topographic or seismic reflection features. For this reason core data could 

 not be projected beyond the immediate area of the core site and no area or 

 volume calculations could be made. Several of these sites contain Holocene 

 marine sand (type A) which does not seem to be associated with a prominent 

 shoal. The remaining sites contain type E of F material which is thought to 

 be pre-Holocene fluvial sediment. All of the pre-Holocene deposits are beneath 

 some overburden, which mostly consists of suitable type A sand. Thus, the com- 

 bined thickness of both units is considered usable. Many of the cores bottomed 

 in usable material and their thickness are shown as greater than the specified 

 amount of core recovery. 



Eleven cores containing usable type E and F material are grouped into areas 

 designated as areas 1 and 2 in Figure 4. It is possible that continuity of 

 these deposits exists throughout the area. If this is true, a potentially us- 

 able volume of more than 14.5 million cubic meters of material could be recov- 

 ered from area 1 and 20.6 million cubic meters from area 2. However, if these 

 are fluvial deposits it seems unlikely that deposition was continuous over 

 such a large area. Additional detailed coring in areas 1 and 2 is necessary to 

 properly define the deposit before these areas can be considered high potential 

 sites for sandfill. 



Of the 16 separate borrow areas identified in Figure 4, shoals A,B,C,E,F, 

 J and area 1 should definitely be considered as sources of fill for any projects 

 along the Cape May coast. They are within about 9 kilometers of the coast, all 

 have water depths less than about 12.8 meters (42 feet), and their combined sand 

 resources are estimated to be more than 216 million cubic meters, more than 

 enough to meet projected fill requirements for beach nourishment projects. Brief 

 descriptions of these sites are given below. 



a. Borrow Area A and Area 1 . Area A (Fig. 4) is an elongate and arcuate 

 shoal (named Prissy Wicks shoal on NOS chart 1219) that semiparallels the coast 

 at the end of Cape May. Area 1 is a rather flat extension of the south flank 

 of the shoal and is composed of fluvial sands that probably underlie the entire 

 Prissy Wicks shoal complex. The seismic data in area A and the seismic and core 

 data in area 1 show that sand about 1.5 meters thick is present; the combined 

 estimated sand resources are more than 28.3 million cubic meters. 



b. Borrow Area B . Area B consists of a narrow fingerlike shoal (named 

 North Shoal on NOS chart 1219) adjacent to areas A and 1. Core 174 off the 

 southern flank shows that the shoal is composed of medium to coarse sand under- 

 lain at the base by fine-grained sediment. 



c. Borrow Area C . Area C is a concentric shoal (Fig. 4) immediately west 

 of area B and about 5.4 kilometers from the western side of Cape May peninsula. 

 The area comprises Round and Middle Shoals (on NOS chart 1219), and the seismic 

 data and core 175 show that it contains up to 6.1 meters of a poorly sorted 

 mixture of fine to very coarse pebbly sand. 



d. Borrow Areas E and F . These areas are two closely spaced shoals within 

 7.2 kilometers of Cape May Inlet; they probably offer the highest potential as 

 sources of nourishment sand. The CERC data show that medium to coarse sand is 

 present to about 3-meter (10 feet) depths and the combined estimated sand vol- 

 umes are more than 21.3 million cubic meters. 



16 



