Journal of Coastal Research

27

502514

West Palm Beach, Florida

May 2011

Beach Erosion along the Northeast Texas Coast

Young Hyun Park{ and Billy L. Edge{*
{ BK21 SIR Group Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Seoul National University South Korea { Haynes Coastal Engineering Laboratory Zachry Department of Civil Engineering Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-3136, U.S.A. b-edge@tamu.edu

www.cerf-jcr.org

ABSTRACT
PARK, Y.H. and EDGE, B.L., 2011. Beach erosion along the northeast Texas coast. Journal of Coastal Research, 27(3), 502514. West Palm Beach (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Some areas of the Texas coast along the Gulf of Mexico are stabilized by beach nourishment or artificial protections, but the northeast Texas coast has been damaged and changed by short- and long-period erosion. The berm or dune that can act as protection from wave activities rarely exists, and mild, sloping beaches increase the potential of erosion in the study area. The upper Texas coast was monitored by Texas A&M University between 1999 and 2005. The measured beach profiles showed the morphological short- and long-period changes by overwash, and critical erosion was observed, especially by the landfall of hurricane Rita in 2005. The suspected causes of severe erosion were analyzed by comparing dune heights and beach widths, and it was found that overwash was one of the major factors causing erosion of the shoreline in the area. When storms made landfall in neighboring regions, such as southern Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, overwash by long-period waves of remote storms was observed during the beach surveys. Overwash by remote storms could not be ignored, and it was an important contributor to continued beach erosion in the study area. Erosion caused by direct landfall of storms had significant effects on long-period erosion as well.

ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS:

Texas.

Remote storm, storm, hurricane, beach erosion, overwash, short-period, long-period,

INTRODUCTION
The northeast Texas coast has experienced extreme erosion and has retreated for decades, though the area was directly impacted by landfalls of only two storms from 1991 to 2005 (Tables 1 and 2). The area has been studied for decades, and overwash is strongly suspected as the main cause of erosion. Overwash is the phenomenon of sediment transport with overtopping, defined as a form of coastal flooding that can move sediment landward, and it is a precursor to barrier breaching, as described by Donnelly et al. (2004). Leatherman (1983) said that Atlantic coast barriers whose widths are less than 200 m suffer overwash frequently. Because our study area was located in the Gulf of Mexico, his conclusions could not be directly applied. However, because the beach in the study area was quite narrow and flat with small dunes, its morphological characteristics resulted in severe erosion during even minor overwash events. If overwash were prevented by some means, erosion would be reduced. However, the shoreline and the offshore area continue to be eroded. The offshore area, which is composed of fine sediments commonly found on the northeast Texas coast, is eroded constantly. The shoreline continues to be eroded during major storms, and much sediment is transported seaward. These are general beach processes that cause cross-shore
DOI: 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-09-00042.1 received 19 April 2009; accepted in revision 24 February 2010. * Corresponding author Coastal Education & Research Foundation 2011

erosion. Because cross-shore sediment transport was dominant and several overwash events were observed in the study area, overwash by storms was investigated as a main cause of erosion. The study area was directly and remotely affected by storms in the Gulf of Mexico. Overwash generally happens at the landfall of a storm, but only two direct landfalls occurred in the study area between 1991 and 2005: landfalls of Tropical Storm Ivan (2004) and Hurricane Rita (2005) occurred at the end of the period. However, because the continuous beach erosion problem by overwash could not be explained by these direct landfalls, we needed to focus on other causes. Overwash induced by remote storms was frequently observed during beach surveys, and remote storms were believed to be one of the main causes of overwash in the study area. The objective of this study was to investigate overwash of remote storms by analyzing multiple characteristics of beach erosion in this area. In this article, the geological and hydrodynamic characteristics of the study area are described, followed by an explanation of the methods of short- and long-period beach surveys. Analyses are presented of beach erosion based on short- and long-period measurements, beach erosion by direct landfall of storms and remote storms, and overwash determined by comparing dune and beach width with beach erosion. These sections are followed by our conclusions.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA

The study area ranged from High Island to Sabine Pass near the border between Texas and Louisiana, shown in Figure 1.

Beach Erosion along the Northeast Texas Coast

503

Table 1.

