Coastal Erosion Responses for Alaska - the National Sea Grant ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Smith—Introduction Inherent in these mandates is a choice among alternatives, including options involving no construction. Changes in coastal zone management policy may provide the wisest response to coastal erosion. This can mean adverse consequences to a few for the good of many others. The presentations that follow will address coastal processes and trends that drive shoreline retreat and coastal erosion. Non-structural coastal zone management responses will be discussed, along with successfully proven constructed responses. Constructed works will be presented with a view toward their particular limitations. Each alternative response has its pros and cons. With the impressions you gain today from our highly qualified presenters, you will be able to use your time efficiently to read further to learn more of what you need to know for wise decisions regarding coastal erosion responses for Alaska. The Workshop Organizing Committee and the University of Alaska Anchorage, School of Engineering, gratefully acknowledge the sponsors of this workshop: • U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center • NOAA Alaska Sea Grant College Program • International Arctic Research Center • U.S. Arctic Research Commission • University of Alaska, Corporate Programs • Individual contributors through the University of Alaska Foundation including • Loretta A. Keim • Spreng Associates, Inc. • John Oswald We also appreciate very much the contributions of the presenters and their employers who paid their way to Anchorage for the workshop and invested valuable time and energy in their preparations. Our gratitude also goes to the administration and staff of the University of Alaska Corporate Programs office, the UAA Advancement office, and the UAA School of Engineering for their hard work to make this workshop happen. The efforts of JeNae Christiansen of the Department of Civil Engineering were invaluable and to her we owe special thanks. Lastly, I add my personal thanks to my colleagues on the workshop organizing committee: Robert Pawlowski, Christy Miller, and John Oswald.
Coastal Erosion Responses for Alaska: Workshop Proceedings 3 Alaska Sea Grant College Program • AK-SG-06-03, 2006 Living with the Coast of Alaska Revisited: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Owen K. Mason Geoarch Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska Alaska, like most coastal states, lives by its coast. If one includes the Mat-Su Borough, nearly ¾ of Alaskans reside in immediate proximity to coastal property. However, even most of the interior communities confront an erosion problem, albeit if it is alluvial in causation. Fairbanks routinely flooded at breakup and several towns have had to consider relocation—most recently Huslia and Alakaket on the Koyukuk River. In this talk, I have added the subtitle: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Aesthetics must be part of the solution; creating an ugly coast should not be a goal. The Alaska shore is roughly divisible in half. In the south, the predominantly deeply embayed and formerly glaciated bedrock southern rim along the Gulf of Alaska from Ketchikan to Cold Bay; and in the north, the mostly unconsolidated and unglaciated Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort sea coasts, from Naknek and Dillingham to Kaktovik. The soft shores of eastern Cook Inlet serve as an important exception and suffer a number of erosion threats. Nonetheless, most of the severe problems with erosion are inevitably in the north, although most of the cities on the bedrock coastlines are located on “soft” sediments like deltas and alluvial fans and are subject to a plethora of coastal hazards, like avalanches, debris flows, tsunamis, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions. My involvement in coastal issues commenced in 1991 when Orrin Pilkey recruited me after an erosion workshop in Barrow, enticing me with fame and glory, to craft a volume in his Living with the Shore series. The series, funded by FEMA, aimed to educate the real estate buying and renting public as families and businesses decided where to live. The volumes strived to be site-specific with detailed road maps. The optimistic goal was that by educating the public to coastal threats to life, limb, and property, fewer poor choices would be made and problems would be avoided. As a North Carolina resident, Orrin Pilkey focused on barrier island geomorphology and development. Barrier
Page 1 and 2: Coastal Erosion Responses for Alask
Page 3: Contents Introduction Orson P. Smit
Page 8 and 9: Mason—Living with the Coast of Al
Page 14 and 15: 10 Mason—Living with the Coast of
Page 27: Coastal Erosion Responses for Alask
Page 30 and 31: 26 Atkinson—Ice, Wind, Waves, and
Page 32 and 33: 28 Atkinson—Ice, Wind, Waves, and
Page 34 and 35: 30 Miller—Management Responses to
Page 40 and 41: 36 Bates—State and Coastal Distri
Page 51: Coastal Erosion Responses for Alask
Page 54 and 55: 50 Ruggiero—Coastal Sediment Budg
Page 56 and 57:
52 Ruggiero—Coastal Sediment Budg
Page 59 and 60:
Coastal Erosion Responses for Alask
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69:
Page 72 and 73:
68 Zufelt and Smith—Arctic and Lo
Page 74 and 75:
70 Zufelt and Smith—Arctic and Lo
Page 76 and 77:
Coastal Erosion Books/DVD Published
show all

Coastal Erosion Responses for Alaska - the National Sea Grant ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?