Page images
PDF
EPUB

detic Survey, retired. I am acting president since the death of our very dear friend, J. Spencer Smith.

The American Shore and Beach Preservation Association had its origin in the findings and recommendations of the committee on shoreline investigations sponsored by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences in 1926. That committee had determined that there was need to invite public attention to the necessity for the preservation of our shores and beaches. The interest of this scientific body had been aroused by the problems involved in the changes of shoreline as shown in coastal surveys and from general inspections. It was noted that disruption of the natural cycle of changes had occurred due to expanding development of shore communities for recreation and by the construction of jetties and dredging of entrance channels at various inlets and harbors for improvement of navigation and the promotion of waterborne commerce. Although much work had been done by local groups to prevent erosion, these efforts were ineffective because of lack of cooperation and incomplete knowledge of the basic conditions and forces involved.

The American Shore and Beach Preservation Association was formed with membership from individuals and communities along the Atlantic, Gulf, and the Pacific coasts and from the shores of the Great Lakes. The stated purpose of the association isto bring together for cooperation and mutual helpfulness the many agencies, interests, and individuals concerned with the welfare of these lands, and in all legitimate ways to foster that sound, far-sighted, and economical development and preservation of the lands which will aid in placing their benefits wi in the reach of the largest possible number of our people, in accordance with the ideals of a democratic nation.

It was through the efforts of the association that legislation was enacted, which created the Beach Erosion Board under the Corps of Engineers, United States Army, and authorized cooperative studies with th eagencies of the several States. Subsequent legislation in 1945 authorized general shoreline investigations. In 1946, an act was passed establishing a policy of Federal assistance in the protection of publicly owned shores.

Due partly to lack of funds, but mostly to the lack of trained personnel in this country, it has only been in recent years that the staff of the Beach Erosion Board has been able to make a real contribution to this very serious problem of shore erosion. In its general development investigations, the Board studies the forces of wave action, the source and composition of the material above and below high- and low-water marks, the history of shore processes from past surveys and records, and, finally, the development of techniques and methods for the improvement, stabilization, and protection of the shores and beaches. This is research work which is essential to provide a firm basis for millions of dollars spent on construction of protective works and shore structures.

The Board has completed cooperative beach-erosion studies in 77 shore localities. Current studies are in progress in 13 areas with funds presently available. One additional study has been postponed because no Federal funds are available. In this instance the State of Massachusetts has indicated its desire to proceed. The amount of Federal funds required is $5,000.

Seven prospective studies for which the various States have appropriated funds to cover their share of the cost are as follows: (1) Barnegat Inlet to Cape May, N. J., $40,000; (2) on the Delaware coast, $25,000; (3) Suffolk County, N. Y., $25,000; (4) Fire Island to Jones Inlet, N. Y., $10,000; (5) Saco River to Pine Point, Maine, $7,000; (6) San Diego County, Calif., $15,000; (7) Orange County, Calif., $15,000; total, $137,000. The various States have available funds to cover their share of the cost in each of these items.

The $137,000 is the amount which the Board desires in order to proceed with the States having funds made available from their appropriations; but the Board cannot proceed until it has matching funds from the Federal appropriation

The members of the association wish to record their support of the operations of the United States Beach Erosion Board and to recommend that an increase be made in the appropriation of funds for those items in the budget concerned with the cooperative studies and with the development studies.

I mentioned the development studies. Earlier I spoke about the cooperative studies. That is the work which I spoke of as being research work which is essential in order to provide knowledge of what is happening and to correct it. And it is the basis upon which basic work should be done before the construction of very expensive shoreline structures, whether commercial waterfront or anything having to do with recreation or navigation or commerce along the shorelines where it has to be done.

Mr. HAND. As I understand it, we have this situation: We have the authority and a small fund set up for general studies to be undertaken exclusively at the expense of the Federal Government.

Admiral COLBERT. That is right.

Mr. HAND. Such as the study of tidal conditions, soil conditions, and so forth as a background for what later we hope will be developed.

Admiral COLBERT. That is right.

Mr. HAND. It is a cooperative study which pinpoints to that particular locality what is needed there.