Tropical cyclones in the period 20002005 (NOAA, 2006) near the northeast Texas coast.
Data Name Class Landfall Date Peak Wind (km/h) Pressure (mb)

Rita Katrina Ivan (landfall twice)

Hurricane, Cat. 3 Hurricane, Cat. 3 Hurricane, Cat. 3 Tropical storm Tropical storm Hurricane, Cat. 1 Tropical storm Tropical storm Hurricane, Cat. 2

Port Arthur, Texas Southeast Louisiana Alabama Port Arthur, Texas Southeast Louisiana Port OConnor, Texas Between Port OConnor and Freeport, Texas Palacios, Texas South central Louisiana

Bill Claudette Grace Fay Lili

9/24/05 8/29/05 9/16/04 (first landfall) 9/23/04 (second landfall) 6/30/03 7/15/03 8/31/03 9/06/02 10/03/02

193 201 193 65 52 96 65 93 148

937 920 943 1003 997 981 1007 998 963

The shallow water is turbid from suspended sediment from the Mississippi and Atchafalaya rivers; this fine sediment changes the coastline and coastal environment in this area by suspension, transport, erosion, and deposition. The study area is located on the Louisiana-Texas continental shelf. The maximum and minimum widths of the continental shelf are 200 km at the Louisiana border and 30 km in south Texas, respectively. The depth at the seaward boundary of the shelf is 180 m, and the shelf forms a mild slope from the shoreline. The study area is affected by wind and waves mostly from the southeast, but their strength is not enough to cause critical erosion except during severe storms. Geologically thin barrier beach sands overlying the Pleistocene headland (Beaumont Formation) occur between Sabine Pass and High Island. The area near Sea Rim State Park is an anomalous sandy beach that has been attributed to sand derived locally from underlying Pleistocene river deposits (Morton, 1979) and/or possibly the convergence of littoral cells. The shoreface between the McFadden National Wildlife Refuge to the west of Sea Rim State Park and High Island consists of a headland that is composed of late Pleistocene fluvial-deltaic deposits. Beaches in this region are narrow and are often covered by shell pads that migrate along the beach, depending on wave heights and sediment transport direction. The foreshore is steep and berm crests are well defined where thick shell pads

are present. Nevertheless, many areas of the Beaumont Formation are exposed on the surface of the shoreface. Texas Highway 87 along the northeast Texas coast was destroyed by Hurricane Jerry (Category 1) in 1989, and it has remained without any restoration. Direct impacts by storms were rare in the study area, and only two landfalls of storms occurred during the monitoring surveys: Tropical Storm Ivan (2004) and Hurricane Rita (2005). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Waters, 2003) conducted a shoreline erosioncontrol demonstration project, which was located about 3.6 km away from the east end of the short-period study area. Waters (2003) showed that the average wave heights were estimated to be between 0.76 and 0.91 m in summer and between 1.2 and 1.4 m in winter. The mean tide range was 0.39 m. We also surveyed the control project area and observed that the erosion control demonstration project created a relatively stable area with the long-period rate of retreat of about 1.5 m/y. This value was much less than the value of Morton (1997) of 3.7 m/y and the rate of retreat of 3.5 m/ y from this study along all survey lines. In this study, beach samples were collected from dune, beach face, and subaqueous areas from the north Galveston jetty to Sabine Pass, and the median grain size (D50) was measured. The results are presented in Table 3; the presence of clay was observed in almost half of the sites (8 of 19). Sand samples could

Table 2.

Landfalls of storms around the upper Texas coast from 1991 to 2005.
North Texas South Texas Louisiana Mississippi Alabama Total

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total

1 1 2

1 1 2 1 1 2 2 10

1 1 1 1 2 6

1 1 1 1 1 5

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 10

0 1 1 2 3 0 1 5 1 1 2 5 3 3 5 33

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

504

Park and Edge

Figure 1.

