In March 1967, emergency measures were taken. The north end was 

 restored by placing about 360,000 cubic yards of fill, and by building a 

 405-foot groin near the north end. The groin was necessary, because there 

 was a reversal in the predominant direction of longshore transport at the 

 north end. In the next year, approximately 203,000 cubic yards of emer- 

 gency fill eroded, and most of the shoreline returned to about where it 

 was before the emergency work. The shoreline immediately south of the 

 groin, for a distance of about 400 feet, has remained nearly stable, and 

 the loss of emergency fill along this small segment was about 42 percent 

 less than the loss along the remaining emergency section. 



Survey records from 1938 to 1957 (reported in the original project 

 report), show that the average annual recession rate was about 1 foot per 

 year, with a short-term maximum rate of 2.8 feet from 1952 to 1957, when 

 the area had been exposed to four major hurricanes. The annual loss of 

 material for the entire active profile was estimated to be about 4 cubic 

 yards per linear foot. 



During the 2 years following the fill, the effects of shore processes 

 were radically different from processes determined from historical records. 

 During April 1965 — April 1966 and April 1966--April 1967, the shoreline 

 receded 67 and 15 feet, respectively, with corresponding losses of 370,000 

 and 342,000 cubic yards. In the third year, April 196 7- -April 1968, a 

 marked change occurred in the response of the fill. The rate of shoreline 

 recession dropped to 5 feet per year, and the volume change of material 

 amounted to a slight accretion of about 17,000 cubic yards. Surveys in 

 1969 indicated that the project was in nearly the same condition as in 

 1968. Full verification of the project performance will depend on future 

 surveys. However, it can be assumed that the project required 2 years of 

 exposure to reach a state of equilibrium with the prevaxl-'ng enviomment. 



Rapid recession of the shoreline during the first 2 years was a result 

 of profile adjustment along the active profile which terminates at depths 

 of profile adjustment along the active profile which terminates at depths 

 between -22 and -30 feet mean low water, as well as net losses in volume 

 resulting from natural sorting action which displaced fine material to 

 depths seaward of the active profile. The foreshore and nearshore design 

 profile slope of 1 on 20 was terminated at a depth of 4 feet below mean 

 low water. The adjusted project profile of April 1968 shows the actual 

 profile closing at a depth of about 22 feet below mean low water, with a 

 characteristic bar and trough system. Thus, displacement of the initial 

 fill with the accompanying reduction of the beach design section was the 

 result of normal sorting action and the reestablishment of the normal 

 profile configuration. 



6.322 Sea Girt, New Jersey . The feasibility of pumping sand to a beach 

 from an offshore source by hopper dredge was tested from 28 March to 20 

 May 1966. (U.S. Army Engineer District, Philadelphia, 1967, and Mauriello, 

 1967). The beach site at Sea Girt, (Figure 6-24) was selected because it 

 was State owned, required nourishment, and a typical ocean environment 

 would be encountered. Other factors which influenced selection of the 



6-29 



