hurricane could "break up the Outer 

 Banks." 



There are alternatives, says Spencer 

 Rogers, North Carolina Sea Grant coastal 

 erosion and construction specialist. He 

 says that a well-designed beach nourish- 

 ment project can be efficient, effective 

 and environmentally friendly. 



Working with beach communities to 

 evaluate the impact of hurricanes Dennis 

 and Floyd, he found the closely spaced 

 storms destroyed 65 buildings between 

 Currituck and Sunset Beach. Another 903 

 that were threatened by erosion were 

 considered repairable. 



Rogers was especially interested in 

 the fate of the structures behind nourish- 

 ment projects at Wrightsville, Carolina 

 and Kure beaches, where Floyd's 75-year 

 surge event occurred. These publicly 

 funded nourishment projects, were 

 designed by the ACOE for both long- 

 term erosion and hurricane protection. 



Each included higher elevation dunes and 

 a wider beach. Not a single building 

 behind these engineered dunes was lost. 



Carolina and Wrightsville beaches 

 are two of the oldest projects continually 

 maintained by the corps. From 1965 to 

 1998, the Carolina Beach program has 

 cost $26.3 million, while the Wrightsville 

 program has cost $16.7 million. The 

 figures reflect combined federal, local 

 and corps funding sources. The Kure 

 Beach program, implemented in 1 998, 

 cost $10 million for wider beaches, 

 dunes, public walkover access and the 

 extension of storm water outfalls. 



Rogers says that recent hurricanes 

 show that where sand is available, a well- 

 planned and maintained nourishment 

 program can be an effective option. 

 However, the method requires a long- 

 term commitment to add sand every two 

 to four years. Nor is it the best solution 

 for every erosion problem. It may not be 



Spencer M. Rogers 



cost-effective in areas with high erosion 

 rates, or where sources of beach-quality 

 sand are scarce. 



Hardening of shorelines is not in 

 the mix of remedies for the North 

 Carolina ocean front, Rogers points out. 

 Sandy beaches disappear in front of 

 seawalls and bulkheads. Groins or 

 jetties increase erosion for neighboring 

 properties. 



Cleary, Riggs, Rogers and Wells 

 are members of the CRC Science Panel, 

 established in 1997 in the wake of 

 Hurricane Fran to help re-evaluate 

 shorefront erosion rates and inlet 

 changes. 



While some scientists may find 

 beach nourishment the more benign of 

 the engineered erosion remedies, they 

 demand continued, tough environmen- 

 tal impact standards for the CAMA 

 permit process. Measures include 

 monitoring the biological impacts of 

 sand placement; monitoring effects on 

 recreational and commercial fishing 

 habitat; determining the suitability of 

 the sediment to be placed on the beach; 

 and ensuring public access to beaches. 



Finding an equitable funding 

 process for long-term beach 

 renourishment projects can get sticky. 

 The question of "who pays" often is a 

 major stumbling block. 



In March, Carteret County voters 

 rejected a $30 million bond referendum 

 to finance a 10-year beach nourishment 

 project for nearly 1 7 miles of Bogue 

 Bank beaches. The proposal called for 

 levying a special tax in separate tax 

 districts for oceanfront and non- 

 oceanfront property owners. It would 

 have been the first time a local munici- 

 pality had completely financed a major 

 beach nourishment project. 



Adrienne Cole, executive director 

 of the Carteret County Economic 

 Council, explains that it was designed 

 to be a stop-gap measure as the county 

 moves through the lengthy approval 



20 EARLY SUMMER 2000 