Aerial photo of the study area and the location of cross-shore survey lines along the northeast Texas coast (Google Earth, 2009).

not be collected from Sea Rim State Park to Sabine Pass because the recently deposited fine-grained deposits were too soft and deep to walk on. The average median grain sizes were 0.171 mm, 0.165 mm, and 0.155 mm at dunes, beach faces, and surf zones, respectively. A thin layer of sand overlay the clay, and both Pleistocene and Holocene clays were exposed due to a deficiency of sand in most of the area. Substantial wave damping was observed in some locations with an aqueous muddy bottom. Tuttle (2000) studied the impact of these aqueous muddy bottoms in Jefferson County and found that waves are damped quickly in these areas. Tuttle noted that the density of the mud is closely related to viscosity, with denser mud showing higher viscosity. Zhang and Zhao (1999) found that dense and viscous mud responds more slowly in wave action and causes wave energy dissipation. The exposed mud of Pleistocene and Holocene periods by erosion of veneer sand along the study area is shown in Figure 2. We believe that wave heights in the study area were reduced due to viscous damping by the muddy bottom.

METHODS
To assess beach erosion due to remote storms, beach profiles in fixed locations and wave data were analyzed. Time-series surveys were conducted for the beach profiles, and wave data were obtained from the National Data Buoy Center (NDBC). Beach erosion was analyzed using changes in beach profiles, dunes, and beach widths. The profiles were measured using real time kinematicdifferential global positioning system equipment with approximately 2-cm accuracy in vertical and horizontal directions, but the resolution varied with the distance from the base station. A dual frequency echosounder was used in the measurement of water depth. Beach profiles along the study area were measured by our research team from 1999 to 2005. There were initially 156 survey lines between High Island and Sabine Pass, but only the even-numbered lines were measured throughout the duration of the survey. The distance from the first to the last line was about 31 km, and the interval between each line was

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

Beach Erosion along the Northeast Texas Coast

505

Table 3.

The measured sand size along the upper Texas coast (from north Galveston Island) in 2003.
Coordinate Location D50 (mm) Coordinate Location D50 (mm)

29u24917.0500 N, 94u42921.2360 W

29u26951.9680 N, 94u38924.3850 W

29u29944.1080 N, 94u31941.6910 W

29u31928.9380 N, 94u27908.1560 W

29u33912.5340 N, 94u22933.7270 W

29u34955.3120 N, 94u17958.8670 W

29u36943.2860 N, 94u13924.8520 W

29u38929.2000 N, 94u08950.5610 W

29u40900.4250 N, 94u04912.7360 W

29u40954.4950 N, 93u58957.4080 W

Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone

0.164 0.141 0.130 0.166 0.155 0.202 0.130 0.162 0.171 0.171 0.181 0.192 0.224 0.195 0.159 0.214 0.178 Clay 0.223 Clay Clay 0.150 0.174 Clay 0.088 Clay Clay 0.145 0.129 Clay

29u25942.0340 N, 94u40930.3300 W

29u28949.1070 N, 94u33957.2190 W

29u30936.4400 N, 94u29925.0120 W

29u32920.6110 N, 94u24950.8960 W

29u34902.7830 N, 94u20915.7020 W

29u35949.8480 N, 94u15940.1600 W

29u37936.9540 N, 94u11904.6300 W

29u39918.4100 N, 94u06933.6360 W

29u40936.7800 N, 94u01926.0160 W

Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone Berm Beach face Surf zone

0.151 0.150 0.152 0.181 0.180 0.135 0.142 0.165 0.145 0.212 0.187 0.182 0.197 0.195 Clay 0.212 0.208 Clay 0.189 0.152 Clay 0.137 0.132 0.123 0.158 0.120 0.111

approximately 400 m. The coordinates of several survey lines and the survey periods are given in Table 4. The surveys were conducted to monitor short- and longperiod beach changes. The long-period surveys were conducted each season between 1999 and 2002. The short-period intensive surveys were repeated seven times for lines 126 and 128 between 2004 and 2005 by Park (2006). Lines 126 and 128 were selected due to high potential for overwash. Each beach profile was measured from the dune to the closure depth at a distance of 600 m offshore. The measured beach profiles were analyzed in short and long periods separately, and the data were analyzed by comparing changes in dune and in beach width.

