jacksonville District
THANK YOU!
#bethechange@fsbpa
Eric.p.summa@usace.army.mil