Admiral COLBERT. Correct. You come down to specific items and it cannot be done until you have developed a little technique or knowledge of the area. To explain that, we never had the personnel in this country which had done anything of this kind. It was a matter, then, for the Board to get people and train them. That had been done abroad in certain places. Holland, for instance, has done some work. So the engineers had to develop their own technique in this country to fit the peculiar needs. Up to 1930 there was practically nothing that had been done, so it is only in very recent years that they have begun to form a staff to do this work. After a time they saw the necessity for it and now that we have the staff and are going ahead with this, I am afraid they are going to have to reduce that staff' if they do not have more money than is presently inserted in the budget, and that is a terrible situation to face.

As you know, I am interested in research work and was formerly Director of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey and we have had this work go on through our studies, but I can see if it is dropped off that we are going to lose a great deal that we have gained in training engineers and young men in various grades who have come into

this. And it is a thing that must go on now if you are looking to the future.

Mr. HAND. Does it not come to this, coming to the more recent history of this problem, that the 79th Congress passed authorizing laws for participation by the Federal Government in these projects. Since that time, I think with one exception, there has only been one project completed and that under a rather special phrase of that law. The municipalities, which are vastly affected by this problem, were led to believe, when Congress passed the authorizing laws in the 79th Congress, they might look forward, if they themselves could afford their share, to some degree of Federal cooperation and now it is not fair to suspend this problem. Either we should say we are not going to undertake it, despite the laws passed in the 79th Congress covering beach erosion problems, or that we are. We should do one thing or the other. It comes down to that simple an alternative, does it not!

Admiral COLBERT. That is correct. You understand I am speaking for the members of an association. We have gathered them together, because they do not want to go along individually, and somebody do something and waste a lot of money and maybe do the wrong thing.

Mr. Hand. That was precisely the situation which this was primarily meant to correct.

Admiral COLBERT. So it is a matter of going back and finding out what the forces are, what the conditions are, what the material and sand movement is in that area, and making a laboratory study as well as a field investigation, and building up a staff that knows how to do it, who are going to be very efficient about going in and tackling it. With vast experience in one place which may apply to another locality, they may say the conditions are the same here, the basic force of the waves in this particular area. And that is the particular direction that the Board is going to study, and they will come up with an answer that will be a great saving not only for the Federal Government at a later time, but right now it will save putting in the wrong kind of work at that place.

Mr. Hand. Not only may the municipality harm itself by putting in the wrong type of structure for its protection, but ultimately harm and hurt an adjacent municipality by putting in the wrong kind of structure.

Admiral COLBERT. That has happened in the past. It will destroy the regimen and will increase the current and flow along the shore. And if you destroy that, you create a terrible hazard on one side or the other by a little drift.

Mr. Hand. Does that conclude your statement?
Admiral COLBERT. Yes. I would like to introduce next Mr. Cross.
Mr. Cross. I am Sam Cross, of Suffolk County, Long Island, N. Y.

Suffolk County is taking the attitude that God helps those who help themselves, and the Federal policy has been “If you help yourself, we will go along and help you to the extent of 50 percent."

We have had cooperative agreements with the Coast and Geodetic Survey on that 50-percent basis, and we have continued now for the last 15 or 20 years on a cooperative survey with the Coast and Geodetic Survey, 50 percent of which we put up, in the attitude that if we are interested enough to spend some of our own money, they will help out.

All we

This Beach Erosion Board has worked on this 50-percent basis. We would like to see it continued. We are willing to put up half of the money if they will help us out. It is the only place where we can get help and get that information.

We have quite an erosion problem there and the State of New York has agreed to help out the county if the county would help themselves, and the county has put up 50 percent and the State has helped out with the other 50 percent.

We have gone ahead and spent $4,200,000 so far on beach protective works. We have another $600,000 and contracts are being prepared at the present time. That money which is being spent is not under the direction of the Beach Erosion Board, but it is under their advice on what to do and if we cannot get their advice there is no one else to turn to.

I have a letter here from the county superintendent of highways, actually the public works department, but they maintain the title of "Superintendent of Highways."

Mr. Hand. You have an application pending which involves the sum of $25,000; is that correct?

Mr. Cross. That is right. We had a cooperative survey in 1939 and 1940 and we obtained quite a bit of information then about the down drift from our surf. This is Fire Island at Jones Inlet. They have been working on that. There is a project on that also, I believe. They have found they need more information as to how much sand is coming down, and so forth and how it works up through there. We do not know and are unable to obtain the information. can do is to put a stone pile out there and, if it works, all right; if it does not, well it is just that much money wasted.