Long-Period Changes
Morton (1979) concluded that three factorsdeficit in sediment, sea level rise, and storm activitiescontributed to long-period changes along the southeast Texas coast. Morton (1997) studied beach erosion in the area between Sabine Pass and Galveston Island and showed the rate of retreat depicted in Figure 3. He found that the maximum rate of retreat (9.8 m/y) was observed between Sabine Pass and Sea Rim State Park over 23 years (1974 to 1996). The average rate of retreat was 3.7 m/y in the study area between 1974 and 1996 (Morton, 1997). Our surveys showed that the average rate of retreat was 3.5 m/y at L126 and L128 before the landfall of Hurricane Rita, but it sharply increased to 5.2 m/y due to the hurricanes impact. It seemed that the rate of retreat almost kept constant between 1974 and 1996; the study area has been suffering the retreat of the shoreline for a long time.

COASTAL PROCESSES Sand Budget

Morang (2006) discussed sediment transport in the study area as part of a study to determine options for long-period stabilization of the shoreline from Sabine River to San Louis Pass, southwest of Galveston. He noted that 75% of sediment movement is in the cross-shore direction and only 25% of sand moves alongshore. In the cross-shore movement, 40% of eroded sand moves offshore and 35% of sand is eroded and moved by overwash. Our study area does not have a balance alongshore in sand budget either. Sediment transport by overwash was directly related to the intensity of the storm, waves, and storm surge level, and an increase of overwash might be a main cause of permanent shoreline recession.

Short-Period Changes
The data for short-period changes were collected and analyzed from 2004 to 2005. The beach profiles of L124 and L126 are shown in Figure 4. Only two storms made landfall in the study area during this period (Table 1), and the major short-period changes occurred from the impact of these two storms. The average rate of retreat was 5.2 m/y between 1999 and 2005 in the study area, which includes the landfall of Hurricane Rita and long-period waves generated by Hurricane Katrina. These storms caused considerable retreat of the

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

506

Park and Edge

Figure 2.

The exposed mud bottom along the northeast Texas coast.

shoreline in 2005. Hurricane Rita was responsible for the retreat of 15 m at L126 and L128 during landfall. The measured profiles indicated that some eroded sediments were transported and deposited behind the backshore and the rest were moved and deposited at the toe of the beach face. The ratio of landward and seaward transport by overwash was

studied by Park (2006), who showed that the ratio of landward transport increased for steeper slopes, higher wave heights, and longer wave periods. Morton and Paine (1985) estimated that the sand volume of overwash caused by Hurricane Alicia (1983), a Category 3 storm at landfall, was about 12% of the total volume of eroded sand around the study area. However,

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

Beach Erosion along the Northeast Texas Coast

507

Table 4.
Name

The coordinates of survey lines along the upper Texas coast.

Latitude Longitude Survey Period

L1 L50 L126 L128 L156 Waters site

29u33921.0380 N 29u35929.2630 N 29u38952.8150 N 29u38957.9220 N 29u40903.2180 N 29u39927.650 N

94u22915.5540 W 94u16938.3270 W 94u07957.8870 W 94u07944.1220 W 94u04926.9650 W 94u06912.880 W

Fall 1999Spring 2002 Fall 1999Spring 2002 Fall 1999Sept. 2005 Fall 1999Sept. 2005 Fall 1999Spring 2002 Dec. 2004Aug. 2006

Stone et al. (1996) reported that 95%99% of sand eroded by Hurricane Opal, which made landfall as a Category 4 storm in Florida, was deposited on the dune and backshore. The sand deposited behind the dune by overwash does not easily return to its pre-overwash position (such as the top of the dune, beach face, etc.), and it might be a permanent loss of shoreline. The surveyed beach profiles shown in Figure 4 showed that the profile accreted in winter and eroded in summer between February 16, 2004, and September 21, 2005. This seasonal pattern was opposite to the general summer/winter beach pattern that maintained the shape of the beach by repeating seasonal accretion and erosion in most of the stable beaches. Though the average wave height in the winter was almost 50% higher than in the summer, the seasonal cycle was collapsed by remote and direct impacts of storms along the upper Gulf of Mexico in summer. The erosion control project of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was tested with different dune configurations separated by six geotextile groins since 2004. The dunes between the groins were composed of sediments of multiple grain sizes, including clay fill. The site was located between L128 and L156, 3.6 km away from L128. The measured beach profiles are shown in Figure 5. These were explained in detail by Waters (2003). Waters mentioned some success of this demonstration project by showing deposition of sediment

between the groins and the test dunes. The beach width was much less than the 200 m of stable beach width on the Atlantic coast suggested by Leatherman (1983), but it seemed that this area was becoming stable by accretion based on the measured profiles. In the area of the erosion control demonstration project, shoreline retreat was about 7 m by the impact of Hurricane Rita, but it returned to its previous position after a year. Morton, Paine, and Gibeaut (1994) mentioned the recovery processes of the eroded beach by storms; 50 m and 1.5 m are the minimum beach width and elevation for recovery processes, respectively. Though more data were needed for comparison, their reference values for beach stability seemed to match with our survey results in the study area.

