reported a redistribution of £. talpotda away from the impacted zone during 
nourishment rather than an increase in mortality. Parr, Diener, and Lacy 
(1978) reported on the nourishment of Imperial Beach, California. Their study 
sites differed in that either seawalls or stone revetments backed their beach, 
and the dominant fauna was amphipods. However, they also reported a slight 
redistribution of organisms away from the nourishment and no long-term effects. 
Two other studies (Marsh, et al., 1980; Culter and Mahadevan, 1982) mentioned 
the beach intertidal zone in their studies; however, both found the area to 
be biologically depauperate and concentrated on offshore sampling stations in 
their evaluations. 
This study evaluates the effects of beach nourishment on an intertidal 
sandy beach macrofaunal community. Specific objectives of this study were: 
(1) To establish base-line quantitative data on the community 
structure and seasonal variation among the biota inhabiting the inter- 
tidal zone of a high-energy sandy beach; 
(2) to determine the effects of beach nourishment using dredged 
materials on the intertidal macrofaunal community of a high-energy 
sandy beach; and 
(3) to make recommendations concerning the implementation and 
environmental advisability of beach nourishment with dredged materials. 
The study is based on observations of community dynamics on two similar 
beaches located on Bogue Banks in Carteret County, North Carolina (Fig. 1). One 
beach, located at Fort Macon State Park on the eastern tip of Bogue Banks, 
received nourishment with dredged sediments from December 1977 to June 1978. 
The other beach was located at Emerald Isle on the western end of Bogue Banks; 
this beach, which was called the comparison beach, received no nourishment. 
Both beaches were sampled repeatedly before, during, and after nourishment. 
II. SITE DESCRIPTION 
Both the beaches monitored during this study are located on Bogue Banks, a 
south-facing barrier island in North Carolina (Fig. 1). It is relatively stable 
historically (Pilkey, Pilkey, and Turner, 1975), but is subject to local over- 
wash (Fisher, 1967) especially when high-energy conditions exist during storms. 
The actual study sites, however, are not subject to storm overwash. 
Both beaches are similar in that the land immediately shoreward of the 
beaches is relatively undeveloped. At the nourished beach (Fort Macon), the 
only development is a bathhouse and parking area behind the primary dune at 
the far western boundary of the park. The unnourished beach (Emerald Isle) has 
a single row of houses parallel to the primary dune and behind it. A series of 
road cuts run perpendicular to the primary dune at approximately 100-meter 
intervals. 
The dune at both beaches was 3 to 4 meters high and, at least at the un- 
nourished beach, was accretionary (Leber, 1977). The dune in both cases is 
stabilized by sea oats, Untola paniculata; American beachgrass, Ammophila 
breviltgulata; seacoast blue stem, Andropogon littoralts; bitter panicum, 
Panteum amarum; seaside goldenrod, Solidago sempervirens; and sea rocket, 
Caktle edentula. 
10 