Our superintendent writes:

I understand that your committee is holding a hearing on Friday, February 19, 1954, to consider the request by the Beach Erosion Board for funds for cooperative beach erosion studies.

On January 25, 1954, the County Board of Supervisors of Suffolk County passed a resolution authorizing me to act as agent for Suffolk County, N. Y., and to execute an application in conjunction with the State of New York and the United States engineers for a cooperative beach erosion study covering the 90 miles of ocean front in the County of Suffolk, N. Y. Suffolk County has agreed to bear with the State of New York one-half of the total cost of the survey and study.

The shores of Long Island are seriously threatened by persistent erosion of the shoreline with consequent heavy losses of economic and recreational values. The proposed survey and study of the Beach Erosion Board would help to furnish us with the "know-how" to protect our beaches. We would be able to design our erosion-arresting structures with greater confidence based on scientific knowledge rather than guesswork. Any recommendations by the Beach Erosion Board which would result from the proposed survey would be highly valued by us.

The Beach Erosion Board is the only organization in this country which is qualified to make a survey and study such as we are requesting. The cost of a survey is very reasonable considering the benefits to be derived.

I hope that your committee will give favorable consideration to the request of the Beach Erosion Board's request for funds to carry on a cooperative beach erosion survey of Long Island.

Mr. HAND. Is not this true, too: Even if Congress did not in the near future go ahead with any construction under the authorizing laws of the 79th Congress, still a reasonable program of cooperative studies would be immensely helpful to the local communities even if eventually they have to construct their own structures at 100 percent of their own expense?

Mr. Cross. We have given up trying to get any construction money from the Federal Government. It is just going to be dragged out too long. And we have to go ahead and pay for this ourselves.

Mr. HAND. You want the use of their expert knowledge, however, on those cooperative ideas!

Mr. Cross. We want the benefit of their knowledge.

Mr. HAND. Let me observe also that under those laws they required the greatest amount of local cooperation in any of the projects that we have. We build structures all over the country requiring either none or very little local cooperation; but in these projects, if and whenever constructed, the law requires two-thirds local cooperation and one-third Federal, and even then only with respect to publicly owned land. That is correct, is it not?

Admiral COLBERT. I think it is 50-50.

Mr. HAND. As far as construction is concerned, it is one-thirdtwo-thirds.

Admiral COLBERT. That is right. And that applies only, as you say, to publicly owned shores; not private.

Mr. HAND. Permit the chairman, without objection, to insert in the record at this point a statement of Congressman Utt, of the 28th District of California, and a statement of Senator Kennedy, of Massachusetts, urging the prosecution of this work.

(The statements referred to follow :)

STATEMENT OF JAMES B. UTT, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, 28th DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA,

BEFORE THE HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE I am appearing on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Orange, State of California, with reference to completing the beach erosion survey in Orange County. Orange County made a request through the State of California that such a survey be made on a 50 percent-matching basis with the Federal Government. The Beach Erosion Board, at the request of the State of Califarnia, made an estimate of the cost of this survey and determined that it would cost approximately $30,000; one-half to be borne by the State of California and the County of Orange together, the other one-half by the Federal Government.

Erosion surveys have been completed on all of the southern California coastline with the exception of a segment covering about half of the Orange County coastline from a point near Huntington Beach to the southern city limits of San Clemente. Included in this segment are 3 State parks along the beach, one extending for 9,000 feet between the city of Huntington Beach and the city of Newport Beach, the other at what is formerly known as San-Juan-by-the-Sea and now referred to as Doheny State Park with several thousand feet of beach frontage, the third one being within the city limits of San Clemente containing 1 mile of beach frontage just north of the southern boundary of Orange County.

New erosion problems have arisen at various points along this segment. Beach recession between Dana Point and the northern city limits of San Clemente is now threatening some 70 homes, as well as cutting deep into the State public beaches. It is our desire that this survey be made as quickly as possible and that the Federal Government appropriate approximately $15,000 as its matching cost.

JAMES B. UTT, Member of Congre88.

STATEMENT OF James B. UTT, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, 28th DistricT OF CALIFORNIA,

BEFORE THE HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE

I am appearing on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Diego, Calif., part of which county is within my district, urging that the beach

« PreviousContinue »