IMPACT OF STORMS
Because it is difficult to predict landfall of storms with high accuracy 48 hours prior to landfall, many past surveys had trouble getting good-quality data for the impact of storms, due to distance between the survey area and the eye of the storm, the interval of surveys at landfall of the storm, etc. During the monitoring of long-period profile changes between 1999 and 2005, only two landfalls were made in the study area. Tropical Storm Ivan and Hurricane Rita made landfall in 2004 and

Figure 3.

Average long-period shoreline change from 1974 to 1996 (Morton, 1997).

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

508

Park and Edge

Simpson scale) in Alabama on September 16, 2004. The storm moved inland, turned to the Atlantic Ocean, and then curved clockwise. It reentered the Gulf of Mexico and traveled westward. Its second landfall was made with a wind speed of 74 km/h (tropical storm) at Sabine Pass on September 24, 2004. During both landfalls, beach erosion occurred in the study area as a result of overwash. The first overwash occurred by longperiod waves from the remote Hurricane Ivan, and the second was caused by landfall of Tropical Storm Ivan with higher surge and shorter-period waves.

Hurricane Katrina
Hurricane Katrina produced the maximum wind speed of 282 km/h (Category 5) in the Gulf of Mexico and was 201 km/h (Category 3) at landfall in Louisiana on August 29, 2005. Though the study area was located about 450 km away from its landfall, a massive overwash fan and inundation by long-period waves were observed in the study area at landfall. Overwash caused by Hurricane Katrina in the study area is shown in Figure 7.

Hurricane Rita
Hurricane Rita was another extreme storm in the Gulf of Mexico, occurring within a month of Hurricane Katrina. Rita made landfall with a wind speed of 193 km/h (Category 3) at the Texas-Louisiana border on September 24, 2005. The beach profile measurements were conducted 3 days before landfall on September 21, 2005, and 5 days after landfall on September 29, 2005. The survey results provide good references for research in cross-shore beach erosion caused only by a storm, because the survey was conducted immediately before and after landfall of the storm. The beach and inland area near the study site were devastated, and civilian access was prohibited for several weeks. The eroded sand was transported and deposited behind the dune. The retreat of the beach face was about 15 m, and 33.8 m3/m of sand was eroded by Hurricane Rita. Dune heights were reduced by more than 1 m, or 50% of their original heights during landfall. The two photos in Figure 8 were taken at each profile measurement: photo A was taken 3 days before landfall, and photo B was taken 5 days after landfall. In each photo, landward and seaward sides are right

Figure 4. Shoreline changes, including landfall of Hurricane Rita, during 1999 and 2005.

2005, respectively, and the latter caused extreme damage to inland areas as well as along the coastal study area. Overwash by remote storms was observed in the study area at landfall of Hurricanes Ivan and Katrina. Wave data were obtained from Station 42035 by the NDBC, and long-period waves by remote storms are presented in Figure 6. Data losses by the severe impact of Hurricane Rita are also shown in the figure.

Hurricane Ivan
Hurricane Ivan made landfall twice. The first landfall was made with a wind speed of 193 km/h (Category 3 on the Saffir-

Figure 5.

Beach profiles measured in the control study area (Waters, 2003).

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

Beach Erosion along the Northeast Texas Coast

509

Figure 6.

Wave data for Tropical Storm Ivan (2004) and Hurricanes Katrina (2005) and Rita (2005) from NDBC buoy 42035 off the Texas coast.

and left, respectively. Though the photos were taken at the same location, they seemed to be different places due to the complete removal of small dunes, vegetation, and sand by Hurricane Rita and because of the presence of the exposed clay bottom by erosion.

Remote Storms
Because overwash was generated mainly by strong wave activities and/or storm surges, landfall of storms in areas and states surrounding the study area, such as south Texas,

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

510

Park and Edge

Figure 7.

