changes, assists in evaluation of their relative importance, and aids the 
identification of specific events. 
The shape of a single profile changes between measurements in response 
to the many process variables (e.g., waves, wind, water level, eta) active on 
the beach. A careful evaluation of a profile line measured frequently over 
time may reveal systematic changes in its shape. Regular seasonal changes in 
profile area, for instance, were obvious on west coast beaches before being 
quantitatively confirmed by empirical eigenfunction analysis (Shepard, 1973; 
Aubrey, 1978). Along a single profile, zones of maximum variation are to be 
expected in the region of maximum wave energy dissipation. This, again, has 
been confirmed by empirical eigenfunctions on west coast beaches (Aubrey, 
1978). The technique does not explain the physical reason for the variability. 
In the case of beach profiles, the sand is moved in response to wave forcing 
in a manner which is assumed to be deterministic, or at least statistically 
predictable. In this case, it is hoped that since the wave forcing provides 
most of the variability, the eigenfunctions will reflect this mechanism. By 
examining the temporal structure of the beach eigenfunctions along with spa- 
tial structure, the decision can be made as to whether, in fact, the eigen- 
functions represent some physically meaningful process. This has been shown 
to be the case in nearshore profile studies. 
Profiles obtained during the BEP do not extend beyond about the -0.61 meter 
MSL shoreline. For that reason, beach variability associated with transport 
in the nearshore zone seaward of this limit cannot be determined. This is a 
serious limitation of the data set and is not associated with a limitation in 
the method of analysis. It is known that the breaker zone and nearshore are 
regions of active transport both onshore-offshore and alongshore. Offshore bars 
act as periodic storage areas for sand that is later supplied to the beach 
under favorable wave conditions. The time periods and detailed response of 
this region cannot be determined from the available data. 
IV. RESULTS 
1. Temporal Variability, 
a. Short-Term Changes (Storms). Coastal storms, such as the March 1962 
storm, are particularly important agents for causing massive changes to the 
beaches. This storm, which never reached hurricane strength, resulted from 
two low-pressure cells which combined several hundred miles off the coast of 
New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia. It then remained stationary 
from 6 to 8 March generating high tides (2.2 meters above MSL) and extreme 
waves (6.1 to 9.1 meters high) which battered the coastline through five tidal 
cycles. The damage to Long Beach Island was particularly severe (Fig. 9). 
The northern end of the island was breached in four locations with waves de- 
stroying or damaging nearly every structure. In the vicinity of Harvey Cedars, 
the dune was breached, the area flooded, and most houses washed into Barnegat 
Bay. Dollar value of the damage at Long Beach Island was estimated at 
$19,754,000, of which nearly half was attributed to storm waves. Other effects 
of the storm have been documented (Cooperman and Rosendal, 1962; U.S. Army 
Engineer Division, North Atlantic, 1963). 
30 