Overwash caused by remote impact of Hurricane Katrina (2005) in the study area.

Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, were also included in the investigation. There were 33 landfalls in these states from 1991 through 2005, as shown in Table 2. Two direct landfalls were made by Tropical Storm Ivan in 2004 and Hurricane Rita in 2005, as previously mentioned. This constituted only 6.1% of the 33 landfalls; almost 50% of landfalls were made in south

Texas and Louisiana, which were adjacent to the study area. Though there was no direct landfall of storms during 1991 and 2003, erosion and damage from overwash were observed during beach surveys. When Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Louisiana, some important evidence of overwash caused by a remote storm was found in the study area. It is believed that

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

Beach Erosion along the Northeast Texas Coast

511

Figure 8. The impact of Hurricane Rita at L126 and L128 in 2005, (A) 3 d before landfall, on September 21, 2005, and (B) 5 d after landfall, on September 29, 2005.

the study area continued to erode by overwash caused by remote as well as direct landfalls. Though only five hurricanes were stronger than or equal to Category 3 between 1991 and 2003 in the Gulf of Mexico, three of these hurricanes were recorded in 2004 and

2005. When we considered that 15 and 18 landfalls were made during the periods of 19912000 and 20012005, respectively, it seemed that the frequency and severity of storm activity was rapidly increasing after 2001, possibly due to climate change.

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

512

Park and Edge

Figure 9.

Dune heights and widths along the study area between fall 1999 and spring 2002.

OVERWASH
The long-period surveys were conducted to analyze the characteristics of erosion along the northeast Texas coast between 1999 and 2002. Seventy-eight survey lines were carried out on the 31-km-long coastline. The elevations of dunes or backshore rarely exceeded 2 m above mean sea level (MSL) along the shoreline. The lowest dune or backshore was located between lines 126 and 128, and this area was frequently overwashed. The characteristics of overwash were analyzed by comparing changes in dune heights and beach widths with beach erosion. In this study, the dune height was measured on the first crest of dune that prevented overwash. The beach width was calculated using the horizontal distance between the contact line of MSL on the beach face and the location where the maximum dune height was measured (Figure 9). The dune heights and beach widths along the study area are shown in Figure 9, and the changes between the two time periods are given in Figure 10. The average dune height was 1.72 m in 1999; it had decreased by 0.02 m to 1.70 m in 2002. The average beach width was 39.59 m in 1999; it was reduced by 6.91 m to 32.68 m in 2002. The width decreased the most in the area with the higher profile numbers, and no strong correlation was found between the change in dune height and beach width. Dune heights increased between lines 46 and 122 over the same period, but they decreased at the lines close to the border of Louisiana.

Large decreases in dune height and beach width were clearly illustrated between lines 150 and 156. The landward and seaward movements of dunes and shorelines are shown in Figure 11. The decrease in beach width was caused by the movement of shoreline landward along most of the survey area, but the locations of dunes and shorelines moved seaward between lines 136 and 156 (Figure 11). It was evident that this area was eroded by different conditions compared with other areas. Erosion by overwash might have been dominant between lines 1 and 134, because deposition was made by the landward movement of eroded sand from the dunes, and the shoreline also moved landward due to overwash mostly from severe wave conditions. However, because the impact of overwash was not strong due to high dunes and wide beaches between lines 136 and 156, this shoreline was eroded mainly by waves and longshore current, and the seaward advance of the shoreline was caused by eroded sediment from dunes. Park (2006) said that the intensity of overwash and the ratio of landward sediment transport are increased at steeper slopes, higher wave heights, and longer wave periods. There were four landfalls of storms in surrounding areas such as south Texas and Louisiana from 1999 to 2002, but any overwash caused by direct landfall of a storm did not occur in the study area. However, beach erosion by overwash continued, and we believe it was caused by remote storms.

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

Beach Erosion along the Northeast Texas Coast

513

Figure 10.

Changes in dune heights and beach widths between 1999 and 2002.

CONCLUSIONS
The northeast Texas coast has been severely eroded for a century, indicated by historical evidence that the highway and roadway along the beachfront have been relocated landward seven times. Morton (1997) analyzed long-period beach changes in the study area over 20 years by aerial photography

and some ground-based surveys and estimated the rate of retreat of coastline to be about 3.7 m/y. This was almost the same rate of retreat measured in the study area between 1999 and 2005 before landfall of Hurricane Rita (2005). But the rate sharply increased due to extreme overwash by landfall of that storm. Erosion caused by Hurricane Rita was critical, and the shoreline rapidly eroded by 12 to 15 m. Though the average

Figure 11.

Movements of dune locations and mean sea level locations between 1999 and 2002.

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011

514

Park and Edge

wave height and tide did not cause shoreline recession by offshore transport or even alongshore transport, overwash was suspected as a major cause of shoreline recession. There were only two landfalling stormsTropical Storm Ivan in 2004 and Hurricane Rita in 2005but more than 90% of storms made landfall in distant areas such as south Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, which affected the study area. It was observed that much erosion was caused by longperiod waves of remote storms that made landfall in other areas of the Gulf of Mexico. When Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Louisiana 450 km away from the study area, inundation and erosion by overwash provided evidence of the impact of remote storms. Overwash by remote storms in the Gulf of Mexico was a main cause of continued beach erosion in the study area. Over the years, the upper Texas coast has been eroded by overwash; however, damage by overwash was not severe, and much fine-grained sediment was deposited in the upper Texas coast by various erosion deposition processes. Because the frequency of occurrence of storms sharply increased in the Gulf of Mexico after 2001, beach erosion along the Texas coast is likely to become more severe due to climate change.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Support for this work was provided by Jefferson County, Texas, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District in Galveston, Texas A&M University, and the Texas Sea Grant. The authors sincerely appreciate the support and encouragement of our colleagues.

LITERATURE CITED
Donnelly, C.; Wamsley, T.V.; Kraus, N.C.; Larson, M., and Hanson, H., 2006. Morphologic classification of coastal overwash. In:

Proceedings of the 30th Conference of Coastal Engineering (San Diego, California, ASCE), pp. 28052817. Google Earth, 2009. Home Page. http://earth.google.com (accessed December 20, 2009). Leatherman, S.P., 1983. Barrier dynamics and landward migration with Holocene sea-level rise. Nature, 301, 415417. Morang, A., 2006. North Texas Sediment Budget, Sabine Pass to San Luis Pass. ERDC/CHL TR-06-17. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, 78p. Morton, R., 1979. Temporal and spatial variations in shoreline changes and their implication, examples from the Texas Gulf Coast. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 49, 11011112. Morton, R., 1997. Gulf Shoreline Movement between Sabine Pass and the Brazos River, Texas: 1974 to 1996. Austin, Texas: University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, Geological Circulars 9703, 46p. Morton, R. and Paine, J., 1985. Beach and Vegetation-Line Changes at Galveston Island, Texas. Erosion, Deposition, and Recovery from Hurricane Alicia. Austin, Texas: University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, Geological Circulars 8505, 39p. Morton, R.; Paine, J., and Gibeaut, J., 1994. Stages and durations of post-storm beach recovery, Southeastern Texas coast, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research, 10(4), 884908. NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), 2006. Upper Texas Coast Tropical Cyclones in the 2000s. http://www.srh. noaa. gov/hgx/hurricanes/2000s_maps.htm. Park, Y.H., 2006. Overwash Induced by Storm Conditions. College Station, Texas: Texas A&M University, Ph.D. thesis, 171p. Stone, G..W.; Grymes, J.W.; Armbruster, C.A., and Huh, O.K., 1996. Overview and impacts of hurricane Opal on the Florida coast. Eos, Transaction of the American Geophysical Union, 77, 181184. Tuttle, M., 2000. Evaluation of Coastal Wave Attenuation Due to Viscous Fluid Sediment at Jefferson County, Texas. College Station, Texas: Texas A&M University, Masters thesis, 126p. Waters, J.P., 2003. Section 227 shoreline erosion control demonstration project: Jefferson County, Texas. In: Proceedings of the 4th Conference of Coastal Structures (Portland, Oregon, ASCE), pp. 10841095. Zhang, Q.H. and Zhao, Z.D., 1999. Wave-mud interaction: wave attenuation and mud mass transport. In: Proceedings of the 4th Conference of Coastal Sediments (Long Island, New York, ASCE), pp. 18671880.

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011